0

S Wocial ork
Lectures
on

Curriculum and Pedagogy

by

bodhi s.r
 Dedicated
to
Dalit & Tribal Students
The New Vehicle is an Imprint of the Insight
Multipurpose Society (IMS). IMS is driven by a sincere
desire to deepen people’s theoretical engagement with
meaning(s) and truth(s).
The New Vehicle endeavours to promote knowledge
that is emancipatory in nature and help realize civility
in self and society. It aims to further rational thought
and humane philosophical discourse through
publishing content across varied theoretical domains.
The New Vehicle signifies the moving wheel of change
and impermanence, also called anicca in pali.
Knowledge and insights are fundamental to this change
process. Our publishing house provides space for
engaging, experiencing and articulating this anicca.

EBook edition 2019: ISBN 978-81-942059-2-0

Published in India by Insight Multipurpose Society,
Wardha, Maharashtra
IMS website: nalanda-academy.org
© 2019, bodhi s.r
The moral rights of the author has been asserted
 Forthcoming

Mangesh Dahiwale
THINKING THE NAVAYANA WAY

John F.Kharshiing and bodhi s.r

THE FEDERATION OF KHASI STATES
HISTORY, EPISTEMOLOGY AND POLITICS

bodhi s.r and raile.r.ziipao (Ed)

LAND, WORDS AND RESILIENT CULTURES
THE ONTOLOGICAL BASIS OF TRIBAL IDENTITY
 Foreword

Over the years, I have often held the view that social work
needs to be more real both in theory and practice. Being an
applied social science, it must arrive at its knowledge after
deep study of social reality with perspectives and concerns
for the most marginalized groups. Unfortunately this is
something that I have not observed taking place.

Having taught the Master’s programme in Tata Institute of

Social Sciences and been party to the restructuring process
of the social work programmes that took place in the TISS
in the year 2004 onwards, there is still something amiss
when it comes to social work facing this truth. The
problematics of social work is that its educators seem
fearful to identify what ails Indian society, are hesitant to
diagnose it properly and shy away from formulating
intervention models that would correctly treat the same.

In 1996, TISS organized a major conference to celebrate its

60th year as an Institute. A special volume on ‘Towards a
People Centered Development’ was brought out. I had
contributed an article titled ‘The Plight of Dalits: A
Challenge to Social Work Profession’ to this volume. There
I made few arguments with regards to the engagement of
social work profession and professionals in addressing the
‘caste question’. My claims in the article may be
summarized as follows: Although the social work
profession world over is rooted in the ideal of social justice,
and accordingly emphasizes the need of making the
excluded, exploited and the vulnerable understand how

i
they are exploited, who exploits them, and how the
exploited can at least mitigate, if not prevent, such
exploitation, using the legally recognized and humane
means, the social work profession in India is primarily
rooted in the religious doctrines. Some of these doctrines
grounded around the ideas of caste, while preaching that
the rich and the dominant communities and individuals
should be sympathetic towards the poor and vulnerable
ones, and undertake all possible measures to ameliorate
their pitiable and pilloried condition, yet they still hold on
to their beliefs of one caste being more superior to another.
Such a theological position goes against the basic tenets of
social work profession. Yet the professional social workers
in India never questioned this unethical and immoral
position of such doctrines.

I also argued that socialized in such beliefs, the social

workers themselves are caste biased and therefore incapable
of recognizing the problems faced by many fellow citizens
who belong especially to the caste below in the hierarchy.
Therefore, before resorting to deal with the issues of caste
discrimination and brutalities that the Dalits face even
today, it is imperative to first conscientize the Indian
professional social workers to come out of their caste
prejudices and embed themselves in a different state of
civility.

Another assertion I made in the article is that the existing

social work methods such as case work, group work, community
organization and social action are applied only to deal with
other issues such as health, education, issues of the

ii
physically and mentally challenged, orphans and destitute,
prisoners, youth and children, and of late issues of women’s
empowerment. Not so surprisingly, these methods are
hardly used to deal with issues of caste-based prejudices,
discriminations and violence. Therefore, I argued not only
for an alternative conception of social work methods
suitable for dealing with caste related issues, but also for
our willingness as professional social workers to evolve
efficacious social work methods and apply them to address
caste related problems effectively.

From these minor interventions in the 1990s to the current

programme in the TISS, social work education has come a
long way. There is a greater degree of acceptance of the
complexity of the Indian conditions and an attempt to
engage with the same. Some of the issues that were
invisibilised from social work education since its inception
have now come to occupy central space in both teaching
and intervention. This is definitely a paradigm shift for
social work and something that I personally appreciate.

This book which attempts to capture these shifts in social

work education and in its curriculum is a wonderful read
and is on the same line as my own thought process. It is
both insightful and full of information about how these
twist and turns of conscientization took place through the
years within the discipline. It touches upon various themes
in curriculum formation beginning with social work history,
basic social work concepts, pedagogy, methods and the
new emerging ideas in social work education.

iii
I personally have not seen nor laid my hands on a book in
social work that engages so deeply with curriculum and
pedagogy. While social work educators are, in my opinion,
one of the most creative among teachers in the social
sciences, and the social work discipline being the most
innovative, having to engage with both a field of inquiry
and field of practice together, there is however very less
writings on the subject of curriculum formulations and
pedagogical strategies.

I am so happy to see the production of this text at this

moment, a text that is born out of the Indian experience
and has deep organic roots. These are good signs for social
work education in India because in many ways such efforts
can also be read as attempts to come out of the shell of
western theory and its dominance on social work thinking
and practice in our country.

One only hopes that as social work searches for deeper

knowledge and deeper truths about the Indian conditions,
the social work profession gains strength and confidence to
face the Indian reality more truthfully and intervene in ways
that include all its peoples, empowers the excluded groups,
bring civil culture and civility among the Indian masses and
make India a nation in which every single individual takes
pride in being its citizens.

A.Ramaiah
TISS, Mumbai

iv
 Preface

As an educator in social work, one is exposed not only to

field realities and interventions but to very engaging and
committed young minds. Minds that are grounded in
visions of realizing an egalitarian society, on upholding and
practicing democracy, on seeking and defending justice, on
informed citizenship and evolved civility, and minds that
seek to transform self and society through education and
knowledge. Over the years, this opportunity to engage with
peoples was not restricted only to students. I have also met
peoples with deep insights about reality and genuine
commitment to social transformation from across the
length and breadth of South Asia.

Also being a faculty in one of the earliest social work

institutes in the country, I have also had the opportunity to
be part of a massive restructuring process of the Tata
Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and its social work
curriculum. In 2005 it re-imagined its academic and
administrative structure and made fundamental changes to
its social work programmes in line with its vision and
mission.

Initially I taught in the Masters of Arts in Social Welfare

Administration. Later in 2007, post restructuring of the
TISS, I was part of a group that offered a Concentration on
Dalits and Tribes: Social Justice, Equity and Governance.
Then in 2012 when another minor restructuring of the
social work programmes took place, I was one of the
members who formulated a new field of practice - the
Masters of Arts in Social Work with Dalit and Tribal
v
Studies and Action and have been teaching in this
programme since.

Over the years, some of the research scholars, friends and

students have been requesting me to put my social work
lectures and colloquium presentations in the form of a
book so that they could better comprehend the theoretical
issues that I often lecture about, not the active and
combative ones but the more reflective and meditative
lectures. I had earlier made one such attempt around a
course I teach in Tribal Studies, bringing out an edited
book on the subject. The experience of bringing out a text
from one’s own lectures delivered in a single course was
indeed a satisfying exercise. Since I had somewhat
succeeded in such a project, I thought I should invest effort
to do the same with some of my social work lectures.

One of my students kind of kick-started the process in

2019, when after a lecture on perspectives in Dalit and
Tribal Social Work, she sought some readings about an
argument I had made, post a very conceptually challenging
class. I could not provide the student any immediate
original reading material on the same. Finding myself in an
awkward position I thought I should attempt to bring
together some of my lecture notes into one readable text. It
is this reason alone that made me toil a bit to bring out this
book. A minor caution though, since most of the texts in
this book are notes of lectures, that require more verbal
articulation than textual engagement, the ideas are thus
sketchy. Nonetheless I have attempted to textualise the
basic ideas and lay the framework in ways that make some

vi
theoretical sense. Needless to say that it finally depends on
the reader to interpret, make meaning and attempt new
ways of seeing the text.

It is important to state here that at a personal level I closely

identify with the Navayana School in Indian social work
who source their epistemological basis and philosophical
ideas from Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. Most of my own theoretical
reflections stem from this methodological premise. It is
thus important for the reader to realize that this text is
written from such a point-of-view. My writings are not
written to influence and coerce but to problematise, to
unpack, to produce the new and to unravel the possible
paths in anicca. The word anicca is a pali word that denotes a
reality that is ‘rapidly rising and passing away’. It has a little
deeper meaning than the word ‘change’ and even the word
‘evolution’. It signifies movement and transformation
embedded in a process of a probabilistic rising and passing
away; nothing is fixed and nothing is permanent.

I hope my research scholars, friends and students will

benefit from the insights that I have shared in this book.
They are reflections that began sometime around 2003 and
have further evolved over time into something new. That is
why in some places I have used the term navayana to denote
the newness of the ideas and process.

I thank my students, past and present who have enriched

me with their questions and their relentless thirst for
emancipatory knowledge. I have had to work and think
extra hard to live up to their expectations. I also thank my
colleagues in the Center for Social Justice and Governance

vii
who have created a vibrant academic space and turned the
teaching/learning process into a knowledge project. I thank
the Tribal Intellectual Collective India for allowing me to
republish the reworked chapter 3, 4 and 8 in this book. I
also thank colleagues from the University of Gavle, Sweden
and Tampere, Finland, University of Melbourne, York
Canada, Royal University of Bhutan and the National
Institute of Social Development Sri Lanka for rich
discussions on social work curriculum.

I am tremendously grateful to Anjali, my colleague in the

School of Social Work with whom I have debated endlessly
over the years on social work curriculum, philosophy and
pedagogy. I also thank the vibrant Navayana community
whose interest in the knowledge enterprise has truly
deepened and widened my scope of thinking and
equanimous reflection on complex subject domains across
the philosophical spectrum.

Last but not the least I thank my two great teachers -

Siddhatto Gotamo and Babasaheb Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, two
beings committed to truth seeking, pioneers of adult
philosophy and compassionate leaders of change and
transformation in India. Both saw the pursuit of knowledge
as a living project and showed us the path towards
‘freedom of mind’. It is from these two humane
enlightened teachers that I have taken the word ‘Navayana’,
and it is from their knowledge that this book sources its
axiological premise, intellectual taste, conceptual elegance
and theoretical insights.

bodhi s.r

viii
CONTENTS

Preface v

Chapter I Introduction 1

Chapter II Historicizing Social Work Education : 34

An Exercise in Discursive Practice

Chapter III Theorizing the ‘Field’ in Indian Social 63

Work Education and Practice:
Reassembling Conceptions from a
Critical Perspective

Chapter IV De-assembling Social Work Methods 98

from Four Points-of-view

Chapter V On the Politics of Social Work 116

Curriculum and Pedagogy

Chapter VI Some Thoughts on Navayana Social 141

Work

Chapter VII De-familiarizing Content and 164

Pedagogical Processes in Fieldwork
Supervision

Chapter Upekkha Reflections on an Interview 200

VIII in Retrospect

ix
 Chapter I
Introduction
Cultivation of mind should be the ultimate aim of human
existence: Babasaheb Dr.B.R Ambedkar
Broadly, the political position of most social workers in
India is generally pro-poor, at times socially distorted and
psychologically destabilized by an individual’s religious
affiliation, caste loyalties and region based linguistic affinity.
But overall, most social workers view Indian society from
class lens, and it is the category ‘poor’ that informs their
perspective and practice. Their approaches to practice are
grounded on the idea of ‘developing the poor’ and most
interventions are framed on ‘the upliftment’ and ‘in
partnership with’ the ‘poor’ classes. There are, however, a
few social workers whose view of Indian society is
grounded fundamentally around ‘caste’ rather than ‘class’,
and their perspectives and intervention are directed at the
structure of caste and against coercive caste relations.

At the personal level I have been definitively impacted by

these very conflictual perspectives about the nature of
Indian social realities and have changed my perspective
multiple times with wider field exposure and direct field
engagements. In the light of these often earth-shaking
social exposures and concomitant insidious personal
psychosocial transformations, I will attempt to capture in
this book the changing processes of my perspectives
around a single subject-Social Work Curriculum and
Pedagogy, contemplated over a period of time.

1
I have written some of these analytical reflections in the
form of field and lecture notes. A few of these notes have
been written as early as 2007, making the propositions and
content somewhat out dated and a little incongruous. That
is to admit that while it would have been judicious from my
end to update them and make it more relevant to my
students and the social work community that I often
engage more intensely with, I have left the main body of
text as it is. I have however made minor alterations to these
notes to make the text more coherent, readable, contextual
and empirically grounded. I have often used these notes in
lectures that I deliver to my students and have also
presented them to colleagues in colloquiums. Over the
years I have also enriched them further based on students’
questions and more expansive field experiences.

At the core of most of my writings is a conscious

theoretical attempt to view social work content from an
alternative perspective, sometimes ‘from below’, at times
‘from within’, in other context from ‘alternative centers’
and also from a ‘beyond the binary’ points-of-view. These
perspectives have a name. It is called the Dalit and Tribal
Social Work (DTSW) perspective. All the chapters in this
book, except for chapter six (which is my reflection around
the year 2019), are fundamentally grounded on these
points-of-view.

Social Work Education in India: Its Evolution and

Underlying Historical Context

Before unraveling the evolution of social work in India it is

important to note that in the year 1936 three schools of

2
social work were set up in three unique cities. These are the
Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work Bombay
(now Mumbai), the Sao Paulo School of Social Service and
the Institute for Social Work for Girls in Cairo. Whether
the setting-up of these institutes on the same year was a
mere historical accident or a strategic response to national
and global crisis depends on how one conceives social
work.

Nonetheless the development of Social Work Education

and its curriculum in India can roughly be identified around
some key historical phases that began before 1936. While it
is non-judicious to fix history rigidly, I will attempt to
capture these phases loosely around eight somewhat
distinct but key evolutionary time spans. I will look at the
debates surrounding the period and also the curriculum
offered by various schools during specific phases.

Phase One: Social Work Education - Ideas and

Attempts before 1935

Before 1935, from a professional social work discipline

point-of-view, there wasn’t any framework of real
theoretico-historical significance. There were activities of
the elites that were fundamentally charitable and some even
had a nuanced political vision embedded in charity such as
those of the Servant of India Society initiated in 1905. In
the late 19 and early 20 century, the practice of what could
be loosely called social work was mostly remedial,
reformist1 and ameliorative. The activities taken up were

1 The contributions at reforms of Hindu society such as those

attempted by Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Sasipada

3
relief for the poor, institutions for widows and orphans,
care of the disabled, establishment of charitable
dispensaries and the setting of hospitals. Most of these
efforts however were contextual depending on activities
and interest from one province to another. During this
period we also observed a concern for the protection of
children as reflected in the Madras Children Act 1920, the
Bengal Children Act 1922 and the Bombay Children Act
1924.

As against this backdrop, there were also historical actions

and initiatives that can be denoted as fundamental and
transformative. Most of these emanated from the
‘depressed classes’ themselves which included the
contributions of Jotiba Phule on education, Shahu Maharaj
on political representation and Babasaheb
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar on total emancipation. Each organized
the ‘depressed classes’ towards education, livelihoods,
development, change and progress. A significant strategy
observed during this time were the attempts at altering the
consciousness of oppressed peoples while at the same time
negotiating spaces with the powers that be through direct
field interventions, mass mobilization and the print media.

Bannerji, Mahadev Govind Ranade and Pandita Ramabai, Natarajan

was notable. For the Muslim society the efforts of Syed Ahmed Khan
was noteworthy. There were also mass reformist movements such
as the Brahmo Samaj, Arya Samaj, the Ramakrishna Mission, the
Indian National Social Conference, Women’s Indian Association and
many others.

4
 Phase Two: The Formulation Period from 1935-1946

Significant during this phase is the setting up of the Sir

Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work. There was
also fervor to identify areas of interventions especially in
Bombay Province. In the year 1936-1937 there was a series
of lectures organized on the theme ‘Some Social Service of
the Government of Bombay’. In these lectures 10 topics
were identified. They were Public health programmes,
Medical department, work of the labour office, factory law
and administration, work-men’s compensation, work of
labour officer, industrial housing in Bombay city, village
improvement in Nasik District, the work of cooperative
societies and the Bombay Children Act.

In 1938, a Volume was issued by H. M. Stationery Office,

entitled Social Service in India. Its chapter included,
Agriculture; Medicine and Public Health; Education;
Industrial Labour; Co-operation; and Local Government;
Voluntary Effort and Social Welfare. However this period
did fall within a period that began in 1920 and lasted till
1947 where the non-cooperation movements were very
widespread and active. With a total lack of funds for social
service, many social programmes did not proceed beyond a
point.2

2 Many of these events were captured by Wadia, A.R (1961) in her

book ‘History and Philosophy of Social Work.’

5
Phase Three: The Role Identification Period from
1947-1960

There were many journals that sprang up during this

period. The International Social Work (ISW) was started by
the International Conference of Social Work and the
International Association of Schools of Social Work in
1958, with a base in India. The Social Work Forum (SWF)
was started by the Indian Association of Trained Social
Workers in 1963. The Lucknow University Journal of
Social Work (LUJSW) was started by the Department of
Social Work of Lucknow University in 1962. Other
publication in social work got a further boost through these
journals as well as through publication of books on various
aspects of social work profession, authored by educators
such as Frances Maria Yasas, D.P. Chaudhary, M.S.Gore
and K.K.Jacob. The key event in this period concerns the
appointment of the first UGC review committee on Social
work education.

Phase Four: The Reflection Period from 1960-1980

The TISS had just celebrated its silver jubilee in 1961.

Significant events during this period were the setting up of
the two UGC Review committees on social work
education. The first was set up in 1960 and the second in
1975. The first committee submitted its report in 1965 and
the second in 1980. An important event in social work
history that took place in 1964 was when Professional
Social Workers and Gandhian Constructive Workers
collectively formed a study-group. Three individual -
Jayaprakash Narayan (Director, Gandhian Institute of

6
 Studies, Varanasi) Dr. M.S. Gore (Tata Institute of Social
Sciences) and Sugata Dasgupta (National Institute of
Community Development) initiated this process. Their
vision was to create intersections, both in theory and
practices, between the two groups and formulate a ‘culture-
bound theory and philosophy of social work and to
disseminate the information.’3 Proceedings of this study
group was published by the Gandhian Institute of Studies,
Varanasi in the form of a book titled, “Towards a
philosophy of Social Work” in 1967 edited by Dasgupta.
This text is rich in content and perspective and did provide
an insight into the theoretical processes during the said
period.

The Planning Commission also published the first edition

of the Encyclopedia of Social Work in India in 1968, with
12 articles on different aspects of social work profession. A
significant event took place in the form of G.R. Banarjee’s
felicitation on her retirement from TISS in 1972 where her
papers on social work were compiled in a book form and
was later published in 1975 titled ‘Field Work Supervision’
by the Indian Journal of Social Work (IJSW).

Phase Five: The ‘Search for Meaning’ Period from

1980-1990

This period was significant in many ways. For one, the

report of the second review committee was out and many
schools of social work were readapting their curriculum and
incorporating new courses like social action and social

3 Special Issues on Gandhian Contribution to Social Work Profession,

Maharashtra Journal of Social Work.

7
 problems in India. Supposedly there were attempts to
engage with structure much more than at any point in time
in the history of professional social work. While some
social work institutes had moved towards a generic social
work programme, there were string arguments made to
continue the specialization framework in the TISS in 1982.
In the domain of the production of social work literature,
one could argue that it was this phase that saw the most
creative writings in terms of arguments and even research
and development. Further the second edition of the
Encyclopedia of Social Work in India was published by the
Ministry of Welfare in 1987 with 10 articles on the social
work profession. R.K. Nayak and H.Y. Siddiqui edited a
book on Social Work and Social Development in 1989,
mostly based on papers presented at a seminar on social
work education in Bhubaneswar.

The UGC also published a Report on the Curriculum

Development Centre in Social Work Education in 1990.
During this period, we also witnessed the crystallization of
people’s disenchantment with the development paradigm
and its claims to usher a just social order. Saldanha4
captured these processes in his article ‘Towards a
Conceptualization of Social Action within Social Work:
Teaching Social Action as a Dialogue between Theoretical
Perspectives and Between Theory and Practice’.

4 Saldanha, D (2008). ‘Towards a Conceptualization of Social Action

Within Social Work: Teaching Social Action as a Dialogue Between
Theoretical Perspectives and Between Theory and Practice’ in the
Indian Journal of Social Work Vol. 69(2), pp. 111‐137. There are
some very interesting insights in this article. I shall touch on them in
the next chapter.

8
Phase Six: The Contemplative Period from 1991-2004

This was the period that saw the rise of the NGOs and the
slow withdrawal of the state from welfare responsibilities.
While there were some very innovative attempts by social
work educators to enrich social work with newer
perspectives and fields of practice, there was not much in
terms of impact, both theory and practice made on the lives
of the most oppressed and marginalized population in the
country. This prompted A.Ramaiah to confront social work
education in his famous article ‘The Plight of Dalits: A
Challenge to Social Work Profession’ published by the Tata
Institute of Social Sciences special issue brought out in its
60th year celebration on the theme ‘Towards a Peoples
Centered Development’ in 1998. At this point, social work
education seems to be engaging with many new domains
and even incorporating new teaching content, except for
the issues that really matters, in which mass oppression,
atrocity and marginalization was all taking place rampantly.
I shall engage with his ideas in greater details in the
following chapter.

However, it is important to point out that on the issue of

women’s development, many social work institutes did
engage with it in all seriousness. The Directory of Social
Work Education Facilities in India, published by the
Ministry of Welfare in 1995 which listed a total of 53
schools, mentioned seven institutes where courses on
women’s issues was part of the curriculum. The course was
either titled “women welfare” or “women and child
welfare”. While the questions of caste was somewhat
negated, many social work practitioners and educators have

9
 actively through the years contributed to women’s studies,
women’s movement and reforms in government policies
and laws related to women. However, women’s/gender
issues are still part of a person-centered interest in social
work. The issues of teaching courses on women and the
effort to integrate gender sensitivity into the curriculum is a
political process, as it is considered “subjective” by the
traditionalists who believe that education should be
‘neutral’5.

In 1998 the Indian Journal of Social Work published a

special issue on ‘Gender Aware Social Work’. Several social
work educators and practitioners have written on a wide
range of concerns of social work, including the imperative
need for integration of gender analysis in social work
curriculum, like Social Development and Social Policy,
recognition of the bias in laws for women, and field
instruction. Field practice included gender analysis of
specific problems of women like wives of alcoholics,
integrated rural development programme for girl children,
etc. Further a critique of social work practice and
development of theory of practice is essential for social
work to effectively stand as a helping profession of the
issue of violence against women.

5 Dave and Desai, (1998) quoted in Anjali Dave’s ‘Feminist Social

Work Intervention: Special Cells for women and children’ from the
Book, “The violence of normal times” edited by Kalpana Kannabiran
(2005)

10
 Phase Seven: The Deconstruction Period from 2005-
2012

The TISS went through a major restructuring of its social

programmes in 2005. As part of this process, a
conceptualization that tried to capture the Indian reality
was formulated in order to provide a conceptual frame for
the formulation of new masters’ programme. This was
discussed in general body meeting of social work educators
in August 2005, in which I was an active participant. The
debates and discussions were meant to arrive at an external
and internal environment match, leading to the creation of
new ‘work teams’ around Centers6 that would provide
direction for formulation of a new syllabus for the Social
Work programme of TISS. The meeting was supposed to
facilitate a movement from specializations to super
specializations, conceived as ‘concentrations’. The earlier
five specializations7 had twelve courses each and in addition
there were also basic courses, methods courses and
optional courses taught over two years (four semesters).
The programme at this point as it appeared after the
external-internal environment match emanating from

6 The shift from five departments of social work to six centers

includes, (i) Center for Health & Mental Health (ii) Center for
Community Organization & Development Practice (iii) Center for
Criminology & Criminal Justice (iv) Center for Social Justice &
Governance (v) Center for Disability Studies & Action (vi) Center for
Equity for Women, Children & Families
7 Family & Child Welfare, Medical & Psychiatric Social work, Urban &
Rural Community Development, Criminology & Correctional
Administration and Social Welfare Administration

11
 conceptualization of external reality that was presented to
the faculty8 is shown in Diagram 1:

Diagram 1 : Deconstructing the TISS Programme9

Focus Thrust Field of Practice Knowledge Based / Practice
Concentrations Concentrations
Structural -Political Economy of (1)Conflicts, Peace & Human
Development, Poverty Security
Changing & Environmental
Social, Justice
Political, - Social Structure
Economic, Resistance & Change
Cultural & - Globalization,
Technological Technology Culture &
Context Identity
- Democracy, State, Civil
Society & Human
Rights
Sectoral -Development & (1)Health & Development (2)Rural Devp, Environment &
Capabilities, Governance, Sustainable Livelihoods
Mechanisms, -Law & Social Policy, (3)Urban Devp: Unorganized
Systems -Health & Education, Sectors & Livelihoods
-Human & Natural (4)Social Work in the Field of
Disasters Mental Health
(5)Social Policy & Planning
(6)Community Health
(7)Disasters, Impoverishment &
Social Vulnerability
Realities -Women, Dalits, Adivasis (2)Women Centered Social (8)Juvenile Justice & Youth in
Group & (Tribals), Minorities, Work Conflict
Identities Children, Youth, Aged, (3)Dalit & Tribe Centered (9)Developmental/Therapeutic
Disabled, Delinquent Social Work Counseling
(4)Persons with Disability & (10)Socio-Legal Rehabilitation
Equalization of Practice
Opportunity (11)Advanced Practice with
(5)Criminology & Justice Children & Families
(12)Youth & Change
Organization -Family & Community (6)Social Work with Children (13) Family Social Work
& Families
Units of (7)Community Organization
Social & Development Practice
Organization

The debates concerning the TISS restructuring centered to

a great extent on the deconstruction of the earlier
specializations. At times it was pitched as a challenge to the

8 Since I was an active participant in this restructuring process, I kept

a copy of this initial diagram when it was distributed and discussed
among faculty colleagues.
9 TISS Restructuring documents available with the author

12
earlier specialization framework and in other occasions as
an improvement on the same. Fundamental in this process
however was the emergence of new areas that were called
‘Fields of Practice’.

Around the years 2006 to 2010 there was numerous

attempts across the country to indigenize social work
curriculum and a number of proposals, innovations and
frameworks were institutionalised. A cross sectional
overview of social work programmes of different institutes
in the country around the years 2009-2010 shows the
spread of the social work curriculum between schools of
social work. I will take the case of the Department of Social
Work Mizoram University, the Loyola College Chennai,
Bharati Vidyapeeth University Pune, Lucknow University
and Tata Institute of Social Sciences Mumbai. I have
handpicked universities from north, south, west and east
India and restricted my analysis to them. I will present
below a brief overview of their course curriculum across
four semesters.

13
 Diagram 2 : Mizoram University (2009)10
First Semester -Foundations of Social Work Practice
-Social , Economic and Political Environment
-Human Growth and Development
-Working with Individuals
-Working with Groups
Second Semester -Working with Communities
-Social Work Research
-Social Work in Health and Mental Health
-Social Work with Families
-Social Work with Children
Third Semester -Social Welfare Management
-Social Policy and Planning
-Social Legislation
-Rural and Urban Development
-Youth Work
Fourth Semester -Integrated Social Work Practice
-Social Development
-Women and Development
-Tribal Development
-Counseling: Theory and Practice

Mizoram University as one can observe from the

curriculum framework was generic in approach and thrust.
This was prevalent across many social work colleges in the
North East of India where the generic thrust is perceived as
more feasible and even efficacious.

10 Mizoram University, Department of Social Work.

http://www.mzu.edu.in/schools/social%20work.html (dated 10th
December, 2009)

14
 Diagram 3 : Loyola College Chennai (2009)11
First Semester -Social Work Profession: History, Philosophy & Methods.
-Sociology and Indian Society
-Human Growth and Development
-Introduction to Social Case Work & Social Group Work
Second Semester -Community Organization & Social Action
-Social Work Research & Social Statistics
-Social Work Administration & Social Legislation
-Advanced Social Case Work & Social Group Work

Third Semester -Counselling

Specialization:
Spl: Community Development
(1)Rural Economy & Cooperation (2) Rural Community Development (3) Welfare of
Weaker Section
Spl: Human Resource Management
(1) Industrial Relations & Trade Union (2) Labour Legislation& Case Laws (3)Human
Resource Management
Spl: Medical and Psychiatric SWk
(1)Medical Social Work in India (2) Psychiatric Disorders (3) Health Situation in India
Spl: Welfare of the Disadvantaged Section
(1)Children in India (2) Welfare of Weaker Sections (3) Women & Devp
Spl: Human Rights
(1)Human Rights : International Perspective (2) Human Rights in India: The
Constitution & Legal Framework (3) Contemporary Issues in Human Rights
Fourth Semester -Computer Application for Social Work
Research Project
Specialization:
Spl: Community Development
(4)Urban Community Development (5)Management of N.G.O
Spl: Human Resource Management
(4)Labour Welfare (5) Organizational Behaviour
Spl: Medical and Psychiatric SWk
(4)Management of N.G.O (5)Psychiatric Social Work
Spl: Welfare of the Disadvantaged Section
(4)Displacement & Rehabilitation (5)Management of N.G.O
Spl: Human Rights
(4)Human Rights and Social Work Practice (5)Management of N.G.O

Loyola College as shown above offers five interesting

specializations with a wide spread generic thrust across the
four semesters.

11 Loyola College, Department of Social Work, Chennai

www.loyolacollege.edu/socialwork.html (dated 10th December,
2009)

15
 Diagram 4 : Bharati Vidyapeeth University (2009)12
First -Indian Society & Social Problems
Semester -Social Work History & Ideologies
-Methods of SWP - Work with Individuals
-Methods of SWP - Work with Groups
-Methods of SWP - Work with Community and Social Action
Specialization:
FCW – (1)Family Sociology (2)Child Devp & Socialization
URCD – (1)Rural and Urban Sociology (2)Tribal Devp
PMIR – (1) Industrial Sociology(2) Unorganized Labour
MPSW – (1) Medical & Psychiatric Social Work (2) Introduction to Physiology & Anatomy
Second -Community Health and Health Care System
Semester -Human Growth & Behaviour
-NGOs & Programme Management
-Methods of Social Work Practice –
-Models & Strategies of Community Organization
-Social Work Research – I
Specialization:
FCW- (3)Child in India – Situational Analysis (4)Women’s Status, Issues & Empowerment
URCD- (3) Rural Economy (4)Co-operative Practices in Rural Devp
PMIR- (3)Trade Unions in India (4)Labour Economics
MPSW- (3)Psychiatry – Child & Adult (4) Counseling in Health Care
Third -Social Work Research - II
Semester -Social Welfare Policy, Planning & Practices
-Social Laws and Procedures
Specialization:
Spl:Family & Child Welfare
(5) Child Welfare Policies and Prog (6) Family Life & Population Education (7)Youth Development (8)
Social Work Intervention with Disabled
Spl:Urban & Rural Community Development
(5)Urban Community Devp (6)-Rural Community Devp (7)Policies and Prog of Community Devp (8)
Management of Community Devp Prog
Spl:Personnel Mgmt & Industrial Relations
(5)Labour Legislation (6)H R M Info System & Practices(7) Industrial Relations & Case Studies (8)
Personnel Management
Spl:Medical & Psychiatric Social Work
(5)Psychosocial Aspects of Care & Rehab (6)Health Education & Health Promotion (7)Management of
Hospitals & Health Care Institutions (8)Multi Disciplinary Approach to Health Care: Social Work
Intervention
Fourth -Environmental Issues & Disaster Management
Semester -Development Communication & Media
-Counseling in Social Work – Theory & Practice
Specialization:
Spl:Family & Child Welfare
(9)Family Counseling (10) Gender Issues & Justice (11) Social Work in Secondary Set-up (12) Education
& Social Work Intervention
Spl:Urban & Rural Community Development
(9)Community Development Movements in India (10) Democratic Decentralization, Panchayat Raj &
Municipal Administration (11)Livelihood Skills & Micro Finance(12) Trend in Community Development
Spl:Personnel Mgmt & Industrial Relations
(9)Occupational Health & Safety (10)Human Resources Development (11) Labour Welfare Administration
(12) Organizational Behavior
Spl:Medical & Psychiatric Social Work
(9)AIDS – Health Care & Support (10)Legal Aspects of Health(11)Psycho Social Aspects of Psychiatric
Patients and Rehab (12)Health Care & Disability

12 See Prospectus of Bharati Vidhyapeth University, Section on

Department of Social Work(as on 10th December, 2009)

16
 Bharati Vidyapeeth Pune had four specializations and
offers a wide range of social work courses across the four
semesters.

Diagram 5 : Lucknow University (2009)13

First Semester -Social work: Concept, Nature & Development
-Personality & Dynamics of Human Behaviour
-Social Case Work: Theory & Practice
-Social Group Work: Theory & Practice
-Community Organization: Theory & Practice
Second Semester -Contemporary Concerns & Structure of Society
-Social & Human Development
-Population & Environment
-Social Work Research
-Social Welfare Administration & Social Action
Third Semester -Social Work: Themes & Perspectives
-Social Policy & Social Planning in India
-Statistics & Computer Applications
Specialization (Electives) Papers
Spl: Labour Welfare & Human Resource Management
(1)Trade Unions & Industrial Relations (2) Labour Welfare & Social Security
Spl: Health & Health Care System
(1)Dimensions of Health & Medical Social Work (2)Psychosomatic Factors of
Health
Spl: Family Centered Social Work Intervention
(1)Women’s Problems & Legislation for Empowerment (2)Youth Welfare &
Development
Spl: Rural & Urban Development
(1)Perspectives on Rural Development in India (2)Rural Society & Panchayati
Raj Institutions
Spl: Correctional Social Work
(1)Criminology & Penology (2)Correctional Admin
Fourth Semester -Counseling & Communication
-Participatory Approaches to Development & Social Work Practice Skills
-Political Economy & Development
Specialization (Electives) Papers
Spl: Labour Welfare & Human Resource Management
(3)Human Resource Management (4) Labour Legislation in India
Spl: Health & Health Care System
(3)Psychiatric Social Work & Health (4)Mental & Personality Disorders
Spl: Family Centered Social Work Intervention
(3)Child Welfare & Development (4)Welfare of the Aged
Spl: Rural & Urban Development
(3)Urban Development in India (4)Urban Planning in India
Spl: Correctional Social Work
(3)Correction: Theory & Practice (4)Social Work Practice in Corrections

The Lucknow University also offers five specializations

with an even spread of social work basic courses across all
the four semesters.
13 See Ordinances & Syllabus, Lucknow University, Faculty of Arts,
Department of Social Work, (as on 10th December, 2009)

17
 Diagram 6 : Tata Institute of Social Sciences14
First Foundation Courses (FC)
Semester FC 1: Understanding Society
FC2: Introduction to Economics
FC3: Devp Experience, Social Conflict & Change
FC4: Polity, Governance & Public Policy
Social Work Practice (SWP)
SWP-Group Work
-Participatory Communication
-Critical Perspective on Society: Intro to Social Theory
-Quantitative Research Methods in SW
Second FC5: Law & Social Work
Semester SWP-Case Work
SWP-Community Org
SWP-Social Work Admin
SWP-Social Work Perspectives:
-History & Ideology of Social Work
-Qualitative Research Methods in Social Work
Third SWP-Social Action, Networking & Advocacy
Semester FIELD of PRACTICE CONENTRATION:
(i)Community Organization & Development Practice
(1)Theoretical Perspective on Community (2) Advanced Community Organization (3) Seminar on
Community Organization (4) Global Economy & Polity (5) Development Practice (6)
Participatory Planning & Assessment (7) Rural Reality & Development Practice
(ii)Person with Disability & Equalization of Opportunity
(1)Rehab Contexts for Persons with Disability (2) Human Rights, Social Policy & Law (3) Rehab &
Counseling Intervention (4) Family Centered Intervention with Families of Children & Adults
with Disabilities (5) Rural Practicum-Common Inputs
(iii)Health & Development
(1)Social Sciences & Health (2) Health & Devp I and II (3) Health Research(4)Intro to Mental
Health(5)Community Mental Health (6) Concepts , Policies & Prog of Community Health (7)
Community Health: Processes & Practice
(8) Rural Realities, Health & Mental Health
(iv)Dalits & Tribes: Social Justice, Equity & Governance
(1)Dalit & Tribal Social Work (2) Political Economy of Dalit Devp (3) Political Economy of Tribal
development (4) Seminar on Dalit & Tribal Issues (5) Advance Dalit & Tribal Social Work
Practice Skills (6) Innovative Intervention in Dalit & Tribal Empowerment (7) Rurality, Rural,
Caste & Tribe
(v)Criminology & Justice
(1) Criminology: Trends & Perspectives (2) Criminal Justice: Law & Policy(3)Seminar on Crime
Prevention & Strategies (4) Social Work Methods in Criminal Justice (5) Communication in
Criminal Justice (6) Technology & Crime-Forensic Sciences (7) Crime & Justice in Rural India
(vi)Social Work with Children & Families
(1)Situational Analysis of Children In India (2 )Policies & Prog for Children (3) Vulnerable Children
(4) Skills of Working with Children in Vulnerable Situations (5) Family in India(6)Development
Interventions across the Family Life Cycle (7) Issues & Concerns of Children & Families in
Rural India
(vii)Women Centered Social Work
(1)Women History & Society (2) Seminar on the Gendered Body: Sexuality & Violence (3) Working
with Women Part A:Women Devp Practice & Politics , Part B: Feminist Social Work Practice
(4) Engendering Law & Justice in India
(5) Engendering Rural Realities

14 See Prospectus 2009‐2011, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Master’s

Degree Programmes, TISS (2009)

18
Fourth Knowledge Based Intervention / Skills Concentration:
Semester (i)Rural Development, Environment & Sustainable Livelihoods
(1)Rural Society & State (2) Governance (3)Environment & Livelihoods (4) Law Policy & Institutions
(5) Rural Devp: Challenges & Practice
(ii)Urban Developpment: Unorganized Sectors & Livelihoods
(1)Political Economy of Urbanization in the South (2) Planning & Governance of Cities (3) Poverty,
Livelihood & Informal Sector (4) Seminar on Urban Devp, Livelihood, Informal Sector (5)
Urban Devp Practicum
(iii)Social Work in the Field of Mental Health
(1)Legislations, Prog, Policies in Mental Health (2)Gender & Mental Health(3) Child & Adolescent
Mental Health (4) Seminar on Emerging Mental Health Issues (5) Perspective on Mental
Health, Poverty & Marginalization
(iv)Social Policy & Planning
(1)Theoretical Perspective on Social Policy (2) Policy, Government & Governance(3) Social
Planning & Policy research
(4) Seminar on Social Policy & Advocacy (5) Field Study Engagement
(v)Community Health
(1)Community Health Planning & Mgmt (2) Health Communication & Training (3) Gender, Health &
Rights (4) Seminar in Community Health (5) Environmental Health
(vi)Disasters, Impoverishment & Social Vulnerability
(1) Introduction to Disasters (2) Disaster Response & Mitigation(3) Health Intervention in Disaster
Situations (4) Seminar on Disaster Mgmt (5) Engaging with Social Realities in Disaster
Situations
(vii)Juvenile Justice & Youth in Conflict
(1) Perspective & Legislation Related to Children & Youth (2) Juvenile Justice System (3) Youth
Deviance: Etiology & Emerging Trends (4) Intervention Strategies & Skills (5) Perspective &
Legislation Related to Children & Youth Contextualizing Children in the globalised World
(viii)Developmental/Therapeutic Counseling
(1) Personal & Professional Issues in Therapeutic/ Developmental Practice (2) Effective
Methodologies of Working with Children & Adolescent (3) Therapeutic Counseling
Interventions (4) Issues of working with Special Populations
(5) Skills for working with Child Victims of Sexual Abuse & Exploitation
(ix)Socio-Legal Rehabilitation Practice
(1)Correctional Policies, Legislations & Institutions (2) Emerging Trends in Aftercare & Rehab (3)
Seminar on Human Rights & Access to Justice-I (4) Seminar on Human Rights & Access to
Justice-II (5) Counseling & Advocacy Skills (6) Field Engagement
(x)Advanced Practice with Children & Families
(1)Approaches & Models of Counseling with Children (2) Skills for working with Child Victims of
Sexual Abuse & Exploitation
(3)Family Centered Social Work Practice (4) Interventions with Couples in Relationship Conflict (5)
Contemporary Practices in the Field of Children & Family
(xi)Youth & Change
(1)Youth & Development (2) Skills of Working with Youth-I (3 )Skills of Working with Youth-II (4)
Practice-based Project & Seminar on Youth

-Theme Based Concentration

(xii) Conflicts, Peace & Human Security
(1) State, Democracy & Conflicts in India (2)Nation State & Politics of Identity (3)Conflicts, Violence
& Collective Violence (4)Human Security: Concepts, debates & Trends (5)Conflict
Transformation & Peace Building

OPTIONAL COURSES:
(1)Governance of NPO (2)Organizational Behavior in NPO (3)Strategic Mgmt for NPO (4)Financial
Mgmt for NPO (5)Project Mgmt (6)Training for Social Work Personnel(7)Non-Formal
Education (8)International Social Work (9)Spiritual Social Work

In the TISS, Mumbai however, a new concept called

‘concentrations’ replaced the earlier ‘specializations’ in

19
social work. They were formulated around major and
minor concentrations. The major concentrations were
conceived around ‘Fields of Practice’ (FOP) and the minor
concentrations were conceived around ‘knowledge based’,
‘skill areas’ and ‘thematic based’. While the first year was
generic in approach and thrust, beginning third semester
students were to choose their field of practice
concentrations. There were a total of seven Fields of
Practice concentrations of 12 credits each with a rural
practicum attached to the concentrations. These
concentrations were offered to the students of which they
can choose one. In the fourth semester students had to opt
for one out of twelve thematic, knowledge based or skill
based concentrations of total 8 credits each. First year field
work placements was generic while the third and fourth
semester fieldwork was attached to the third semester
concentration.

Interestingly around the years 2011 to 2012 there was

another critical re-assembling of social work curriculum
that kick-started in the TISS. The reasons for the same are
plenty but it suffices to state that somewhere the immediate
curriculum was not sitting well within the school context
when other factors like student’s choices, faculty expertise,
field requirements and institutional capacities were
considered. The realization that came about was that there
was a need for rationalization of the curriculum keeping in
mind faculty workload, student’s needs and possibility of
offering all social work programmes. Based on the system
of giving students a free choice to opt for their areas of
interest, a hierarchy of sorts was setting in among the FOPs

20
 which was felt important to dilute. A number of
committees were set up to relook and streamline the
curriculum in which colleagues from other social work
departments of different universities also participated
actively.

During this period I had personally travelled to many social

work colleges15 and had detailed discussions with social
work colleagues on curriculum. Most were very keen to
hear about the new TISS curriculum. While some were
appreciative of the innovations taking place, others were
not so enthused by such wide spread conceptualization of
social work. I did feel a tension around curriculum among
colleagues from colleges who were strict adherents of the
generic programmes and the specializations. The TISS
however went ahead with its second round of restructuring
of their programmes in 2011 and by 2012 its Academic
Council passed the new social work curriculum that was
offered for the upcoming batches. I have provided a
detailed account of the same in the third chapter of the
book while conceptualizing the ‘field’.

Phase Eight: The Navayana Period beginning 2012

During this phase we observed the rise and consolidation

of more organic social work curriculum that spoke directly
on domains that emanated from marginalized and excluded
groups. Significant among them are Dalit and Tribal Studies
and Action which constitutes Dalit Social Work and Tribal

15 I visited the social work department Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi

University, Lucknow University, Nirmala Niketan, Rajagiri College of
Social Work, Karve Institute of Social Service and discussed their
curriculum with them and also shared the new curriculum in TISS.

21
Social Work, Women Centered Practice and Disability
Studies and Action.

Many other schools of social work were also reviewing

their curriculum at this point and inserting components
that directly engage with structure, structural issues and
social development. However while new courses were
added to existing curriculum, there was nothing significant
in terms of new domains of social work practice. Some still
sought a generalist practice while some still follow the
specialization model. The TISS in 2012 offered three new
Masters of Arts in Social Work with nine social work
programmes. I will touch upon only the three new
programmes as I have noted above.

The Masters in ‘Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action’

(DTSA) offered 78 credits. There were 26 credits of
thematic courses, 12 credits of fieldwork and 6 credits for
research. The other remaining credits had a generic thrust.
The DTSA programme was unique and the only one of its
kind in the country. It has a very philosophical but
contextual thrust and is wide in scope and theoretical
depth. It engages with global realities from a Dalit and
Tribal perspective. These are conceptually rich perspectives
that provide students with an extensive understanding of
social realities.

22
 Diagram 7 : The M.A. Social Work in Dalit and Tribal
Studies and Action16
First Semester FC 1 Understanding Society
FC 2 Introduction to Economics
FC 3 Development Experience, State, Social Conflict and Change
SW1.2 Social Case Work
SW1.1 Social Group Work
SW2 History and Perspectives of Social Work
SW4 Research Methods I
DTSA 1 Rural, Rurality, Caste and Tribes
FW1.1 Field Work
Second SW1.3 Community Organization
Semester SW3 Critical Perspectives on Social Work: Introduction to Social Theories
SW1.4 Social Welfare Administration
SW5 Research Methods II
DTSA 2 Political Theory for Critical Social Work
DTSA 3 Term Paper on Dalit and Tribal Studies
FW1.2 Field Work
DTSA 4 Dalit and Tribal Social Work: Perspectives & Concepts
Third Semester DTSA 5 Political Economy, Development and Dalits
DTSA 6 Caste, State & Politics in South Asia
DTSA 7 Tribes, State and Governance
DTSA 8 International Social Work and Indigenous Peoples
DTSA 9 Advanced Dalit and Tribal Social Work Practice Skills
DTSA 10 Law, Justice and Democratic Rights
FW2.1 Field Work
DTSA 11 Tribal and Dalit Movements: Theory & Practice
Fourth DTSA 12 Project Planning and Management
Semester DTSA 13 OPTIONALS (Students can opt any one of the course given below
13.1 or 13.2 or other courses offered by MA programmes within TISS)
13.1 Social Policy, Government and Governance OR
13.2 Social Entrepreneurship among Dalits and Tribes
Research
FW2.2 Field Work

The M.A. Social Work in Women Centered Practice (WCP)

had similar credit structure like DTSA. It is also one of its
kinds in the country and is rich both theoretically and
practice. The curriculum is as presented below:

16 M.A. Social Work Curriculum [with specific reference to the Nine

thematic programmes] 2012‐2014, School of Social Work, Tata
Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai passed by the Academic Council
of the TISS in 28th March 2012.

23
 Diagram 8 : The M.A. Social Work in Women
Centered Practice17
First Semester FC 1 Understanding Society
FC 2 Introduction to Economics
FC 3 Development Experience, State, Social Conflict and Change
SW1.2 Social Case Work
SW1.1 Social Group Work
SW2 History and Perspectives of Social Work
SW4 Research Methods I
WS1/C1.7.1 Women History & Society; Feminist Theory & Perspectives (4
cr)
FW1.1 Field Work
Second SW1.3 Community Organization
Semester SW3 Critical Perspectives on Social Work: Introduction to Social Theories
SW1.4 Social Welfare Administration
SW5 Research Methods II
C1.7.5 Engendering Rural Realities – Rural Practicum
FW1.2 Field Work
C1.7.4 Engendering law & Justice in India -I
Third Semester C1.7.6 Women & Work
C1.7.2 Seminar on Gendered Body Sexuality and Violence
C1.7.3 Work with Women –(I) WCSW & (II) WDPP
CODP 6 Social Action, Advocacy and Movements*
FW2.1 Field Work
C1.7.4 Engendering Law & Justice in India -II
Fourth C1.7.7 Engendering Non-Formal Education
Semester C1.7.8 Seminar on WCP
DTSA11 Tribal and Dalit Movements: Theory and Practice*
Research
FW2.2 Field Work

Finally the Disability Studies and Action (DSA) programme

which is an important area that the School of Social Work
in the TISS, Mumbai has been trying to augment and
strengthen over the years also came up with its own
curriculum structure as presented below.

17 Ibid., One important note is that in the WCP programme Students

have the choice to opt for any one of the Social Action Courses
namely, CODP6: Social Action, Advocacy and Movements or DTSA11:
Tribal and Dalit Movements: Theory and Practice.

24
 Diagram 9 : The M.A. Social Work in Disability
Studies and Action18
First Semester FC 1 Understanding Society
FC 3 Development Experience, State, Social Conflict and Change
FC 4 Polity, Governance and Public Policy
SW1.2 Social Case Work
SW1.1 Social Group Work
SW2 History and Perspectives of Social Work
SW4 Research Methods I
FC5 Law and Social Work
FW1.1 Field Work
Second SW1.3 Community Organization
Semester SW3 Critical Perspectives on Social Work: Introduction to Social Theories
SW1.4 Social Welfare Administration
SW5 Research Methods II
FC 6 Human Growth and Behavior
DSA 1 Theoretical Perspectives and their Application to Disability
Rehabilitation Social Work;
DSA2 Persons with Disability and their Rehabilitation Contexts
FW1.2 Field Work
DSA 3 Human Rights, Social Policies and Law
Third DSA 4 Rehabilitation and Counseling Interventions
Semester DSA 5 Family-Centered Interventions with Families of Children and Adults
with Disabilities
DSA 6 The Gender Dimensions of Disability in the Indian Context
FW2.1 Field Work
DSA 7 Management of Rehabilitation Programmes for the Disabled
Fourth DSA 8 Building Disability Awareness through Action
Semester DSA 9 Seminar on Community Interventions in the Rural Context
Research
FW2.2 Field Work

There are other new programmes that emerged during this

time but the above three were unique as it was for the first
time that social work curriculum began to enter such
challenging domains. Since these very unique programmes
have been introduced in the TISS, their curriculum (as
presented above in the Diagrams 7, 8 and 9) has gone
through further alterations. Each of these programmes
have now incorporated the new concept mandated and
institutionalised by the University Grants Commission
around the concept of CBCS or Choice Based Credit
18 Ibid., The DSA programme is also recognized by the Rehabilitation
Council of India

25
 System courses. Nevertheless the overall structure of most
curriculum remains as structured initially.

It is also important to note here that during this period new

social work journals came into the public domain.
Significant among them are the Indian Journal of Dalit and
Tribal Social Work (IJDTSW) that published its first issue
in 2012. Later in 2013 another journal, the Indian Journal
of Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action (IJDTSA) was
introduced. Both these journals were copyrighted by the
Tribal Intellectual Collective India.19

In the domain of social work perspectives, a number of

ways of seeing began to emerge during this period having
implications both on social work education and practice.
While I have detailed these perspectives from across
regions of the globe in the following chapters, I will try to
bring them together in a conceptual frame and present it in
Diagram 10 below under the title – Perspectives in Indian
Social Work after 2013. However, a note of caution
regarding the same; when one brings all social work
perspectives together cutting across context in the world,
including those emerging from India under a single
framework, the conceptions overlaps and becomes more
complex. The perspectives from India that I place in the
framework were available in the public domain around
2013, some of which have been further refined into various
Master’s programmes.

19 The Tribal Intellectual Collective India began in 2009 and I have

been its National Convener (Academic) since.

26
 Diagram 10 : Perspectives in Indian Social Work after
201320

Radical Social Structural Social Women Centered Dalit Social

Work Work Social Work Work
(Raisers of [Pro Equality] {Anti Patriarchy} {Anti Caste}
Focus on
consciousness)
Structure {Pro Change { Pro Women {Perspective
{Anti Oppression Perspective } Perspective} from below}
Perspective }

Tribal Social Work Gandhian Social Work

Focus on {Diversity - Dialogue} {Reform - Reconstruct}
Community {Perspective from within} {Perspective from above}

Interactionist Social Work Traditional Social Work

Focus on (Seekers after meaning) (Fixers)
Individual {Systems Perspective} {Perspective: Status quo}

Note: Howe’s (1987) labels for each grouping are given in parentheses ( ) and Mullaly’s
(1993) label for Structural Social Work is given in square brackets [ ]. The author’s
formulations are given in curly brackets { }.

20 Based on the earlier framework by Howe (1987) which includes

Traditional Social Work (fixers), Marxist Social Work
(revolutionaries), Radical Social Work (raisers of consciousness) and
Interactionist Social Work (seekers after meaning) Sources:
Whittington and Holland (1985), D. Howe (1987), I have added
Mulally’s (1993) conception of structural social work and made my
own interpretation of his position. In addition I have also further
refined the conception of the ideologies in social work practice in the
domain of the theoretical premise from an earlier paper published
by adivaani in bodhi s.r(2016) on Tribal Social Work, Dalit Social
Work, Gandhian Social Work and made minor additions and changes
to Structural Social Work, Radical Social Work and Women Centered
Social Work. An important point to note regarding social work
perspectives in India is that among the many newer social work
ideas that I have placed in Diagram 10, the school of Gandhian social
work remains dominant in both teaching and practice. Other
perspectives and schools of thought to this day, still occupy
miniscule theoretical space in social work education.

27
 As on 2019, there are also newer ideas that have emerged
since. One of which I shall engage in greater details in
chapter six. However as a consolidated theoretical closure
to the above eight phases of the evolution of social work
education, I will attempt to provide an overarching
framework to read the same around the idea of social work
epistemologies.

Some Thoughts on Theoretical Realms in Social Work

Practice

Based on my observation and experience in curriculum

related matters, I have often been pushed to think more
deeply about premises of social work ideas. In my
understanding each of the theoretical formulations
concerning social work education in India rest on three
different but overarching premises. One set of ideas could
be grouped under the framework of “normative’, the other
under the term “discursive” and the last under the term
“navayana”. While the first two frameworks are not
difficult to understand and are spoken of by many social
work educators, the navayana perspective is ‘new’. The
word ‘new’ is also what ‘navayana’21 signify. At this juncture

21 In my conception, Navayana springs from a locale beyond a mind

centered dualistic conception of text/context. It however
encompasses the totality rather than a discriminated reality.
Navayana includes the ‘binary’, the framework of ‘beyond the binary’
and the realms between the two which I call the ‘subtle and sublime
binaries’. I attempt to reflect on a non‐binary conception of social
work from beyond the dualistic premise. In this regard I attempt to
answer questions such as, what are the possibilities of writing text
that are non dualistic? What does writing from such a space entail?
How does one write a text located in such spaces? What kind of
social work emerges from such locales?

28
it suffices to state that the perspective is grounded on a
contextualist view of the world and is somewhat resistant
to the acceptance of any single ‘universal’ and the
imposition of any universal on realities that is conceived to
be fundamentally multiple and diverse.

All the three conceptions are ideas that are currently being
debated and discussed among progressive social workers in
India interested in change, transformation, liberty and
empowerment. Each perspective stems from a certain
perception/conception of reality with a concomitant
identification and thrust on a distinct area of action and
intervention. Further, each overarching framework is
further differentiated around a basic premise and secondary
premise with an emergent focus on identified fields of
practice.

While it would have been far more enriching to detail each

of the analytical frames, I will restrict myself only to
unraveling them at the most basic
ontological/epistemological level that opens up to
meaning-making and interpretation for the reader. I will
attempt to represent these complex ideas in Diagram 11, in
a language that is not difficult to understand. I assume most
social work educators who have studied its history would
be able to immediately identify these theoretical
conceptions. However while the propositions asserted in
each realm are self explanatory, the conception does require
some contemplation to comprehend. A caution however
needs to be brought to the awareness of the reader, that for
the part on Navayana social work premise, although not

29
difficult to understand, I shall attempt to engage with the
same in greater detail in chapter six.

I have titled Diagram 11 as ‘Social Work Epistemology(s)-

The Three Theoretical Realms’ to encapsulate under a
single conceptual framework the intrinsically linked ideas of
social work ontology, premise and perspectives.

Diagram 11 : Social Work Epistemology(s) - The Three

Theoretical Realms

Normative Realm Discursive Realm Navayana Realm

Individual Centric Identity Centric

(i)Those who focus on physical (i)Those who focus on identity & structure
deformities & psychopathology (ii)Those who focus on structure & system
(ii)Those who focus on
psychopathology & psychology
System Centric
Group Centric (i)Those who focus on system & history
(i)Those who focus on psychology & life (ii)Those who focus on history & discourse
span
(ii)Those who focus on life span &
community Discourse Centric
(i)Those who focus on discourse & diversity
(ii)Those who focus on diversity & change
Community Centric (iii)Those who focus on change & being
(i)Those who focus on community & sectors
of development Truth Centric
(ii)Those who focus on sectors of (i)Those who focus on being & truth(s)
development & identity (ii)Those who focus on truth(s) and …

The Theoretical Thrust of the Text

All the chapters in this book have two key motives. One is
more personal, that is to engage more deeply with social
work education, to problematise the ‘given’ and to produce
the new. Two is more related to my students, that is to
write in ways that clarify perspectives and transmit social
work ‘skills’ and insights through writing to them.
30
Over the years I have personally used these lecture notes to
clarify my own thought process and to deepen my
understanding of the said domain, all the while transacting
skills to my learning/teaching community whenever I
prepare my lectures and deliver them.

Following this introduction, in chapter two I will attempt to

historicize social work education from a Dalit and Tribal
Social Work (DTSW) perspective. By ‘DTSW’ perspective I
mean a point-of-view fundamentally located in a Dalit and
Tribal ways of looking at social work history, processes and
change. To give this historicization of social work a greater
spread, I posit the same within the larger overarching global
debate on social work education. In this engagement, I
unravel some of the key ideas in social work education and
discuss the rich ideas and frameworks emanating from the
same.

In chapter three I engage with a key concept in social work;

the ‘field’. The concept ‘field’ is used so often and across
such wide domains in social work education that we have
lost sight of what it probably refers to. Sometimes taken as
given, I felt there was a need to deconstruct such
conceptual ‘givens’, not only to produce new meanings but
also to challenge the status quo.

In the fourth chapter I attempt a problematization of social

work methods, again from a DTSW points-of-view. The
concept of methods in Indian social work education
occupies a central position in both teaching and practice.
The fact that social work methods are theoretically
coherent, have massive amount of literature to back its

31
teaching, is output oriented and gives social workers a
professional tag make the methods fundamental to social
work education. However these methods are also a
contentious issue and are the source of theoretical conflicts
in social work. They are often the key reasons for
acrimonious debates among social work educators and
practitioners. In this chapter I have tried to provide a
different way of looking at them applying them to a ‘test of
context’.

In chapter five, I touch upon the micro elements of the

social work curriculum and attempt to unravel their
premises, their objectives, their expected outcomes and
how they link to other processes within the curriculum
framework. This reflection was important for me for many
reasons, but the key reason being the need to re-imagine
the social work curriculum.

The sixth chapter constitutes the notes of a lecture I

delivered to the Navayana Social Work community in
Mumbai on the subject of the ‘Navayana learning process’.
Under the aegis of the Navayana Sangha, we meet often to
discuss and reflect on theoretical issues that concerns the
learning and unlearning process of ‘Navayana’. In this
chapter I engage little more deeply with the constitutive
concepts and the Navayana Social Work framework.

The seventh chapter focuses on fieldwork pedagogy,

pedagogical practices and pedagogical strategies. Here I
attempt to flesh out minute processes involved in fieldwork
supervision and the learning/educating process. I had
wanted to cover the whole two years programme but the

32
article became too lengthy and thus restricted myself to
only the first year fieldwork. Over the years I have also
engaged more deeply with second year fieldwork and have
gained many more insights into fieldwork education. I will
leave this part out of this book for now.

The final concluding chapter is an interview I had given on

the history and evolution of Dalit and Tribal Social Work in
India based on my own engagement and experience.
Having been one of the persons who took active part in
formulating the DTSW curriculum, I shared my insights in
the interview about minute theoretical issues and
administrative processes that went into the development of
the programme. Since 2006 when the programme was
launched, till 2019, with many changes taking place in
between, the DTSW programme has further deepened both
its theory and practice. Students have given a very positive
feedback about the course and many who have passed out
are spread across India engaging and contributing to the
very challenging empowerment process in the country.

33
 Chapter II

Historicizing Social Work Education

An Exercise in Discursive Practice
Freedom of Mind is the Real Freedom: Dr.B.R Ambedkar

This chapter is framed as a critical reflection on the

‘historical shift’, directed not only at problematizing the
discipline of social work but also as a means of identifying
the progressive trends emerging in theory and practice
within the social work profession. I attempt to identify the
global contours of contemporary debates within the
profession, critically examine the historical status of social
work education in India and conclude by unraveling
invisible, yet pulsating indigenous liberatory social work
theory that are being articulated from India that resounds
with other emancipatory frameworks across the world.

In the year 2016 I brought out an edited book on ‘social

work in India’. I titled one of the chapters engaging with
the history of social work education as ‘Professional Social
Work Education in India: A Critical View from the
Periphery’.22 Interestingly this article did strike a chord with

22
The ideational seeds for this article can be found in a ‘Field Note’ that
I published in a social work journal in India in 2011. Later in 2016, I
made few changes to the earlier note and included the same in a
book I edited on Social Work in India. This was part of the series on
Tribal and Adivasi Studies, Perspectives from Within by the Tribal
Intellectual Collective India, published by adivaani, Kolkata. Over the
years I have delivered many lectures based on this article to my
students. Sourced from my own insights and teaching experiences, I
have reworked this article, fine tune the language, deepened the

34
a few social workers in India. I received two requests from
social work colleagues to permit me to translate this article
into two other Indian languages – Hindi and Kannada.
Other than this little excitement that I thought it generated,
there was neither talk nor discussions on the said subject.
Social Work education in India is very interesting for two
very counter intuitive reasons. One, it does not have its
own indigenous theory. Most of the teaching content in
terms of basic courses is borrowed from western literature,
and two, there is no excitement in theory building. I do not
remember the last organic emancipatory theoretical piece
produced about Indian social work that does not borrow
ideas from Western European thought.

Even the debates within social work education in India did

seemed more western than Indian. As educators we are far
more informed about knowledge produced by western
social work educators and workers from Britain, Australia
and Canada. This is not to take away from the fact that the
social work teaching content in India from the mid forties
was greatly influenced by Gandhiji’s ideas. Based on my
own observation of social work education, (but more as a
matter of opinion), most Institutes of social work in India
actually teach Gandhian Social Work, but because the idea
has become so mainstreamed, it is simply called Social
Work. What perplexes me though is why those who adhere
to his vision are so fond and dependent on western
theoretical formulations, the very ideas he rejected.

footnotes and brought in new content related to the history of social

work education in India.

35
This is not to say that I myself devalue or disagree with
western social work formulation and teaching. They are
indeed a genuine attempt by western social workers to
confront and resolve the problems of western society.
What I disagree however is its imposition or acceptance as
a universal framework that applies across time, space and
context.

A deeper look into western social work knowledge reveals

that such frameworks are nothing more than rules of
thinking of a single community (Western European) that
positions itself as the only producer and final arbiter of all
knowledge that should be considered valuable. With this
caution in mind, I will attempt, in the following section to
capture as many ideas as possible that have emerged from
various context(s) (and not only Western European) in the
world. My argument is that western social work knowledge
is not ‘more’ superior to other forms of knowledge(s)
produced from different locales and multiple contexts.
Thus while I will engage with western social work
knowledge, my attempt is premised on acts of knowing that
sees the same as one of many knowledge(s), appreciating
western knowledge for what it is in a ‘pluriversal’ world
rather than what it claims to insinuate in a western
dominated ‘universal’ world.

The Changing Context of Social Work Education and

Practice

Let me first factor in an argument which I consider

imperative to state that is related to the concrete conditions
of social work education across various regions of the

36
world. Social Work Education, in my opinion is now
experiencing a tectonic political shift generating some
degree of intellectual panic among educators. The shift is
not merely theoretical (which is true partially) between
conservatives and progressives, but the shift has turned
ideological, characterized fundamentally by a historical
rupture of perspectives around religious identity, language
and nationalist sentiments that are unraveling every
moment both in social work education and practice. We
observe these historio-philosophical patterns and socio-
political shifts erupting in many parts of the globe, with
major impact on social work education.

With this concrete condition in mind, it is important to

note that social work history is replete with stories of
attempts to produce humane innovative knowledge in
response to varied context. Social workers across the world
and specifically in some regions, as observed post the
1970s, did produced some very sophisticated radical ideas
which found its way into the social work curriculum. The
situation was also characterized by genuine discussions and
sharing of such ideas that did enrich the discipline.

However the production of these ideas and some form of

inter-epistemic dialogues that took place between these
schools of thought seem to have suddenly taken a back
seat. This is (as I have asserted earlier) in the light of the
insidious, yet abrupt rise of an overwhelming toxic fear and
tension generated by religion, proselytization, identity,
nationality, with crass capitalism and brute neo-liberalism as
the key stimulant of structural and systemic undercurrents.

37
 As social workers, we now live in very challenging times
and as a collective of engaged peoples we are faced with
two humongous tasks. First, to make sense of our own self,
embedded in very complex political realities and secondly,
to try to get some grip of our practice in a world that seems
to have lost sight of both the ‘good’ and the ‘beauty’.
Contemporary situations are suddenly characterized by a
seemingly irresistible onslaught against ecology, endless
conflicts, wars, mass displacements of peoples, food and
water shortages, extreme poverty, environmental crisis and
to top it all the silencing of humane ideas and a backlash
against the realization of the collective good.

Evolving Theory in Social Work Education across the

Globe: Unveiling Perspectives from Multiple Contexts

Social work history speaks of educators producing and

discussing innovative ideas and sharing deep insights about
social work practice under multiple frameworks. Theories
such as radical social work23, critical social work24, structural

23 Roy Bailey and Mike Brake edited a book ‘Radical Social Work’
published by Edward Arnold (Publishers) in 1975. They engaged
with social work in Britain and the United States. Also read ‘Radicals
in Social Work’ by Daphne Statham (1978) published by Routledge
and Kegan Paul. An interesting theoretical analysis and political
position of the radical social workers can be captured in the last
paragraph of the Case Con Manifesto written by a group of radical
social workers who published Case Con magazine in Britain in the
early 1970s.“Case Con believes that the problems of our 'clients' are
rooted in the society in which we live, not in supposed individual
inadequacies. Until this society, based on private ownership, profit
and the needs of the minority ruling class, is replaced by a workers'
state, based on the interests of the vast majority of the population,
the fundamental causes of social problems will remain. It is
therefore our aim to join the struggle for this workers' state. “

38
 social work25, marxist social work26 and feminist social
work27 have abundant literature available for a good read

24 Please read ‘Critical Practice in Social Work’ by Robert Adams, Lena

Dominelli and Malcolm Payne published by Palgrave in 2002. Also
see ‘Critical Social Work, An Introduction to Theories and Practice’
edited by June Allan, Bob Pease And Linda Briskman (2003)
published by Allen & Unwin. An interesting conception is made by
Fook, J. (2002) in his book Social work: Critical theory and practice
published by Sage Publications. He identifies Critical Social Work as
“A postmodern and critical social work practice is primarily
concerned with practicing in ways which will further a society
without domination, exploitation and oppression. It will focus both
on how structures dominate, but also on how people construct and
are constructed by changing social structures and relations,
recognizing that there may be multiple and diverse constructions of
ostensibly similar situations. Such an understanding of social
relations and structures can be used to disrupt dominant
understandings and structures, and as a basis for changing these so
that they are more inclusive of different interest groups.”p. 18.
25 Robert Mullaly wrote a very comprehensive book ‘Structural Social
Work ‐ Ideology, Theory and Practice’ (1993) published by
McClelland & Steward. Then in the second edition written as Bob
Mullaly (1997) 'Structural social work: Ideology, theory and
practices' published by Toronto: Oxford University Press, he framed
Structural Social Work as “Based on a socialist ideology, located
within the radical social work camp, grounded in critical theory, and
operating from a conflict view of society, structural social work
views social problems as arising from a specific societal context ‐
liberal, neo‐conservative capitalism‐ rather than from the failings of
individuals” (p133).
26 Please see the book series “Social Work Practice Under Capitalism ‐
A Marxist Approach” by Paul Corrigan and Peter Leonard (1978)
published by Macmillan. In the Introduction to the series, Peter
Leonard states the rational for a marxist social work approach to
welfare as follows: “In the context of the crisis in the welfare state
and the failure of alternative ideologies and theories to explain this
crisis (referring to Britain) and the continuation of poverty,
deprivation and exploitation, Marxism enters as a method of
analysis. The problem is that Marxism is many things, is itself in a
state of flux and development, and is subject to highly divergent
interpretations. We can see that Marxism is a philosophy which
attempts to explain the natural and social world and the place of
men and women in it, with particular reference to their role as

39
 creators, with nature, of the social world. On this basis, Marxism is
also a critique of the capitalist mode of production in economic and
social terms from the nineteenth century to advanced contemporary
capitalism. But Marxism is not simply a theory: it is a political
practice which confronts capitalism with an alternative model of a
social order. The forms that this model takes and the debates which
are joined on the best way of achieving them are the basis of the
fragmentation within Marxism in Britain. We cannot hope, therefore,
to do more than offer some alternative Marxist perspectives in the
series (referring to the book series as noted above). We do not
intend to indulge in sectarian dogmatism but, rather, to contribute to
the development of the debate on the Left about the nature of the
welfare state and the possibilities of socialist practice within it.”
p.xiii – xiv. Another very insightful text is ‘Social Work and Received
Ideas’ by Chris Rojek, Geraldine Peacock and Stewart Collins (1988)
published by Routledge. This book touches other interesting
perspective such as feminism, humanism and discourse analysis.
27 Mary Langan and Lesley Day wrote an edited book in 1992 on
‘Women, oppression and social work, Issues in Anti Discriminatory
Practice’ published by Routledge. They look at Britain and the
patriarchal power relations in all spheres. Also see ‘Feminist Social
Work Theory and Practice by Lena Dominelli (2002) published by
Palgrave Macmillan. In this book Dominelli lays a context for the rise
of Feminist Social work noting that “Feminist social work arose out
of feminist social action being carried out by women working with
women in their communities (Dominelli and McLeod, 1989). Their
aim has been to improve women’s well‐being by linking their
personal predicaments and often untold private sorrows with their
social position and status in society. This has meant that private
troubles have been redefined as matters of public concern”. She then
attempts a definition of Feminist Social Work as “I define feminist
social work as a form of social work practice that takes women’s
experience of the world as the starting point of its analysis and by
focusing on the links between a woman’s position in society and her
individual predicament, responds to her specific needs, creates
egalitarian relations in ‘client’–worker interactions and addresses
structural inequalities. Meeting women’s particular needs in a
holistic manner and dealing with the complexities of their lives –
including the numerous tensions and diverse forms of oppression
impacting upon them, is an integral part of feminist social work. Its
focus on the interdependent nature of social relations ensures that it
also addresses the needs of those that women interact with – men,
children and other women.” pp.6‐7. Also see the book by Vicky White

40
 for anyone interested in knowing the ideas more deeply.
These were followed by very refined social work
perspectives like those such as the anti-discriminatory social
work28, anti-racist social work29, ethnic sensitive30 and
culture sensitive social work31.

(2006) on ‘The State of Feminist Social Work’ published by

Routledge
28 An important read on the subject is the book ‘Key Concepts in Anti‐
Discriminatory Social Work’ by Toyin Okitikpi & Cathy Aymer
(2010) published by Sage. In attempting to provide a framework of
ADP the authors notes that “Anti‐discriminatory practice was
developed in response to social work practices that perpetuated
discrimination, injustices and inequalities. The calls for an end to
oppression and discrimination have a long history which gained
some momentum in the 1960s. However, it was not until the 1970s
and 1980s that the demands for equality were formulated into an
approach that practitioners could attempt to integrate into their
work. Anti‐discriminatory practice challenged the negative
assumptions that were endemic in society regarding race, social
class, gender, age, disability and sexual orientation.” (p.1) Positing
that the seeds of the framework are to be found in the 17th century
Western European movement, the authors posits that “Anti‐
discriminatory practice is about developing a way of working that is
not based on bias, prejudices, discrimination, injustice or unfair
treatment. It is an approach which calls for people to be treated with
respect and holds that people should not be treated badly or unfairly
because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, impairment, class
(be it middle class or working class), religious belief or age. Apart
from how people should be treated, ADP requires a certain degree of
introspection in order to be appreciative of the kinds of negative
attitudes and beliefs that foster prejudicial views and discriminatory
actions that are ultimately manifested in day‐to‐day practices...Anti‐
discriminatory practice is based on the notion of social justice and
that it is possible to treat people fairly and not view or react
negatively towards them as a result of some preconceived ideas.”
P.26.
29 Please see ‘Anti‐Racist Social Work’ by Lena Dominelli (1997)
published by the British Association of Social Workers. In her
introduction to the second edition of the book Dominelli notes “Anti‐
racist perspectives focus on transforming the unequal social
relations shaping social interaction between black and white people

41
 Further as many more social workers across the world
began to think seriously about the role of knowledge in
social work, newer more politically sophisticated ideas also
emerged, like anti-oppressive social work32 in Western

into egalitarian ones. Additionally, these offer white people hope ‐

hope of changing society in egalitarian directions. In being
committed to making racial equality a reality , white people working
from an anti‐racist perspective can build bridges between
themselves and black people working towards the same objective
from a black perspective.” p.4
30 Located within the American context, the book ‘Ethnic‐Sensitive
Social Work Practice’ is written by Wynetta Devore and Elfriede
G.Schlesinger (1991) third edition and published by Merill, an
imprint of Macmillan Publishing Company. provides important
insights into approaches and strategies to work from such a
perspective.
31 Please see the chapter of Ling How Kee “The Development of
Culturally appropriate Social Work Practice in Sarawak, Malaysia” in
‘Indigenous Social Work around the World. Towards Culturally
Relevant Education and Practice’ edited by Mel Gray, John Coates
and Michael Yellow Bird (2008) published by Ashgate.,pp.97‐106.
32 For Dominelli (1993) anti‐oppressive social work “is a form of social
work practice which addresses social divisions and structural
inequalities in the work that is done with ‘clients’ (users) or
workers. Anti‐oppressive practice aims to provide more appropriate
and sensitive services by responding to people’s needs regardless of
their social status. Anti‐oppressive practice embodies a person‐
centered philosophy, an egalitarian value system concerned with
reducing the deleterious effects of structural inequalities upon
people’s lives; a methodology focusing on both process and outcome;
and a way of structuring relationships between individuals that aims
to empower users by reducing the negative effects of hierarchy in
their immediate interaction and the work they do together.” Quoted
in Dominelli, L. (1998). Anti‐oppressive practice in context. In R.
Adams, L. Dominelli and M. Payne. (Eds.), Social Work: Themes,
Issues and Critical Debates (pp. 3‐22). Houndmills: MacMillan Press
Ltd. (p.24) For “Canadian social work, the term “anti‐oppressive
practice” is generally understood as an umbrella term that
encompasses a variety of practice approaches including, but not
limited to, radical, structural, feminist, anti‐racist, critical, and
liberatory frameworks. Therefore, rather than being seen as one

42
 Europe33 and the North Americas, Black Experience-Based
Social Work34 in America, aboriginal social work35 and
indigenous social work36 in Canada and Australia

“practice approach”, anti‐oppressive social work can be more

accurately understood as a stance or perspective toward practice.
The term ‘anti‐oppressive social work’ represents the current
nomenclature for a range of theories and practices that embrace a
social justice perspective.” http://aosw.socialwork.dal.ca/index.html
Also Please read ‘Anti‐Oppressive Social Work Theory and Practice’
by Lena Dominelli (2002) published by Palgrave Macmillan. Another
insightful book on the same perspective is ‘Emerging Perspective on
Anti‐Oppressive Practice’ edited by Wes Shera (2003) published by
Canadian Scholars’ Press Inc. Also read ‘Anti‐Oppressive Practice,
Social Care and the Law’ by Jane Dalrymple and Beverley Burke
(2006) published by The McGraw‐Hill Companies. Also read Siobhan
E.Laird book ‘Anti‐Oppressive Social Work A Guide for Developing
Cultural Competence (2008) published by Sage.
33 An insightful Anti Oppressive Social work framework in Britain can
be found in the book ‘Social Work, Politics and Society From
radicalism to orthodoxy’ by Kenneth McLaughlin (2008) published
by the Policy Press. Also see ‘The Politics of Social work’ by Fred
Powell (2001) published by Sage.
34 Please read ‘Social Work and the Black Experience’ by Elmer
P.Martin and Joanne Mitchell Martin (1995) published by NASW
Press.
35 See an interesting conceptualization of ‘aboriginal social work’ by
Cyndy Baskin in article titled “Aboriginal World Views as Challenges
and Possibilities in Social Work Education” published by Critical
Social Work An Interdisciplinary journal dedicated to social justice.
Vol 7 No 2 (2006)
36 Please see ‘Indigenous Social Work around the World. Towards
Culturally Relevant Education and Practice’ edited by Mel Gray, John
Coates and Michael Yellow Bird (2008) published by Ashgate. The
term ‘Indigenous Social Work’ is posited as challenge to the
universalizing tendencies of ‘Western Social Work’ which is now
being repositioned as ‘global social work’. This claim to universality
is seen by the authors as “continues to promote professional and
cultural imperialism by adhering to its particular universalizing
ethical, ideological and political value biases”… instead
“Indigenization must be viewed against the historical processes of
globalization and colonization”., pp.14‐15.

43
 respectively, green social work37 in Europe, the formulation
of Decolonial Social Work38 from South Asia, South
America, Africa and Australasia. We are also now witnessed
to even the rise of the perspectives and practice
formulations of ‘beyond-god religion’ such as buddhist
social work39 in the South East Asian regions and countries
like Japan and Mongolia. The traditional40 school in social
work have also deepened its knowledge and produced very
refined practice frameworks.

37 Please read ‘Social Work Practice, An Ecological Approach’ by John

T.Pardeck (1996) published by Auburn House. Also see the book
‘Green Social Work‐ From Environmental Crises to Environmental
Justice by Lena Dominelli (2012) published by Cambridge
38 Please see ‘Social Work in India, Tribal and Adivasi Studies
Perspectives from Within’ edited by bodhi s.r (2016) published by
adivaani. Also an interesting chapter by Linda Briskman on
“Decolonizing Social work in Australia: Prospect or Illusion” in
‘Indigenous Social Work around the World. Towards Culturally
Relevant Education and Practice’ edited by Mel Gray, John Coates
and Michael Yellow Bird (2008) published by Ashgate.,pp.83‐96.
39 Please see ‘Towards Buddhist social work and Happiness’ by
Soontaraporn Techapalokul. Then also visit the initiative of the Asian
Research Institute for International Social work at
https://www.ariisw.com/home‐eng
40
A more traditional (status quoits) social work practice have also,
over the years, developed a number of very sophisticated
approaches to social work practice. Some of these approaches like
the psychodynamic approach, psychosocial approach, the problem‐
solving approach, the task‐centered approach, the systems approach,
the life‐cycle approach, etc. Most of these have roots in western
context but they have also been applied in other settings outside
western society.

44
 The Indian Context

In India, social work education began with a Diploma in

Social Service Administration,41 offered by the Sir Dorabji
Tata Graduate School of Social Work. Later after India
attained its independence from British rule, social work
education was theoretically positioned as an informed
approach to the ‘training of personnel’ to give a
professional touch to services provided by state and non-
state welfare agencies. The thrust of Indian social work
post independence was ‘reconstructive’, build around
Gandhi’s Constructive Work. Many social work educators
during this period were active members of the Indian
freedom movement. The responsibility to frame and
strengthen welfare agencies and to deepen the ‘welfare’
component in the new state fell on them. To achieve this
purpose, social workers came together in a platform they
named the Indian Conference of Social Work (ICSW). The
ICSW was envisaged as a platform to discuss, debate and
refine models of social welfare interventions with various
identified populations.

While not fully out of the American model of social work

education42, both in perspective and content, there was a

41 Rao, V. (1993), Urbanisation, Slum, The State and Self Help

Approach: Organisation and Limits to Citizen Participation. Mumbai:
Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
42 M.C.Nanavatty (1967) notes that “In 1944 ‘basic’ eight areas of
studies were adopted in the USA for social work education at the
post graduate level. They included the subjects of social case work,
social group work, community organization, public welfare, social
administration, social research, medical information and psychiatric
information. These courses were taught as an integrated training
programme with adequate emphasis on field work besides the class

45
 prevailing sense that an element of indigeneity was
embodied in the perspectives and practice of professional
social work. This was because professional social workers
also saw themselves as part of the larger idea of Gandhian
Constructive Work. Gandhiji’s concept of Constructive
Programme43 is still very influential, although they are
beginning to lose the central position that they once
occupied for a very long time. Nonetheless while his ideas
are starting to lose shine, his spirit still informs most of
social work in India. Needless to say that this was not the
case on the ground as there was a clear absence of an
‘indigenous social work knowledge base’ and very miniscule
effort was made to invest on developing indigenous
knowledge. Despite the influence of Gandhian constructive
work,44 as was the case, a major part of the theoretical

work and the research project. In 1952, four broad generic

sequences of study were evolved, namely, (a) social service policy
and programmes; (b) human growth and behaviour; (c) social work
methods of social case work, social group work; community
organization, social work administration and social work research;
and (d) social practice or filed work.”
43 The note was first published in 1941 by Navajivan Trust. The revised
and enlarged edition published in 1945 has 31pages and contains 18
subjects identified by Gandhiji as fundamental to the Constructive
Programme. These are (1)Communal Unity, (2)Removal of
Untouchability, (3)Prohibition, (4)Khadi, (5)Other Village Industries,
(6)Village Sanitation, (7)New or Basic Education, (8)Adult
Education, (9)Women, (10)Education in Health and Hygiene,
(11)Provincial Languages, (12)National Language (13)Economic
Equality, (14)Kisans, (15)Labour, (16)Adivasis, (17)Lepers and
(18)Students. His definition of the Constructive programme is “The
constrictive programme may otherwise and more fittingly be called
construction of Poorna Swaraj or complete Independence by
Truthful and non‐violent means” (M.K.Gandhi (1945)Constructive
Programme Its Meaning and Place. p.5)
44 In direct relation to social work curriculum, a very intense
engagement took place to discuss the ideological foundations of

46
 content of social work education was sourced from western
conceptions45 of professional social work practice. More
specifically the American model of social work education
was to a great extent replicated in India46 including the

social work teaching content in 1967 between Gandhian

Constructive Workers and Professional Social workers. A working
Group entitled ‘Concepts, Contents & Approaches of Professional
Social Work & Gandhian Constructive Work’ was appointed by the
Gandhian Institute of Studies in early 1964. This was an important
attempt in the history of social work education to bring together
these two groups of social workers. The purpose was to evolve an
integrated philosophy of social work for India. The content of the
discussions and papers presented was published in Dasgupta,
S.(1967), Towards a Philosophy of Social Work in India. New Delhi:
Gandhian Institute of Studies, Popular Book Services.
45 These were mostly American frameworks and methods of
intervention
46 A.S.Desai (1985) notes in ‘The Foundations of Social Work Education
in India and Some Issues’, that “Dr. J. M. Kumarappa, who became the
Director (of TISS) in 1941, visited the U.S.A., after which the generic
curriculum shifted to specializations. The social work specializations
were all offshoots of the subjects already contained in the first
syllabus. Thus, Medical and Psychiatric Social Work was established
in 1948 on invitation, by an American social work professional and
Family and Child Welfare in 1949 by an American specialist in Child
Development. Both were ultimately headed by Indian faculty trained
in the U.S.A. The Department of Group Work and Community
Organization was established in 1952, headed by an alumnus trained
in the U.S.A. With the experience gained in managing the Social
Education Organizers' Training Centre at Hyderabad for rural
development, which was on the invitation of the Central
Government, it was realized that there was no short‐cut in the
adequate training of social workers. Hence, in 1955, the Institute
established the Department of Rural Welfare and a separate
Department of Community Organization and Development (for
urban areas). In 1959, both of them were merged into the
Department of Urban and Rural Community Development.”

47
 readings. The linkage between the two contexts – American
and Indian was stark’.47

Attempts at Indigenization in India

Late into the 1960s several attempts were made by

practitioners and educators to indigenize professional social
work knowledge base, by drawing perspectives48 and
methodological issues49 for formulating a context specific
“Indian social work”. These efforts were scattered across
the country and across varied social work domains. Not
many attempts were made by social work academics to
consolidate such knowledge base. This was made far more
difficult by the complexity and diversity of the Indian
reality and the difficulty to arrive at a single universal
framework of ideas and practice.50

47 Please refer to bodhi s.r (2016) Professional Social Work in India: A

Critical View from the Periphery in Social Work in India published
by adivaani.
48 Banerjee, G. (1972), Papers in Social Work. An Indian Perspective.
TISS Series No.23. Mumbai: Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
49 Beginning around 1960s a new breed of social work educators began
thinking seriously about methodology and methods in social work
education. Critiques that social work methods were too individual
centric and community intervention models were western in
essence motivated educators like M.S. Gore (1965), S.Dasgupta
(1968), Armaity Desai (1985), H. Siddique (1987), Murli Desai
(2004) and even sociologist like Denzil Saldanha (2008) to alter
theoretical frames and deepen theoretical connect to the Indian
realities.
50 As far as the Indian context is concerned, there is a growing
realization among contemporary social work educators and
practitioners alike that there cannot be one overarching ‘indigenous
social work knowledge base’.

48
 Over the years, there have been three official reviews of
social work education conducted by the University Grants
Commission.51 The reports of the first two reviews were
submitted in 1965 and 198052 respectively. The report of
the last is still not available.

Contextual and Theoretical Discrepancies in

Contemporary Social Work Education

Social work education in India has its intentions and vision

in place but always seemed confused about its identity,
vision and mission. For instance the biggest debate in social
work concerns the professional tag that goes with social
work. Even among those who have completed their Post
Graduate studies in social work, not all wish to identify
themselves as professional social workers. There is a big
gap among qualified social workers themselves around
identity.

While there are some who hold firmly to the

‘professionalism arrived at by educational qualification’, the
argument goes that there are many more individuals who
are highly skilled, very engaged and even more efficacious
than qualified social workers even though they do not have
any professional degree. Further, many

51 The University Grants Commission is an autonomous Government

instituted apex body responsible for education management in India.
52 The Review Committee on Social Work Education in Indian
Universities (University Grants Commission, New Delhi, 1965) which
was appointed in March, 1960 submitted its report in June, 1965.
The Report consists of 64 pages, with 26 additional pages as
appendices and titled ‘Social Work Education in Indian Universities’.
The Second Review Committee constituted in 1975 submitted its
Report in 1980 titled ‘Review of Social work Education in India’.

49
 structural/community workers are often left out even
though their expertise far exceeds those of the professional
social workers.53

There could be many reasons for the same but two of

these, concerns the field of practice and the creation of an
educational infrastructure over and above charitable work
that is often practiced in India. The first reason relates to
social worker’s context of work. For those practicing in
very organized settings like hospitals, care centers,
municipalities, prisons, police stations, etc., the tag of
professionalism is imperative. For others outside such
settings the professional tag is more a hindrance rather than
a boon. The second reason relates to the framing and
insertion of an (imported) educational framework coupled
with standard and mostly western theoretical content on
people’s daily practices around charity and welfare in India.
This in turn has created a sort of binary between those with
a degree and those without one and also contradictions in
theoretical content.

Attempts to find reconciliation between these theoretico-

structural cleavages have been made, but nothing
fundamental has really taken place. To this day, across
social work education, western social work formulations are
still perceived as superior to other formulations and they

53 On this point as early as 1967 Nagpaul argued that “As the existing
system of education is largely unrelated to Indian conditions, social
work education needs a radical change and drastic reconstruction”
Nagpaul, H. (1967), Dilemmas of Social Work Education in India.
Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol.XXVII, No.3 (October).

50
 are conceived as the proper answers to the ills of Indian
society.

One of these attempts to correct these discrepancies was

made by the second UGC review committee in 1980 which
argued for a positional shift from a remedial focus to a
more emancipatory development thrust in social work
education. The committee believed that social work
education in India should be tailored to respond to the
issues of systems and structures and thus the needs of the
majority ‘suffering’ population rather than merely focusing
on marginalized groups. The understanding was that it was
the Indian social structure that was generating mass poverty
and suffering and people were a pawn in this exercise. The
focus on individuals, individual problems and individual
centered solutions, while vital, was not the remedy to the
highly complex Indian conditions.

Desai,54 who was one of the key initiators of the second

UGC review committee argued that “professional social
work needs to move away from too much dependence on
provision of service towards organizing people to promote
change, … from institutional to non-institutional
programmes, from remedial to those that confront the
cause of poverty, from private concerns to public issues,
from research with a problem focus to one of action
oriented research ... The profession has made a shift but
not significant enough”.55 Asserting this same point she

54 Desai, A.(1984), Social Action and The Social Work Curriculum. In H.

Siddique, Social Work and Social Action: A Developmental
Perspective (pp. 65‐85). New Delhi: Harnam Publications.
55 Ibid.

51
 noted in another article ‘The Foundations of Social Work
Education in India and Some Issues’, where she argued,
“another issue of importance, to a third world country, is
the emphasis in the curriculum either on poverty and social
change, or, the remedial and rehabilitative model of social
welfare. Unfortunately, our models have been the latter,
borrowed as they were from the first world countries”.56

Contradictions between the ‘Conservatives’ and the

‘Progressives’

There is an interesting debate taking place in India within

the social work educator’s fraternity, the age old debate that
we observe across the globe between the ‘conservative’ and
the ‘progressive’. While the ‘progressive’ sees the
‘conservative’ as status quoist, anti-change, individual
centric, problem focused, atheoretical and pedestrian in
understanding the role of power in social interplay, the
‘conservatives’ on the other hand sees the ‘progressive’ as
too theoretical, unnecessarily political, critical, disruptive,
not concerned with measurable outcome and above all else,
too driven by narrow ideology.

Interestingly though, within such a milieu there is not much

to count in terms of indigenous knowledge production.
There are very less social work books in India and among
those available the writings have tendencies to define,
classify, compare and explain, rather than problematise,
debate, disturb and transform. A few noteworthy texts that
require much thinking and reflections have been written by

56 Desai, A. (1985), Foundations of Social Work Education in India and

Some Issues. Indian Journal of Social Work , Vol.46 (1). p.41‐57.

52
critical social workers. However because of the heavy
dominance of ‘conservatives’ in social work education,
these texts do not find space either in theoretical content
nor reading references. The attempt of conservative social
work educators has been to silence and invisibilise these
texts in the name of theoretical standard which is often
measured by indicators that are fundamentally ‘western’.
While supposedly ‘radical’ ‘received theories’ like those of
Lina Dominelli and even Robert Mullaly will be taught to
students, text that speaks about the concrete Indian
conditions are negated. There is a conscious attempt to
invisibilise critical indigenous text. The reasons are not far
to seek. It is always easier to speak about others (especially
western) that have nothing to do with one’s own (Indian)
reality and always difficult to speak about one’s own
context for fear of being exposed, confronted and
challenged. In other words, there is an unconscious belief
among educators that if you do not speak openly about a
‘concrete condition’ (for instance caste) then it is not there,
and those who do so are unnecessarily raking up non-
existent issues. This all-pervasive conception stands
antithetical to all that social work attempts to realize. Such
is the state of Indian social work and the axiological crisis
that most Indian social work educators are faced with.

Most progressive social workers in India are wary of the

perils of traditional social work and its role in augmenting
and maintaining the status quo. The ‘conservative’ is always
a perfect being, the problem lies ‘out there’ among the
numerously abundant suffering ‘other’ that constitutes of
the ‘lazy poor’, the ‘not so hardworking meritless people’,

53
 the ‘non-deserving reserved category’, ‘the unfortunate
vernacular speaker’, and many such ‘pitiable creatures’. This
thorough lack of insight into the oppressive nature of its
theoretical premise, coupled with a lackadaisical attitude
towards any form of humane introspection of itself has
fueled the status quo. This attitude has led to a near total
intellectual impoverishment and has had severe
ramifications on knowledge production in social work.

These tensions among the ‘conservative school’ and the

‘progressive school’ are found everywhere in India. Initially
the debate was identified in the theoretical domain as a
struggle between the remedial (individual) and the
development (community) perspectives.57 However, as this
debate progressed, the theoretical tussle is now being
framed and articulated as a debate between the ‘clinical’
(individual focus) and ‘discursive’ (anti-caste, pro-women,
indigenous social work and buddhist58) schools.59

The ‘individual focus’ position is theoretically located

within an overarching dominant framework couched in a
somewhat acritical, ahistorical and non-discursive (common
sense) language, fundamentally seeing social work as a
57 As pointed by the second UGC review committee 1980
58 My reference to the word ‘Buddhist’ here is not sourced from the
western european conception of Buddhism which was a Christian
construct of a very unique framework that constitutes of three
intertwined open‐ended concepts buddha‐dhamma‐sangha. My
reference in this particular text is to the way this word is understood
in India and not the way Western Europeans have constructed the
same.
59 The ‘community’ perspective seems to have got lost somewhere in
the complex alleys of ‘liberals who are radicals’ world.

54
 profession of clinicians and service providers whose
primary role is the ‘correction of deviants’ augmented
deeply by a collective imposition of a somewhat distorted
moral duty of charity for those who are in the periphery.

The discourse oriented school, on the other hand, stress on

the structurally oppressive elements embedded in the
clinical/individual perspective, the de-contextualized
models and strategies of field intervention, the ahistorical
nature of clinical analysis and the non-discursive
comprehension of Indian social reality. The discursive
school resents the appropriation of social work education
by those grounded on a clinical/individual view of Indian
society and struggles to nudge the premise of social work
epistemology towards more emancipatory and liberatory
points-of-view.

The Emergence of Organic and Contextual Theory in

Social Work

There are many new ideas that have emerged in social work
that engages with structure, systems, history and discourse.
Noteworthy among them from the perspective of
knowledge production are those formulated around two
social categories – dalits60 and tribes61. About the word

60 My understanding is based on a number of discussions with my

colleague Dr.Shaileshkumar Darokar with who I co‐teach a course on
Caste Movements in India, Also my own students have given so many
insights and enriched my own conception further. For a more
sublime understanding, please refer to Gopal Guru’s ‘Understanding
the Category Dalit’ in Atrophy in Dalit Politics, Intervention 1. pp.63‐
76.
61 The concept ‘Tribe’ is now being debated among those communities
identified as such. The category intersects with the Indian State’s

55
‘Dalit’ I trace its conception to the radical humanist
movements called ‘Dalit Panthers’ that erupted in
Maharashtra during the 1970s. Sourced from this
movement I use the concept ‘Dalit’ here to refer to peoples
who have asserted and are committed to the following
political position: (i) Is upfront against the practice of
untouchability (ii) Has courage to assert publicly that
untouchability is inhuman and wrong (iii) Rejects the
exonym ‘harijan’ which is seen as an imposition on their
being (iv) Reclaims the agency to write and produce one’s
own knowledge about self, community and society (v)
Claims the innate human right to own one’s body (vi)
Claims the social right to own physical property (vii)
Asserts the claim to human freedom and social liberty in
society. Further, these assertions historically emerged from
peoples of those collectivities in which the most brutal
form of untouchability was practiced on the whole
community. The concept ‘Dalit’ was born out of their
struggle for emancipation. Thus the category ‘Dalit’
specifically refers to those who have taken the above
positions within these communities. Such is the power
generated by the movement that whole communities are
now identified as Dalit even though empirically there are
ex-untouchable communities that prefer not to identify
with the category produced by the Dalit Panthers. From
this point-of-view, the category ‘Dalit’ is a political position,
a perspective, an epistemology and a social philosophy

categorization of certain societies as ‘Scheduled Tribe’. The concept

‘tribe’ being an exonym, not many are aware of this identity and
prefer to identify themselves by their community (endonym) name.

56
 strategically positioned to counter the system of
untouchability.

About the word ‘tribe’, viewed from a pan-India

perspective, am using the same to refer to all the small non-
caste indigenous communities in India who, I assert, are
methodological communities complete with their own
ontology, epistemology, logic and axiology. However the
word has a very complicated history62 in itself, and in India
it is not without controversy. While many communities in
North East India have taken the identity of ‘tribe’ as
referring to their communities, the indigenous communities
in central India prefer using another exonym call ‘Adivasi’
and the peoples inhabiting their historical lands of Tripura
prefer calling themselves ‘indigenous peoples’. My attempt
here is not to fix these communities in a singular frame but
mostly to try and capture the pan India identity of these
small non-caste indigenous communities inhabiting their
own historical lands in India that are also recognized by the
Indian Constitution.

62
Post 1492, with the rise of Spanish colonialism, the word tribe was
insidiously altered to fundamentally refer to non‐humans/sub‐
humans that needed to be civilized. In this colonial project, tribal
epistemicide was a key imperative. Colonialist to this very day take
pride in having demeaned and destroyed ‘tribal’ epistemology(s),
whilst using the same category – ‘tribe’, as a mirror image to
comprehend their own societies. The reproduction of this colonial
imagery continued unabated, and the savagery notions embedded in
the concept travelled far and wide. Around the mid 1700s, it entered
the hierarchy bound social imagination of the dominant caste
populace of Indian society(s) through the british, who began
reproducing the mirror narrative of the earlier colonizers. The
repercussions of the 1492 conception reverberate to this very day
across the socio‐political spectrum world‐wide.

57
 Viewed from the lens of discourse, both Dalits and Tribes
in their historical struggle for emancipation from their
differential epistemic positions have given rise to a new
social work – Anti-Caste Social Work63 and Tribal Social
Work.64 These theoretical frameworks resonate with the
63 The first substantive paper that emerged in social work education
formulated on a distinct anti‐caste social work premise is by
A.Ramaiah in 1996 as I had pointed in chapter 1. His paper which is
now accepted as a pioneer in asserting the anti‐caste episteme.
Before this, M.S.Gore, a professional social worker and ex‐Director of
the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai also published his book
“The Social Context of an Ideology: Ambedkar’s Social and Political
Thoughts” in 1993, where he discusses the anti‐caste ideas of
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar which till then was considered an anathema in
social work education. No real impact on social work education was
made even after the publication of his book. For more insights on the
debates concerning anti‐caste social work please see Rao.V &
Waghmore.S (2007). Special Issue‐ Dalits and Development: A
Reappraisal, Indian Journal of Social Work Volume 68, (1), Tata
Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Also refer to bodhi s.r(2016)
“Dalit Social Work: Reading Its Theory from a Tribal Location” in
‘Social Work in India’., (Edited) published by adivaani, Kolkata
pp.397‐414.
64 Beginning 2004, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India,
unveiled a “Draft National Tribal Policy” for consultation with
various stakeholders. On 21 July, 2006 the Ministry released its
revised draft “National Tribal Policy”. While the document details
processes related to history, approaches and key development
sectors, the identified strategy for engaging with the tribes in all
realms was laid down as being “Tribe Centric”. Following this
formulation by the Ministry, The Tata Institute of Social Sciences
which was going through a Restructuring of its curriculum,
formulated various courses premised on the Ministry’s identified
strategy and introduced a concentration (that is, set of courses)
called Tribe Centered Social Work Practice. Tribe centered social
work locates social work intervention as an organic process of
working with and through tribes, and accepts the relevance and
efficacy of endogenous methodologies as having the capability to
explain, protect, preserve and promote tribes. Also see bodhi s.r
(2016) ‘Tribal Social Work: Reflections on its Philosophical
Foundations’ in Social Work in India (Edited) published by adivaani,
Kolkata. pp.415‐429.

58
 need to express, assert and augment their efforts towards
liberty and equality. These, I wish to argue, are the social
work formulations that are the first genuine attempts of the
indigenization and resurrection of social work in India on
progressive lines.

Historically, A.Ramaiah (1998)65 is credited with being the

first to provide a theoretical frame for conceiving an anti-
caste social work premise arguing for a need to directly
engage with the questions of caste in India. Ramaiah noted
in his seminal article, that Indian professional social work
for ignoring caste and argued that most professional social
workers were inherently caste prejudiced. He suggested that
Social workers need to seriously consider de-casting
themselves. Social work was not free from caste and could
not operate from outside its social structure. Both social
work education and social workers were subsumed in caste.
He argued that “no social work practice paradigm could
contribute meaningfully and make any real dent on the
marginalized till the same is first accomplished. Anti-Caste
social work was conceived as a theoretical position that
fundamentally rejects the structure of graded inequality
based on purity/pollution which is intrinsically linked to
caste and descent. It proposes a social work practice that
challenges and emancipates people from this graded system

65 A.Ramaiah’s article ‘The Plight of Dalits: A Challenge to Social Work

Profession’, was published in the two volume book on ‘Towards a
People Centered Development, Part I & II., Tata Institute of Social
Sciences, Mumbai, edited by Narayan, Monteiro and Lingam (1998).
pp.124‐146.

59
 of the ‘pure touchable’ and the ‘polluted untouchable’.”66
Following A.Ramaiah’s initial framework, Dalit Social
Work67 (DSW) emerged as a distinct theoretical social work
domain. More advance formulation of the same idea has
now moved to what is identified as Navayana Social
Work.68.

From a theoretical perspective, DSW resonates theoretico-

philosophically with other social work frameworks like
Anti-Racist, Black, Feminist, Critical, Radical and Structural
Social Work that emerged in varied contexts such as
Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom.

Tribal Social Work (TSW) however was a theoretical

product of the team in the School of Social work in the
Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Linked with the TICI that
has its own academic journal,69 the framework of TSW is an
66 bodhi s.r (2016) ‘Social Work education in India: A Critical View
from the Periphery’ in Social Work in India (Edited) published by
adivaani, kolkata.p.237‐238
67 The Indian Journal of Dalit and Tribal Social Work began publishing
in the year 2012 and contain a number of articles related to the
subject domain of Dalit Social Work. Dalit Social Work is now also a
course for Master’s students pursuing their M.A in Dalit and Tribal
Studies and Action in the Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Also see
bodhi s.r (2016) Dalit Social Work: Reading its Theory from a Tribal
Location’ in Social Work in India (Edited) published by adivaani,
Kolkata. pp.397‐414.
68 I will engage with this idea in greater details in the seventh chapter
of this book. Here it suffice to state that the word Navayana means
‘New Vehicle’, an idea proposed by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar who sourced
the same from the deep rooted conceptions about 2500 year ago in
India by Siddhato Gotamo.
69 Their journal is called the ‘Journal of the Tribal Intellectual Collective
India’ available in www.ticijournals.org. This journal is the first of its
kind produced collectively by academics from the tribal/adivasi
community in India under the Tribal Intellectual Collective India.

60
 epistemological equivalent to decolonial social work rooted
to the Indian context. Fundamental to TSW is what is
posited as ‘perspectives from within’ around two
conceptions of the nature of social reality – diversity and
dialogue.70

Conclusion

I have had a number of opportunities to engage with

curriculum formulation in India. One thing that I have
observed across discussions and debates about curriculum
within social work is the difficulty in identifying areas and
fields of intervention. Social work has tendencies towards
less political fields of practice rather than those that have
politics embedded in the nature of the issue. Nonetheless,
there is an understanding emerging across educators, even
though there are newer regressive traditionalist
formulations arising as on 2019 that social work education
must incorporate theoretical conceptualizations and engage
more truthfully with fundamental socio-political-economic
issues that dictate the social landscape of India.

On this count there have been a number of very important

seminars among educators to discuss social work
curriculum in India. Only a few however counts as
significant and creative. These are: the gathering in 1967
between Gandhian Constructive Workers and Professional
Social workers in the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, and
There has not been such attempts before to bring tribal/adivasi
academics in one platform.
70 For a deeper understanding of these concepts please refer to the
Edited book – Social Work in India, Tribal and Adivasi Studies
Perspectives from within published by adivaani, Kolkata in 2016

61
the workshop in 1996 in TISS on ‘People-Centered
Development’. To augment processes related to
curriculum, the UGC did set up a social work education cell
to deepen and expand social work knowledge. However,
needless to state, that even with such attempts there is still
a lack of indigenous social work knowledge to this day.

62
 Chapter III

Theorizing the ‘field’ in Indian Social Work

Education and Practice: Reassembling
Conceptions from a Critical Perspective71
We are soldiers but we are the battle (field) too...: Anonymous

Enveloped by massive change processes since the late

1960s, characterized by mass upheavals and radical
overhauling of structural realities, India is experiencing
rapid change in every domain. The predominant
overarching framework that once determined the country’s
lived realities have witnessed contestations within various
politico-geographical spaces, and in various other socio-
historical spheres there are even violent struggles and
revolutionary assertions. Over this period of time, social
work education has remained alive to these tumultuous
changes and has sometimes even tried responding to each
of these contextual realities. In engaging with these realities,
it conceived the dynamic context through the notion of a
‘field’.

71 I wrote this note as early as 2008. Over the years I have use this as a
teaching material when I engage on the concept of ‘field’ with my
students in the TISS. One of the key reasons I wrote this note was to
engage in the debate regarding the identification of the ‘Fields of
Practice’ in social work education. I attempted through this note to
rupture and destabilize set notions of what constitutes a ‘field’ which
till that moment was embedded in the worldview of the
‘specializations’ in social work. I had published this note in an edited
book on Social Work in India published by adivaani. I thank the
Tribal Intellectual Collective India for allowing the republication of
this article.

63
In this chapter I attempt to engage with several questions
related to social work’s conception of the notion ‘field’;
what does this category signify within contemporary social
work education? What are its constitutive elements? Is
there political interplay involved in construction process? Is
it possible to conceive this category differently and would
this allow the telling of a different story about social work
education and practice. Through the process of
historicizing, I engage with these questions in ways that are
eclectic yet critical, and as an output of the exercise I hope
to be able to reassemble the meaning of the category ‘field’,
locating the same in current context.

At the outset it is important that some basic observations

be made about social work theorizing. It is seen in
contemporary social work education and practice that some
of the key recurring overarching discursive themes are
conceptions such as field, theory/action, and ethics/values.
While there have been some serious thinking around the
domain of theory/action and to a certain extent on
ethics/values, the category field has been somewhat left
unattended. This is at best because of the dynamic and fluid
nature of the reality that the category purports to
contextually and temporarily represent and at worst simply
because social work educators have not dared to venture
into this domain for reasons more political than academic.

A critical cross sectional peep into what meaning the

concept field holds at this historical juncture reveals that the
same is under a sound theoretical grip of traditional and

64
 traditionalist social workers.72 The concept is conceived in a
‘taken for granted manner’, couched in a somewhat
atheoretical language, very generic in meaning with
underlying methodological assumptions that every one
already knows what ‘field’ connotes. Thus any act that
furthers problematization of the said category is
unnecessary and unwarranted. This is the status of the
debate pertaining to the category as it stands today within
social work education.

In revisiting the concept field, I would posit various

arguments that would unravel this political interplay of how
traditionalist has disallowed any revisiting and reassembling
of the concept. I begin by tracing the socio-historical
processes that shaped these conceptions and culminate in a
reformulation of the category field vis. social work
education, hoping to enrich Tribal and Adivasi studies in
the process.

Understanding the Category Field

A category has the power to explain, and within the context

of social work practice, it is historically constituted and
theoretically arrived at before it is used within the frames of
practice and educational programmes. Over time, while
some categories often become flattened and lose much of
their analytic rigor plus representative ability, some

72 Traditionalist social workers here refers to those who have held the
reigns of social work since its inception in India having relied heavily
on Western / American conceptions of social work and those who
engages with social change from a commonsensical understanding of
society rather than relying on more informed theoretical
frameworks.

65
 categories go through a heuristic73 increase and of overall
usage. The value of a category is greatly determined by
perpetual critical contestations of varied perspectives
allowing for new ways of seeing, meaning and
interpretation. In social work practice, the purpose of a
category is not only to define and unravel a context with
precision, but also to facilitate the drawing of clear
boundaries that would allow an abstract theoretical
delineation for informed action and reflection.

This is very much akin to most categories used in social

work education especially while identifying key components
of teaching and practice. For any critical social work
educator, the category ‘field’ constitutes one of the central
concepts in the formulation of the overall curriculum
framework. Most politico-historical contestations among
social workers also happen over intricate elements that
constitute the category field. Curriculum sub-concepts such
as ‘fields of practice’, ‘field work’, ‘field context’, ‘field
supervision’, ‘field engagement’, ‘field action’, ‘field visits’,
etc, are formulated, attached with or build upon the
category field. This central definitive space occupied by the
category ‘field’ in most social work curriculum with direct
implications for professional identity is also derived from
varied definitions and articulation of how the field is
conceived, demarcated and positioned to represent the
discipline within larger societal context.

73 Heuristic increase is positioned to mean ‘enabling a person to

discover or learn something more about a concept by and for
themselves’

66
 Field as Conceptualized in the Social Sciences

Historically, and up to the present, the notion ‘field’ remains

a highly contentious category across social and humanistic
disciplines. Attempts at uncovering conceptions of the
notion within each social science discipline are fraught with
difficulty. However for the specific purpose of this chapter,
a broader understanding that would hold ground for the
social sciences would be adopted.

The subject matter of the social sciences generally concerns

society and its constitutive elements: nature, people,
organizations, structures and systems. Anthropology
constructs the notion field as a demarcated physical space
outside one’s own culture.74 It studies people from cultures
that are totally different, outside of one’s own and explores
other worlds, where lives unfold according to different
understandings of the natural order of things.
Anthropologist generally travels to every corner of the
globe to conduct their research. The goal of observing
while participating is to find ways to enter other peoples’
worlds, to learn their language, follow their lifestyle as far as
possible for an extended period and allow social interaction
to unfold in a natural way while recording such processes.

Sociology perceives the field as located within the

framework of society and its structure. Any phenomena
within the broad confines of society that can be studied
empirically are identified as a field. This would include self,
situation, structure and system. Whether reality is outside of

74 Mcgee,R, Jon & Warms, Richard,L. (2008) Anthropological Theory ,

An Introductory History. McGraw Hill

67
 us or within us would depend on theoretical perceptions
that conceive reality as either mind independent or mind
dependent.

Cultural studies perceive the field as being in a state of

perpetual flux located loosely in a circuit of experience that
is situated in some order. ‘Meaning’, in cultural studies, is
generated and constructed within relationships defined by
the production and consumption process, and various such
meanings are invoked through the notional framework of
the universal and the particular.

Within the social sciences, perspectives and ideology are

conceived as fundamental. For Marxist theorists,75 central
to their vision of a field is the foundational assumption that
nature, history and living beings fit together to comprise a
totality. Since humans emerged from, continue to depend
on and are also intrinsically capacitated to transform nature,
human history as a science is perceived as incomplete until
this foundation is fully comprehended. The idea that nature
has a history, that species come into existence, change and
disappear through natural processes (as the idea that
capitalism isn’t eternal, but came into being at a given time
and will one day disappear from the earth), is how the
75 Engels F, 1884; Brooks. M, 2002; Ian Angus, 2009 Ian Angus (2009).
Marxs, Engels and Darwin how darwin’s theory of evolution
confirmed and extended the most fundamental concepts of Marxism.
A Socialist Voice pamphlet. Also see Brooks.M (2002). What is
Historical Materialism?‐ A Study Guide with Questions, extracts and
suggested readings. http://www.marxist.com/historical‐
materialism‐study‐guide.htm In Defense of Marxism. Engels.F
(1884). The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin‐
family/

68
dynamic field is conceived. According to the Marxian
materialistic conception, the determining factor in history
is, in the final instance, the production and reproduction of
the immediate essentials of life. This is characterized as
being twofold. On the one side, the production of the
means of existence, of articles of food and clothing,
dwellings, and of the tools necessary for that production;
and on the other side, the production of human beings
themselves through the propagation of the species. The
social organization under which the people of a particular
historical epoch and a particular country live is determined
by both kinds of production: by the stage of development
of labor on the one hand and of the family on the other. It
is on such historical underpinnings that action and
reflection takes place.

For post structuralist on the other hand, the category field

refers to a conception of a social space, where there are
interactions, transactions and events occurring that are
located in a specific historical and local / national
/international and relational contexts. This field also
requires an interrogation of the ways in which previous
knowledge about the object under investigation had been
generated, by whom, and whose interests were served by
those knowledge generation practices.

In the works of Bourdieu, the field was to assume an

increasingly significant aspect. A field, in Bourdieu’s
conception, is a social arena within which struggles or
maneuvers take place over specific resources or stakes and
access to them. Fields are defined by the resources which
are at stake—cultural goods (life-style), housing, intellectual

69
 distinction (education), employment, land, power (politics),
social class, prestige or whatever—and may be of differing
degrees of specificity and concreteness.76 For him77 a field
is by definition, ‘a field of struggles’ in which agents’
strategies are concerned with the preservation or
improvement of their positions with respect to the defining
capital of the field. A field is a structured system of social
positions—occupied either by individuals or institutions—
the nature of which defines the situation for their
occupants. It is also a system of forces which exist between
these positions; a field is structured internally in terms of
power relations. Positions stand in relationships of
domination, subordination or equivalence (homology) to
each other by virtue of the access they afford to the goods
or resources (capital) which are at stake in the field. These
goods can be principally differentiated into four categories:
economic capital, social capital (various kinds of valued
relations with significant others), cultural capital (primarily
legitimate knowledge of one kind or another) and symbolic
capital (prestige and social honor).

In Indian Sociology there are very less debates about the

notion field. The only available writings surround
methodological approaches that are formulated around two
views of conceiving Indian reality; the ‘field-view’ and

76 As cited in Jenkins.R, (1992)

77 P.Bourdieu, (1990).In Other Words, Cambridge, Polity. Also see
P.Bourdieu, (1991) Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge,
Polity. Also see Jenkins.R (1992). Pierre Bourdieu. Routledge and
L.D.Wacquant,(1989) ‘Towards a Reflexive Sociology: A Workshop
with Pierre Bourdieu, Sociological Theory, Vol.7

70
 ‘book view’. Jodhka’s78 article ‘From Book View to Field
View: Social Anthropological Constructions of the Indian
Village’ brings out varied contestations related to
approaches of studying Indian villages. Within the
framework of these propositions the ‘field view’ generally
refers to the lived and shared experiences of people from
the field, which one seeks to comprehend and interpret, and
the ‘book view’ of Indian society is framed around texts
developed by indologists – generally sourced from classical
Hindu scriptures and colonial ethnography.

For the purpose of this chapter, the Indian debate within

social science is interesting on two counts (i) most Indian
social scientists assume they already know what the field is
and (ii) this field is generally always outside the researcher
and conceived as being contained in some way in the
realities of ‘the other’.79

78 Jodhka.S. (1998). From ‘Book‐View’ to ‘Field‐View’: Social

Anthropological: Constructions of the Indian Village’, Oxford
Development Studies, Vol. 26 (3). Pp. 311‐32. 1998.
79 It comes naturally to most Brahmin social scientists to study and
theorise about Dalits and Tribes, never occurring to them why this
proclivity. Political theorist Gopal Guru in his article ‘How
Egalitarian are the Social Sciences in India?’, detailed how this
process has been so deeply entrenched in the minds of Indian social
scientists and so easily accepted by Dalits, Tribes and OBCs in India.
Applying the egalitarian principle to Indian social sciences, Guru
contested the idea that some are born with a theoretical spoon in
their mouth while the vast majority with an empirical pot around
their neck. While Guru problematised these processes to a great
degree and provided new direction to understanding and doing
social sciences in India, the struggle by ‘empirical Shudras’ to
emancipate social sciences from the grip of ‘theoretical Brahmins’ in
India has only recently begun.

71
 De-familiarizing the Field in Social Work Education
and Practice from across Continents

While the main focus of the chapter is on India, it is

important to get a glimpse of social work realities across
various other regions of the world. The history of social
work in the United Kingdom throws interesting insights
into how the notion field came to be conceptualized in the
said country. Based on the assumptions that the risk of
social disorder by the year 1601 due to desperation and
need were so great as to warrant action by the state, the
Elizabethan Poor Law was enacted. The law authorized the
raising of taxes to pay for services to those who were poor,
needy, and had no family support, assigning them to
assistance as follows: the ‘impotent poor’ (the aged, chronic
sick, blind, and mentally ill who needed residential care)
were to be accommodated in voluntary almshouses; the
‘able-bodied’ poor were to be set to work in a workhouse
(they were felt to be able to work but were lazy); the ‘able-
bodied poor’ who ran away or ‘persistent idlers’ who
refused to work were to be punished in a ‘house of
correction’.80

The field was conceived based on the notion of poverty

demarcated around the deserving and non deserving poor.
Over the years when social work schools emerged they
were encouraged to emphasize efficiency and standards in

80 Fraser, 1984, in Cree, 2002: 277. Social Work and Society. In M.

Davies (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Work (2nd ed., pp.
277‐287). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.

72
 an environment of “hard-nosed concerns about cost”.81
While there were contestations to these formulation by
radical social workers in the 70s and 80s the concept of a
field was taken for granted as being out there framed around
the idea of poverty. This has remained so to this day. The
influential Barclay Report (1982), illustrated the emerging
tensions of the 1960s and 1970s but stressed more on roles
of social workers and management aspects. However it
must be noted that in the same report there were two
minority reports stressing on approaches instead of roles;
one advocating a broad community work approach and the
other a highly professionalized casework approach.82

In the United States of America social work began with the

first US settlement house in 1886, modeled on earlier
efforts in the UK. They were established with a goal of
eliminating the distance between socioeconomic classes by
locating housing for the poor in working class
neighborhoods. Settlement houses initially provided day
nurseries for working mothers, health clinics, and classes in
dance, drama, art, and sewing.83 The notion field was framed
on similar grounds as those in the United Kingdom.

Over the years, social work became more politicized and,

rather than looking down on the poor or assuming that by
setting a superior example the problems of the poor would

81 Elliott, D., & Walton, R. G. (1995). United Kingdom. In T. D. Watts & D.

Elliott & N. S. Mayadas (Eds.), International Handbook on Social
Work Education (pp. 123‐ 144). London: Greenwood Press.
82 Elliott &Walton,1995: 133(ibid)
83 Van Wormer, K. (2003). Social Welfare: A World View. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth

73
 be resolved, they began to focus on the needs and desires
of those with whom they were working through advocacy
and social change. Jane Addams was quoted to have stated:

‘We found ourselves spending many hours in efforts

to secure support for deserted women, insurance for
bewildered widows, damages for injured (machinery)
operators, furniture from the clutches of the
installment store. The settlement… constantly acts
between the various institutions of the city and the
people for whose benefit these institutions were
erected’84

It was only in the 1900 that the term “social workers” was
used, supposedly coined by Simon Patten, who disputed
with Mary Richmond whether their major role should be
social advocacy or the delivery of individual services.
Throughout the history of social work in the United States
of America there are rare moments when the profession as
a whole had reassembled its basic conception of field.
There are exceptions in the 1960s and 1970s and even as
late as 2000s when many social work educators and
practitioners revisited the conception. However there have
been no major radical shift and the conception of field in
America remains very much the same.

In South America, on the other hand, there have been

numerous efforts to reconceptualize the field. These
processes were captured in a 1971 statement from the
United Nations on training for social welfare that brought
to light the tension between ‘struggling within existing
84 Jane Addams, 1910, in Van Wormer, 2003: 165)

74
 systems’ and ‘working to change them’. The statement
reads:

Social work, and consequently social welfare, must be

freed from dependence on imported conceptions and
techniques; it must further revolutionary change in
social structures and power relationships, rather than
limit itself to helping its clienteles to function better
with a non-viable social environment.85

Between the mid-1960s and the mid-1970s, acknowledged

as the ‘reconceptualization’ period, South America stopped
searching for answers from Europe and the United States
and instead engaged in the discovery of its own authentic
potential to become a free continent.86 From this shift, two
basic schools of thought emerged: the functionalist and the
historical-materialist.87

Functionalist social workers built their premise around the

notion of the achievement of social equilibrium by
attempting to eliminate social problems and dysfunctions,
while historical-materialist social workers conceived a
struggle against oppression and forces of marginalization as
their most fundamental objective. The concept of

85 Resnick, R. P. (1995). South America. In T. D. E. Watts,

Doreen;Mayadas, Nazneen S. (Ed.), International Handbook on Social
Work Education (pp. 65‐86). London: Greenwood Press. Also see
Queiro‐Tajalli, I. (1995). Argentina. In T. D. E. Watts,
Doreen;Mayadas, Nazneen S. (Ed.), International Handbook on Social
Work Education (pp. 87‐102). London: Greenwood Press.
86 Queiro‐Tajalli, I. (1995). Agentina. In T.D.E. Watts, Doreen; Mayadas,
Nazneen S. (Ed.), International Handbook on Social Work Education
(pp. 87‐102). London: Greenwood Press.
87 Resnick, 1995 (ibid)

75
 ‘conscientization’ as formulated by the educator Paulo
Friere became their fundamental theoretical premise.
Within these varied contestations the field was conceived
not as being contained in the poor but as embedded in
structure.

Across the globe in Australia, social work intervention was

influenced primarily by the USA model till the mid 1960s
and thereafter British models became influential.88 The
major fields of social work intervention today include
ageing, refugees, child protection and domestic violence.
While the field was taken for granted as being ‘out there’,
there was far more stress on case work especially in the
hospital setting and relief for families experiencing distress
in the community setting. There have been many
interesting writings on Radical Social Work emerging from
Australia; however there has not been any fundamental
change in its basic conception as is the case with the United
Kingdom and United States of America.

If we turn to South Africa which offered its first social

work diploma course in 1924 the theoretical trends were
quite similar to United Kingdom. However the ‘White
Paper for Social Welfare’ brought out in 1997 cleared the
direction for social work practice in South Africa to a great
degree. It wanted the profession to redefine and locate the
fields of engagement and practice within a context of micro
and macro issues that constitute poverty, unemployment,

88 Phillips, R. and Irwin, J. (2005), ‘The Social, Political and Practice

Context for Social Work in Australia’, Present and Future of Social
Work in Asia‐Pacific Countries, Korea Association of Social Workers:
Seoul

76
aging, human rights, children’s rights, immigration,
refugees, HIV/AIDS, illiteracy, trauma resulting from
violent crime especially rape, murder, child abuse, sexual
assault and etc.

Conception of field in India before 1936

I. Context

Social work education in India celebrated its platinum

jubilee in the year 2011. Over seventy five years of its
existence, social work has viewed the field in various ways.
Prior to 1936, when British India held sway, the conception
of social work was determined by the social condition
existing, created by number of international and national
situations. One was related to the great economic
depression worldwide that occurred during 1928-1932
whose main impact was a sharp reduction in the sale of raw
cotton, jute and ground nuts in the International
commodity markets. During this period, prices for Indian
exports fell about forty percent. In Mumbai (erstwhile
Bombay) the cotton manufacturing industry closed about a
quarter of its mills by 1931. On the political front the year
1935 was defined by the passage of the Government of
India Act, 1935 in 4 June. This Act provided for: the
separation of Burma's administration from India, the
creation of Sind, Orissa and the North-West Frontier
Province as separate provinces, the establishment of
provincial autonomy with ministerial responsibilities,
provision for a Federation with division of powers, the
retention of separate electorates in accordance with the
Communal Award and a demarcation of scheduled areas

77
 into excluded and partially excluded. Most of these
scheduled areas were those inhabited by Tribal
communities.

During this phase, the socio political context was labile and
any activity that seems to qualify as social work, conceived
the field within the paradigm of welfare; inclusive of
structures, services, delivery systems and recipients. This
paradigm was very much within the bounded conceptual
frame of colonial anthropology under the control and
patronage of British imperialism. Colonial anthropology
was under the methodological grip of what was commonly
known as nineteen century evolutionism which framed
society and cultures within a comparative method under a
broad conception known as psychic unity (referring to an
understanding that all human brains work similarly). Society
was supposed to progress though parallel but independent
evolutionary stages posited as being from simple to
complex and primitive to civilized. Here the Victorian
society was represented as the highest currently extant form
of civilization. Anthropologists’ understanding of the
myriad artifacts they collected or the events they recorded
in the field was to a great extent defined by and derived
from these theoretical perspectives.89 It was within such
perspectives and frameworks that social work was greatly
confined.

89 Mcgee,R, Jon & Warms, Richard,L. (2008) Anthropological Theory ,

An Introductory History. McGraw Hill

78
II. Social Work Activities
During the first quarter of the twentieth century, a few
organizations in India started social work training in order
to study social problems and to seek scientific solutions for
the same: Servants of India Society, Social Service League
in Bombay, etc. The Social Service League of Bombay
started a short term training course in the year 1920 for
voluntary workers engaged in social welfare activity. And in
1936 the Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work
was set up in Bombay.

Over time, the generic curriculum that was emphasized in

the pre-independence period (1936-46) developed to
deepen practice through the concept of specializations,
which include medical and psychiatric social work, family
and child welfare, criminology and correctional
administration, group work and community organization,
and labor welfare and industrial relations. Shaped by
priorities established in the United States, the emphasis was
on curative social casework, with less attention to needs of
social and economic development, or the promotion of
prevention services and social action. The field, during this
period was generally conceived as a context outside of
British and various comprador class realities. The passive
recipients of welfare (generally the poor Indians) were more
specifically identified as being the field. In this sense, the field
was framed so as to constitute the welfare structure, the
personnel delivering the welfare services and the recipients
of welfare. This was the overarching framework of the
conception in which the first social work institute in the
country was conceived, formulated and posited.

79
Conception of field in India after 1936

The first school of social work was set up in a very hostile

environment. ‘Nationalist’ uprising against British rule was
gaining momentum and increased tensions with trade
unions, partly related to the fallout from the great
depression were taking place. Clifford Manshardt, an
American Protestant missionary, who had graduated in
theology from the University of Chicago was appointed its
first Director. He came to India in 1925 through the
American Marathi mission, a Protestant Christian
organization. This organization had decided to undertake
work in ‘slums’ and with that objective founded the
Nagpada Neighborhood House in 1926. The agency was
formulated on lines of the ‘Settlement House’ in America.
Identifying poverty, gambling, prostitution, beggary, etc as
social problems, they were perceived as being caused by the
tumultuous changes in social structure especially related to
the breaking up of the family and ‘community’. Manshardt
mooted the idea of developing a school of social work to
meet the need for trained manpower to work in such
conditions. With financing from the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust,
the Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work was
set up.

The programme had three major characteristics– it required

bachelor’s degree for admission, was of two years duration,
and it was called as ‘school’ much in consonance with the
American pattern. Addressing an audience in 1936,
Manshardt made a mention of the need for social work as
follows: ‘As I thought about the matter of training, I
became convinced that the standard of social work in India

80
 could not be raised appreciably until a permanent school of
Social Work was set up to engage in a continuous study of
Indian Social problems and to offer training of social work,
on a post-graduate basis … The fundamental courses in
social case work, child welfare, social statistics, public
welfare administration, medical social work, social
psychiatry, social legislation, organization of welfare
activities, and the history of philanthropy and public
welfare are a necessary part of the equipment of all social
workers’.

During this period the field was conceptualized around the

notion of sectors of welfare, inclusive of welfare delivery
systems, with thrust on systems, process, people and
deliverables carried out by trained professionals. In 1940,
Manshardt90 himself demarcated the field roughly under
four major heads: family and child welfare, medical and
psychiatric social work, juvenile and adult delinquency and
industrial relationships. Social service administration and
social research were positioned as important skills and field
work was seen as learning through direct participation in
welfare activities.

Post 1947, the ideas of Gandhiji were dominant. The social

work discipline during this time was positioned to play an
augmenting role to constructive work emanating from
Gandhiji’s constructive work programme. In 1949,
Jivraj.N.Mehta, the president of the Indian Conference of

90 Clifford Manshardt,(1936) The Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of

Social Work, Ceylon Men, May .pp.11

81
 Social Work,91 set up in the year 1947 identified the
problem of Refugee, Child Welfare, Health Service,
Physical Fitness, Environmental Hygiene, Youth Welfare
and Community Organization as focus areas. The final
recommendations of the conference identified the practice
areas as (i) Rural reconstruction and welfare- agriculture
and village industries, sanitation, health and housing, village
education, village organization, village culture; State and
social service which included a small section on ‘Harijan
Uplift’ and recommendations on welfare of tribal people.

It is within such contextual realities that the demarcation of

fields came to be formulated. The concept of specializations
which began in the TISS in 1948 was framed on such
premises. It is also important to note that the social work
fields of specializations were offshoots of the subjects
already contained in the initial syllabus. Medical and
Psychiatric Social Work was established in 1948 on
invitation by an American social work professional. Family
and Child Welfare were started in the year 1949 by an
American specialist in Child Development. Both were
ultimately headed by Indian faculty trained in the U.S.A.
The Department of Group Work and Community
Organization was established in 1952, headed by an
alumnus trained in the U.S.A. Further in 1953, a full-
fledged Department of Criminology, Juvenile Delinquency
and Correctional Administration were established, headed
by an Indian trained in the U.S.A. With the experience
91 Indian Conference of Social Work (1949) Recommendations of the
Third Annual Session. Also see Mehta, B. (1952).Historical
Background of Social Work in India. Indian Journal of Social Work ,
Vol.13 (1). p.1‐14.

82
 gained in managing the Social Education Organisers'
Training Centre at Hyderabad for rural development, which
was on the invitation of the Central Government, in 1955,
the Department of Rural Welfare and a separate
Department of Community Organisation and Development
(for urban areas) was established. In 1959, the two
departments engaging with community work were merged
into the Department of Urban and Rural Community
Development.

Following this the Department of Tribal Welfare was

established and short-term programmes were launched to
meet the needs of the programmes for tribal welfare started
by the Home Ministry of the Government of India. The
training of deputed officers from the government
commenced in the year 1956. It had a Field Headquarters at
Tamia in Madhya Pradesh and field training in forestry,
agriculture, animal husbandry, cooperatives and handicrafts
as well as social and cultural programmes. Support for this
programme was withdrawn in 1966, when the training had
to be discontinued for various reasons among which was
the difficulty to handle a project at such a great distance
plus some degree of lack of belief and support in the
process.

The Indian reality during this stage was complex and

blurred. Around mid 1960s, people’s disillusionment with
the overarching development paradigms and its claims to
bring about a just social order was witnessed. Saldanha92

92 Saldanha.D. (2008). Towards a Conceptualization of Social Action

within Social Work: Teaching Social Action as a Dialogue between

83
 notes that this period saw the rise of non-government
organisations either with the ideology of human rights,
Freire, Marx or Gandhi. Most groups worked as pressure
groups, operating from below, driving processes towards a
cumulative change brought about through mass
participatory base. Their numbers, widespread character
and their inter-linkages gave rise to contemporary social
movements, aiming at development with people at the
centre.

By 1961, Moorthy had identified six fields; Family and Child

Welfare, Community Organization, Medical and Psychiatric
Social Work, Correctional Administration, Labour Welfare
and Personnel Development and Tribal Welfare with
Public Welfare Administration and Social Research as social
work skills.93 Within Family and Child Welfare the sub
fields identified were Marital Counseling, Child Care
Institutions and School Social Work. Within Medical and
Psychiatric Social Work the sub fields were the physically
ill, disabled persons and mentally depressed. Within
Correctional Administration the sub fields were Offenders
of all ages and types, within jails and reformatories. Within
Labour Welfare and Personnel Development the sub fields
were factories, mines, plantations and such other industrial
work places, including trade unions, and in offices of

Theoretical Perspectives and Between Theory and Practice. Indian

Journal of Social Work , Vol.69 (2), p.111‐137.
93 This article was the content of a talk given Moorthy.M.V through the
All India Radio, Bombay on 10th February, 1961. Also see Moorthy,
M. Vasudeva(1953). Scientific Approach to Field Work IJSW,Vol.14
(2), p.144‐159

84
 almost every type of organization as well as in labour
communities.

Within Community Organization the sub fields were

Community centers and group situations. These, in the
understanding of the author were supposed to be
opportunities that would provide for play, school, clubs,
discussion groups, art, society, local self government,
committee working, occupational teams, national
development projects towards a vision of building a new
India. The organization of such healthy communities in
rural and urban settings was the chief function of the field
of Community Organization whose main practice is Social
Group Work. Within Tribal Welfare the sub fields were
‘backward tribal groups’ who live in remote hills, forest
regions and other isolated areas ‘needing to be gradually
adjusted to a changing social order in India without which
they would disintegrate and develop problems of
adjustment’.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) and the

Ministry of Education had set up its first Review
Committee on Social Work Education94 which came out
with a report. An interesting comment was made in the
report that gives us a glimpse of how the field was
conceived back then: ‘Now that the main aims of social
reform have been achieved, the task of social worker has
taken a different form...he has to look after the needs of
children in orphanages, rehabilitate unmarried mothers and
save children from the stigma of illegitimacy... Today the

94 (UGC, 1965: 7)

85
 field of social work coalesces more or less with the field of
the social workers in the West.’

The fields of social work identified in the report were:

labour welfare, rural development and community
organisation, tribal welfare, medical and psychiatric social
work, correctional work, family and child welfare, work
with the elderly, welfare of the handicapped, and so on. It is
interesting to note that the UGC report was subsequently
criticized by various social workers on the role of social
work in the field of development. The Association of
Schools of Social Work in India (ASSWI) organized a
seminar in 1966 on 'Role of Social Work Profession in
Rural Reconstruction' where the traditional welfare
approach was severely criticized and the need for a
developmental perspective was emphasized.95 Following
this the need for reorienting social work education for
greater relevance and to widen the scope for social work
practice was advocated vigorously through the late 1970s
and in the 1980s. Several institutions undertook major
review of their curricula and developed new courses with a
more developmental focus thrusting on poverty.96

During the period 1975–1977 the country experienced a

state of Emergency where official democracy was
suspended. This gave rise to a large number of political

95 Desai, Murli and Narayan, Lata (1998). Challenges for Social Work
Profession‐ Towards People‐Centred Development Vol.59 (1), p.531‐
558
96 Desai, 1987

86
 struggles manifest as mass-based movements. Andharia, J.97
noted that this period also saw ‘a critique of social work as
being an apolitical enterprise. With the failure of
community development programmes to impact the
poverty levels or people excluded from health, education,
housing, sanitation and infrastructure services, social
workers and community organizers were forced to re-
examine its excessive emphasis on local development
issues’. In the light of this ‘some Social workers began to
recast their work to include structural factors that shape
local realities that led to Community Organization teachers
redefining and reshaping CO to align with, contribute to
and borrow from literature on diverse forms of organizing
– social movements, trade unionism and mass-based
people’s organization and self-help groups’.

In 1980, the Second Review on Social Work education

(UGC) was undertaken. By this time the fields in social work
had come to be formulated around Industrial Relations and
Labour Welfare, Family and Child Welfare, Medical and
Psychiatric, Corrections, Rural Development, Community
Development (Urban and Rural), Urban Community
Development and Tribal Welfare. Desai, A. S.98 conceived
the state of social work education during this period as
narrow and proposed the need to broaden curriculum to
include agro based professionals, rural engineers and
architects, and the need to stretch itself further to include
97 Andharia.J (2007) Reconceptualising Community Organization in
India, A Transdisciplinary Perspective. Vol 15, No 1‐2 Journal of
Community Practice.
98 Armaity. S. Desai, (1985) Desai, A. S. (1985).Foundations of Social
Work Education in India and some Issues Vol.46 (1), p.41‐57

87
indigenous systems such as those in medicine. Her
argument for this shift is interesting. She argued that a
‘remedial, rehabilitative model is essentially concerned with
the breakup of the existing societal systems—the family
and the community—resulting in the problems of the care
of the disabled, the abandoned woman and child, the aged,
or in caring for the deviants of the system which is feeling
the strains of change, that is, the criminal and the
delinquent, or, in assisting persons to adjust to an alien
environment, e.g. industrial labour, or in utilizing the
services such as in medical social work. But these reflect the
problems of an urban and industrial society which
constitutes only 20 per cent of this country. It by-passes the
majority of the rural masses who live in poverty and who
are necessarily the major target groups for social work—the
landless labourer, the small and marginal farmer, the tribal
deprived of his centuries old right on the forest, the women
and children suffering from the ravages of malnutrition and
deprived of many of the most basic needs for food, medical
care and education. Professional social work has shown
little involvement with these target groups’.

These questions troubled the few critical social work

educators and by 1988 to 1990, there was a major
curriculum review undertaken at the national level under
the auspices of the UGC. Arguments were put forth that it
was imperative to include courses such as social action,
social development, policy and planning, social conflict and
others that would open up social work to a deeper
understanding of social realities and a finer engagement

88
with structures of society and varied forces that are
responsible in marginalization.

The 1990s was a period definitive in many ways for the

country. It was during this period that India entered
proactively and overtly into what we now know as
liberalization, privatization and globalization. This period
was also identified as that time when we witnessed the
increase in number and activities of Non Government
Organizations and the rise of the Right Wing sentiments.

India witnessed the demolition of the Babri Masjid,

followed by a number of communal riots across the
country. This was further made complex by the anti-
reservation movements by dominant privileged castes to
disallow any further space for deepening representation for
varied historically marginalized groups. However this
period also saw the Dalit movements becoming more
mainstream, occupying centrality in normative discourse,
plus a number of State initiatives were taken to tackle what
was perceived as ‘the tribal problem’. It is argued that this
period was the defining moment for the rise of identity
politics, both religious and ethnic, that has changed the
political landscape to this very moment.

Social Work during this period operated under an ossified

environment dithering on any engagement with political
issues while seeing itself only as contributors and service
deliverers of the welfare state. There were few exceptions
in the forms of initiatives taken during this time, but there
was nothing really noteworthy that could be recorded. By
the early 2000, social work was going through an

89
interregnum crisis, old ideas and intervention strategies
were becoming irrelevant and meaningless and were
showing signs of decay while across the country nothing
new, in terms of theory and intervention models was being
produced. The degree of disconnect between the content
of teaching and the reality was at best asymmetrical and at
worst disempowering.

It could be argued that the only probable reason why social

work education still remained and was to a certain degree
receiving applicants for its teaching programmes was
probably because it had paid teachers whose permanency
of post was untouched by the University Grants
Commission and that some State funds were made available
for research, training and intervention purposes. This
period was characterized by an increased lethargy in social
work education and in direct relation to the notion field
however, two questions beckoned social work education in
the early 2000s. One was around the notion of a theoretical
stagnation in the conceptualization of the category field and
two; in relation to the methodological and processual
aspects of the indigenization of social work.

Contemporary Social Work and Conception of field in

India: From 2006 to 2013

Beginning 2006, an article appeared in the IJSW titled “Re-

imagining Futures: An Agenda for Change”, a report of the
Director of Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Two reasons
why this report is significant; One, for the first time it
recognizes a need to re-imagine fields of social work in
response to changing realities, and two; for the first time in

90
any address within the first school of social work in the
country was the category Dalit and Tribal articulated
together.

For social work education in India and for many of its

educators, reality had not changed much. This can be noted
from the curriculum of social work programmes across all
the schools offering social work programmes. Even after
71 years, social work programmes remained fundamentally
unchanged and held on to the core components formulated
in the 1950s with a few inconsequential additions made
along the way. No matter how many changes have been
brought into social work curriculum across institutes
offering social work education in the country, most changes
have been non-substantive. There were courses introduced
into social work curriculum that were titled as ‘Welfare
Services for SC/ST and OBCs’. Such course title revealed
the deeply paternalistic and extremely condescending
attitude of social work educators vis-a-vis marginalized
realities.

However the year 2006 is significant. Recognizing the need

to make social work relevant, the TISS began restructuring
its programme. What emerged from it has somewhat
fundamentally altered social work education and its
conception of the field. While the old conceptions of the
field still remains around conceptions in the earlier period
with some minor changes made through the years, for the
first time in social work history we see the emergence of
indigenous formulations in the area of Dalits and Tribes as
teaching content, programme and a field. This is important
to note because this idea had been for long suppressed and

91
forced into 75 years of invisibility by varied groups that
dominate social work education in India. Diagram 12 titled
‘Period of Reformulation of the Notion Field:2012’ is
derived from number of discussions over six years
beginning 2003, that were carried out in the TISS while its
social work programmes were being restructured.

92
 Diagram 12 : Period of Reformulation of the Notion
Field: 2012

UNIT OF SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

Changing Social, Political, Economic, Cultural & Technological Context

STRUCTURE/ SYSTEM

Political Economy Identity Democracy Globalization,

of Development, Social Structure State Technology,
Poverty Change Citizenship Culture
Resistance Rights Identity

SECTORS: MANIFESTATIONS & SITES

AGRICULTURE & HEALTH EDUCATION LIVELIHOODS LAW/ SOCIAL POLICY/ CRIMINAL MEDIA
FOOD SECURITY GOVERNANCE DEVELOPMENT JUSTICE

FIELD: TRADITIONAL & EMERGING

Capability, Mechanism, Systems

Children, Women Dalits Tribes Disabled Religious & Non

Youth, Aged Religious Minorities

CONTEXT: FORMS & LAYERS

UNIT OF SOCIAL ORGANIZATION
C FAMILY / COMMUNITY
Groups & Identities

ECOLOGY & ECOLOGICAL ETHICS

93
 Currently new distinct fields of practiced that has emerged in
social work education which includes Dalit and Tribal
Social Work, Women Centered Practice and Disability
Social Work. While the restructuring trend has not picked
up across social work education across the country, efforts
towards the same is taking place.

There was the formation of a Government backed

Network of Social Work Education99 which is constituted
by one senior representative from every social work
institute in the country towards reforming social work
courses, revision of curricular and updating the same in
consonance with contemporary needs.

Social Work and Conception of field in India: From

2013 onwards

Currently the conception of field is being contested

between progressive and conservative and the process is
reverting back and forth. While conservative forces are
demanding more professionalization, progressives are
seeking the de-professionalization of social work. While
99 In the Report of the National Network of Social Work Education
available at <www.ssw‐network.tiss.edu> titled ‘National
Consultation on National Network of Schools of Social Work for
Quality Enhancement of Social Work Education in India, May2‐3,
2012’ authored by Nadkarni and Desai, snippets of regional
discussions were documented. Formulation of a basic core
curriculum and standard for social work programmes is being
attempted. The one thing that keeps missing is the issues of Dalits
and Tribes. Passing reference about structures and structural
realities hidden under the jargon of ‘culture’ and ‘social structure’,
‘multi‐culturalism’ was made mostly by Eastern region convener,
Dr.Nabor Soreng. Most of the other conveners cutting across regions
were more concerned about the mushrooming of social work
institutes in the country and that students have to pay high fees.

94
some are stressing on individual and clinical practice
demanding that social work must formulate its core around
casework, groupwork and community organizations, others
are demanding more engagement with structure, policy and
research, arguing for policy practice, social movements,
research and rights/welfare practice. The notion field is
experiencing reconceptualization but its theoretical
direction remains blurred.

In Diagram 13 titled ‘Fields of Social Work Practice in

India, a glimpse into varied fields of practice is presented. It
begins with showing the initial professional social work
objectives, the varied ‘fields around the early 1940s,
followed by conceptions around the late 1940s. The key
moment in social work education was the setting up of the
first UGC review committee in the 1960s followed by the
re-conception of various fields of practice around the early
1980s.

After the second UGC review in the mid 1970s, many

programmes were reformulated leading to the restructuring
of curriculum of many schools of social work bringing in
new domains of education and practice within social work
education. In Diagram 13 I have also drawn out a brief
history of Dalit and Tribal Social Work and the processes
of its evolution to this current moment.

95
 Diagram 13 : Fields of Social Work Practice in India
Social Work Objectives (1936) ‘Fields’ of Social Work (1947) Fields of Social Work (1961)
-providing those students who desire to work (ICSW) -Child Welfare
with either private or public social agencies, -Refugee Problem -Youth Welfare
a sound professional education, including trg -Child Welfare -Family Welfare
in practical work -Health Service -Family Planning
-providing man & women now engaged in -Physical Fitness Program -Labour Welfare
social work opportunities for advanced study -Environmental Hygiene -Women’s Welfare
which will enable them to be efficient -Youth Welfare & Community -Rural Welfare
administrators of social service enterprises Org. -Adult & Social Education
-stimulating an interest in social research Focus (1947) -Tribal Welfare
with the end view of enabling students to -Beggary -Welfare of Denotified Communities
carry on independent social investigations & -Prostitution -Backward Classes Welfare
to evaluate & interpret their findings -Juvenile Delinquency -Nomadic Tribes Welfare
-assisting in establishing Indian social work -Urbanization -Correctional Work
upon a scientific basis -Industrial Labor -Beggar Problem
Arguments for Professionalizing Social Final Goal Being ‘Sarvodaya’ -Welfare of the Physically
Work: -progress of all/universal uplift Handicapped
+“While research will be encouraged, the -Trusteeship theory -Welfare of the Mentally
chief aim of the school is practical-to train Handicapped
men & women who will go out with the -Medical Social Work
determination to give of their best in service -Psychiatric Social Work
to their fellow-men” ‘Fields’ Of Social Work 1949 -Urban Community Development
+“school stands for soundness of essential (ICSW)
principles of education, for flexibility of -Rural Reconstruction & Social Work Education (Post 1965)
method & for a working relationship with the Welfare -Need for Para Professionals
whole professional field that will give both -Agriculture & Village -problem related to instructional
perspective & depth to its educational Industries material
programme” -Sanitation -equalised Indian social work reality
+“school believes that scholarly attitudes are -Health & Housing with West
not incompatible with simplicity & common -Village Education
sense, and that the test of the professional -Village Organisation
social worker is his ability to give himself in -Village Culture
Second Review Committee (1975)
intelligent, skillful & disinterested service to -State & social uplift (minor
-critical review of content, relevance
others” focus-‘Harijan’ Uplift)
to needs of country, suggest change
+“school recognizes that the cultural, -Welfare of Tribal People
to make social work relevant, means
economic & social conditions of India differ to effect change
from those of the West & makes every effort Report Out (1980)
to adapt its materials to Indian conditions, & First SW UGC Review -From Remedial to Development
to interpret Indian problems in the light of the Committee (1960) -Assist majority of population & not
national social heritage” -People’s movements saw a peripheral group
+“school lays emphasis upon reading in rise around Marx, Freire, -Teach social action, social policy &
close connection with practice, & upon Gandhian, Human Rights social administration
discussion rather than the lecture method of -Mass participatory base
teaching, in its endeavor to train for
independent & resourceful thinking on social History of Dalit & Tribal Social
questions & problems of maladjustment” Work (Post 2005)
‘Primary Methods (1961) -Pre 2005: Development & Welfare for
+“Modern social work insists that help should
-Social Casework SC/ST/OBC (2 cr edit Course)
be given without pauperizing the recipient-
-Social group Work -Post 2007: 6 course Concentration:
‘Not Charity but Chance’ is the motto of the
-Social Community Dalits & Tribes: Social Justice, Equity
modern social worker”
Organisation & Governance
-2011: Dalit & Tribal Social Work
Working Paper Series
‘Fields’ of Social Work (1940) -Post 2012: MA in SW in Dalit & Tribal
-Family & Child Welfare ‘Supportive Methods (1961)
-Social Welfare in 5 Year Plans Studies & Action
-Medical & Psychiatric Social Work -2013: Indian Journal of Dalit & Tribal
-Juvenile & Adult Delinquency -Organization & Administration
of SWk Social Work
-Industrial Relations -2013: Indian Journal of Dalit & Tribal
-Social Service Administration -Social Work Research &
Conclusion
-Social Research & Fieldwork Statistics Studies & Action

96
India is currently being swept by tremendous forces of
change and this is being felt within every social work
institute. This massive change process is characterized by
the emergence of new forces of marginalization and newer
forms of discrimination in which the brunt is felt by
historically marginalized groups. In response to these
changes, critical educators within the profession agree that
no matter the situation, any abandoning of the critical edge
in social work discipline will lead again, as in the past, into
having to rely too heavily on ‘end conceptions’ borrowed
from other non-indigenous knowledge systems which
ultimately lead social workers to having to hold loose
conceptions of the context of work, especially at the
structural level, thus making no real dent whatsoever on
social reality.

97
 Chapter IV

De-assembling Social Work Methods

from Four Points-of-view100

Aiming to enrich social work theory in general and social

work intervention in particular, this chapter is a humble
attempt from a Dalit and Tribal Social Work perspective to
revisit and de-assemble social work ‘methods’101 as received,

100 The first note I had written on methods was published in the
working paper series of the Indian Association of Dalit and Tribal
Social Workers in 2009. Later I refined the working paper into an
article on the same subject which was published in the Jharkhand
Journal of Development and Management Studies in its December,
2011 issue. The Title of the article in the said journal was “Critical
Reflections on Approaches to Methods in Indian Social Work
Education”. In this present chapter I have referred to this earlier
paper and the conceptions made thereof. Over the years I have
delivered many lectures based on this note to my students in the
Tata Institute of Social Sciences. But since the concept of ‘methods’
was changed in the TISS beginning 2019, I have now used this article
more like a historical reference rather than as a debate about
methods. This article arose as a reflection on the debates in the TISS
during the restructuring of its MA programmes in which the
‘methods’ was a major issue of contestation. To this day the social
work ‘methods’ remains controversial. I perceive these methods
more as western strategies developed to respond to western
realities. They are semi non‐efficacious in India and their relevance if
any is mostly by default.
101 The Western Social Work conception of a ‘method’ (which is
challenged by Indigenous Social Work, see Ibid (2008) Mel Gray,
John Coates, Michael Yellow Bird) is spelled out by Harriet M.Bartlett
(1958) published in (2003) by the National Association of Social
Workers in an article titled “Working Definitions of Social Work
Practice”, special issue on “Research on Social Work Practice as
follows: A “Method (i.e., an orderly systematic mode of procedure. As
used here, the term encompasses social casework, social group
work, and community organization). The social work method is the
responsible, conscious, disciplined use of self in relationship with an
individual or group. Through this relationship the practitioner

98
taught and applied in India. Drawing from engagement of
over thirteen years against dalit exclusion and tribal
peripheralization, four ‘points-of-view’ are proposed as part
of the process of de-assembling the social work ‘methods’.
It is hoped that formulations and articulations made in this
chapter would help destabilize established and set ways of
seeing the ‘methods’ within social work education and
allow for newer and more relevant organic conceptions to
emerge.

Debates surrounding Professional Social Work in India

revolve around two very contentious issues. One is its
‘received content’ generally referred to as the unidirectional
import of social work theories from Europe and North
America. The second issue, which is the focus of this
paper, is the oft repeated debate pertaining to methods
being the ‘core’ of social work practice.

Currently social work curricula in universities across the

country continue to be formulated as per the norms
prescribed in the Second Review Committee Report 1980.
Consequently, Social Work methods continue to be
conceptualized and taught as separate courses in an isolated
manner. Each method is formulated and imparted to

facilitates interaction between the individual and his social

environment with a continuing awareness of the reciprocal effects of
one upon the other. It facilitates change: (1) within the individual in
relation to his social environment; (2) of the social environment in
its effect upon the individual; (3) of both the individual and the
social environment in their interaction… Social Work method
includes systematic observation and assessment of the individual or
group in a situation and the formulation of an appropriate plan of
action. ..”p.269

99
 students as a beginning and an end in itself with clearly laid
out demarcated boundaries.

Generally taken and accepted as sacrosanct in professional

social work, these ‘methods’ which occupy centrality in
both theory and practice, refer to a specialized skill set that
can be learnt and imbibed through rigorous social work
training, complete with frameworks constituting of
‘philosophical assumptions, principles, theoretical
formulations and tools and techniques of practice’.102

A cross sectional analysis of methods formulation across

social work schools in India shows that Case Work, Group
Work and Community Organization are formulated as self-
contained skill sets complete with perspective, strategy and
techniques. Educator’s efforts are generally invested to
define boundaries and skills comprehensively permitting
clarity in theoretical formulation and articulation. Most of
the method courses are also taught as separate courses
within the country’s social work schools.

The (traditional) social work practice methods – using case

work, group work and community organization remains
core in practice and still occupy place of prominence in
Indian social work education. This is reflected heavily in
teaching content of various schools and universities
offering Social Work programmes which includes Tata
Institute of Social Sciences till recently103, Lucknow

102 Mathew,G. (1992). An Introduction to Social Casework. Mumbai:

Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
103 TISS renamed two of its methods courses from Social Case Work to
Working with Individuals and Social Group Work to Working with

100
 University and Loyola College. In some instances, like in
Bharati Vidyapeeth, Mizoram University, Nirmala Niketan
and Delhi School of Social Work;104 case work, group work
and community organization are referred to as ‘working
with individuals’, ‘working with groups’ and ‘working with
communities’. Debates whether there has been a total
reformulation of the practice paradigms in these cases or
are they just a change of name from ‘method’ to paradigms
of ‘working with’ is still ongoing. The Indira Gandhi
National Open University (2011) interestingly has a
combination of both the above, such as (i) Case Work and
Counseling: Working with Individuals, (ii) Social Group
Work: Working with Groups and (iii) Community
Organization Management for Community
105
Development. Across the world and especially in Europe
there have been tremendous debates about the methods.
Till the 1970s, the key methods identified were casework,
family work, groupwork and community work.106 By 1990s

Groups. However its propestus from 2019‐2021 still has earlier

Method’s courses.
104 Bharati Vidhyapeth University, (2009). Department of Social Work
Prospectus (as on 10th December, 2009). Also see Loyola College.
(2009). Department of Social Work,
www.loyolacollege.edu/socialwork.html (dated 10th December,
2009); Lucknow University, (2009). Ordinances & Syllabus, Faculty
of Arts, Department of Social Work. (as on 10th December, 2009);
Mizoram University. (2009). Department of Social Work.
http://www.mzu.edu.in/schools/social%20work.html (dated 10th
December, 2009) and the Tata Institute of Social Sciences. (2009).
Masters Degree Programme Prospectus 2009‐2011, TISS Publication
105 Indira Gandhi National Open University (2011)
106 See the chapter by Dave Ward on Group Work in the book edited by
Robert Adams, Lena Dominelli and Malcolm Payne (1998 ) Social
Work: Themes, Issues and Critical Debates published by Macmillan
Press Ltd. Ward further notes “The four methods were a product of a

101
 there was a decline in the centrality of the four methods
based on many factors such as the ‘drive towards
specialization, the emergence of the law as a central
concern, new approaches to the education and training of
social workers, the impact of ‘new managerialism’107 and,
finally the searching and scathing critiques of theory and
practice from radical, feminist and anti-racist perspectives’
leading to what Ward calls ‘the demethoding of social
work’108.

Revisiting and Re-imaging Social Work Methods from

Four Points-of-view

It is my restrained judgment arrived at through thirteen

years of engagement with social work methods i.e., primary:
casework, group work, community organization and
supplementary: social research, social work administration
and social action, that the professional social work
time that has now passed. They made sense as a part of the
knowledge base of an aspiring profession which confidently saw
itself progressing to enlightened status and security. Battered from
all sides, those conditions no longer apply. Social Workers’
confidence in themselves has been profoundly shaken. It is not
surprising that they have come to feel safer operating within
instrumental but more clear and defensible frameworks, reflected in
such buzz words as ‘competencies’, ‘risk assessment’ and ‘case
management’.(pp.,151‐152)
107 Ibid., Ward explains ‘New Managerialism’ as a trend arising in
Britain where the focus is on concrete and measureable outcomes, in
a drive towards greater economy, efficiency and effectiveness. p.151
108 Ibid., Dave Ward notes “The final factor I wish to note as influencing
the ‘demethoding’ of social work has been the so‐called ‘progressive’
critique of traditional social work. This has interrogated not only the
reactionary policies and practices flowing from the New Right, but
also how good intentions can be damaging. It began with the Radical
Social Work movement in the late 1970s and early 80s, moving on
into the trenchant critiques from feminist, disability, gay and
lesbians, and anti‐racist perspectives from the mid‐80s.” p.151.

102
community is locked in four different ‘points-of-view’
about the methods. Each of these positions are somewhat
determined by location, field of practice and one’s
ideological position. While these ‘points-of-view’ are
framed differently, as characterized by the possibility of
framework and conceptual relocation, nonetheless each are
classically well formulated and positioned within itself and
in context.

Points-of-view - One:

…Each of the Social work Methods can be practiced separately, in

isolation and with least reference and connect to other methods…

If one was to view society as constituted by individuals,

then it comes naturally to such a perspective that most
problems and solutions of all ills that are experienced in
society are to be found contained in individuals. This
container of problems- the ‘individual’ can be
comprehended through the usage of various theoretical and
methodological framework and processes. Believing that it
is possible to understand the individual and his/her
concomitant problems, one could then develop various
strategies to remedy problems experienced by and within
the individual.

In such a perspective, a method of intervention could be

perceived as a combination of various techniques complete
with a premise perspective, theoretical frame, intervention
strategies and a foreseeable controlled desirable outcome.
Social workers positioned within this conception sees
methods, especially those that are focused on the individual
such as casework as being ‘a method of helping people
103
 individually through a one-to-one relationship complete
with philosophical assumptions, principles, theoretical
formulations and tools and techniques of practice’.109

Focusing specifically on the individual, methods could be

clearly formulated, defined, contextualized and applied,
moving from the individual (who is the core constitutive
element), to groups, to communities and to structures and
systems as shown in Diagram 14. Within this premise, it is
assumed that method/s can be learnt and imbibed through
rigorous social work training.

When the individual becomes the primary unit of analysis

and intervention, formulation of any other interventions
with groups and communities are considered important but
holds secondary status to direct intervention with the
individual. Such a formulation leads to the belief that it is
important and possible to differentiate and demarcate
clearly the theoretical boundaries between one method of
intervention and the other.

Further, since the individual is the core object of analysis

and intervention, the method that caters to the individual is
the most important method, pushing other methods to
playing, at most, a facilitative role. With the method/s now
attaining, in itself a comprehensive clear bounded
theoretical framework, they are perceived in subtle ways to
be reliable absolutes, without any loose theoretical ends.

109 Mathew,G. (1992). An Introduction to Social Casework. Mumbai:

Tata Institute of Social Sciences.

104
 Processually, this way of conceiving and perceiving the
methods, strongly upholds the belief that one could identify
beginnings and ends of every single method and as part of
the process there is great need to define the method
especially in the areas of conceptual boundary, fields of
practice and technical skills.

Diagram 14 : Points-of-view: One110

Social Action Structure/ Systems

RESPOND TO
Community Organization Community
METHOD

Group Work Group

Case Work Individual

In the course of social work training, any inability to

comprehend or have theoretical control over such
formulations is perceived as having ‘not arrived’ at
understanding the method yet. One need to learn
definitions with ability to delineate boundaries of
definitions, content and jargon of process, principles,
identified intervention strategies and even acquiring
capability to comprehend and control possible outcomes.
With greater understanding of conceptions comes greater
ability to intervene, and with greater ability to intervene
comes greater confidence in practice. Thus one is measured

110 Also ‘Hierarchy Approach’ to Methods, bodhi s.r, 2011

105
as either a ‘good’ social worker or a ‘bad’ social worker only
if one has mastery over this process.

To summarize this ‘point-of-view’, there are clear lines of

demarcation between one method and the other both
conceptually and methodologically as shown in Diagram
14. Further each of the method accepting the individual as
fundamental, are somewhat placed in different
permutations and combinations depending on the unit of
intervention and sectoral thrust or focus. Stemming from
the above it is an accepted belief that one single method
can do without the others at any given point of time or at
best one method is more important than the other.

Points-of-view: Two

…Social Work Methods are located in a spectrum and needs to be

drawn as a skill set in response to a problem identified in the social
context…

The second ‘point-of-view’ to ‘methods’ takes a slight

theoretical shift from the first and is generally observed
among social workers opining the fluid nature of the social
context. While the individual is still important, the
individual is subjected to some degree of de-emphasis and
the notion of groups and collectives becomes as equally
important as the individual. This perspective is held
generally by those working with groups that need more
psychosocial intervention rather than just psychological
intervention as it is with the first approach that focuses on
psychological or psychosomatic problems.

106
In the context of the formulation of methods, this
approach tends to position itself within a perspective that
identifies no beginnings and no ends for any single method.
Within the framework, conceiving that the lines of
demarcation between one method and the other are
somewhat blurred and not easily demarcated in lived reality,
boundaries can thus never be easily drawn, bounded or
definable. Further it proposes that there is possibly no
beginning and no end in conception of every single social
work method.

From this analysis stems the argument that it is difficult to

draw theoretical demarcations between methods and that
the act of theoretical engagement is merely to provide some
initial knowledge and framework for efficacious
intervention. One could further argue that from this
location social reality is dynamic and not static, boundaries
does not take precedence over content and overall the
focus is on the method being a way (tested) of intervention
and in an abstract sense, a point-of-view; a perspective.
Diagram 15 below represents this formulation.

107
 Diagram 15 : Points-of-view: Two111

Unit of Intervention located in spectrum

Individual Group Community Structure System

Method of Intervention as Unit Requires

Case Work Group Work Community Organization Social Action

Compared to the first ‘point-of-view’, one observes four

positionality shifts away from the first. They are as follows
(i) the individual is no more the core unit of intervention,
(ii) problems take place and manifest in a complex and fluid
social context (iii) methods must respond to a fluctuating
reality depending on how it presents itself rather than
approach a situation with fixed method and (iv) group
processes have tremendous capability of healing and
empowering.

Nonetheless even though this approach problematises the

notion of individual as a ‘container’ of problems and
challenges the idea that one method begins where another
method ends, yet there is still a fundamental acceptance of
the existence and totalizing capacity of specific individual
methods. Notwithstanding the overall epistemic shift
manifest in such conceptualizations, methods do exist and
they constitute the core to any understanding and

111 Also ‘Spectrum Approach’ to Methods in bodhi s.r, 2011

108
intervention process in social work. The methods are a
conglomeration of well formulated strategies with a sound
theoretical base, tested over time, space and situations that
are bound to bring the desired results if applied correctly.
These methods can be learnt, applied and through a
number of experiments/experiences in practice, one could
deepen both understanding and refinement of the
intervention process.

Briefly, within this ‘point-of-view’ it is important however

to note that there is stress on understanding social reality
deep enough to be able to discern what method to use,
when and where.

Points-of-view: Three

…The concept of community is fundamental to social work

engagement and all methods are encapsulated within its framework…

In the third ‘point-of-view’, methods moves away from the

above two in fundamental ways and is generally observed
among social workers practicing community work. This
approach takes into consideration structural realities
inclusive of social groupings and their identities in a larger
frame of social change within the concept of community.
Constitutive structural elements such as historical, socio-
cultural, current political and economic realities are
considered imperative for theorizing, action and change.
This conceptualization subsumes all other intervention
strategies under the community rubric. The same is shown
in Diagram 16.

109
 Diagram 16 : Points-of-view: Three112

COMMUNITY as fundamental
unit/framework of Analysis
Community Organization as
fundamental method of intervention

Group as constitutive
element in community
Group Work as CO strategy

Individual as constitutive
element in community
Case Work as CO strategy

Within this ‘point-of-view’, the concept of ‘community’

constitutes the fundamental premise. Concomitant
structures and boundaries within the community form the
basis of all social work theory and practice. The individual,
within this perspective is subjected to some degree of de-
emphasis and is generally seen as part of a socially
constructed embodiment trapped in structure. At best the
individual is mostly a symptom carrier and most ills and
problems are to a great extent a manifest of the structures
of a context. Individual consciousnesses are constructed
within structures of society and a will to freedom from
individuals demands a persistent engagement in process
within community of action, reflection and transformation
of social reality.

Further in this ‘point-of-view’, there is an element of

reformation embedded within the approach. An act of

112 Also ‘Organic Approach’ to Methods in bodhi s.r, 2011

110
surrender to structure is seen as an indirect submission and
acceptance of the given reality by people, or, more so as a
passive recipient of the process rather than an agency; an
active constructor of social reality. What follows from this
perspective is a socio-political distaste of individual centric
work that is blind to the role of structures in shaping
people’s lives. Individual centric methods such as Casework
and Group Work are perceived as delimiting and
disempowering and are generally identified as acts that
subject people to de-politicization that leads to affirming
the status quo. Further, Case Work and Group work are
also seen as remedial and at most ‘problem fixing’, that is
helping the individual to adjust to his/her problems rather
than transforming structure which is conceived as the root
cause of most social ills.

As an outcome, the individual who was perceived as a

passive recipient and an apolitical entity responsible for
one’s ills and emancipation in the earlier two approaches is
seen within this framework as an active political agent with
agency to transform reality towards more responsive and
egalitarian social structures. Seeing Community
Organization as the fundamental social work method and
Casework, Group Work, Social Work Administration and
Social Work Research as important strategies of community
work, this approach contest any formulation of methods
outside the frame of community on grounds that such
intervention could instead lead to further disempowerment
of peoples.

111
Points-of-view: Four

…It is context that gives rise to formulation of intervention

strategies…It is context that determines what strategies be applied…

The fourth ‘point-of-view’ moves further away from all the

above three conceptions. In this approach, it is not the
individual, the group nor the community that occupies
centrality, but it is the ‘context’ that is most fundamental.
The context here refers to a dynamic, fluid, confluence of
time, space and person experienced in the here and now,
experienced in the realm of common sense.

This point-of-view posits that it is only the contextual

reality that should define the intervention, as in, the most
efficacious intervention arises at the most fundamental level
from its own organic context. One could see that within
this perspective any identification of compact
methodologies in social work is seen as problematic. This is
so because ‘methods’ are perceived as water tight
compartments and rigid theorization of processes that are
false conceptualizations of a dynamic social reality.

I have heard various social workers, arguing from within

this perspective, that the moment one approaches an issue
from a method standpoint, the context tends to get
overshadowed by the method, and in the process, the
context is unconsciously nudge to the background and
fades into oblivion only to reassert back when intervention
is not producing the desired outcome.

This ‘point-of-view’ purports to argue that one could view

the context from a number of perspectives while engaging

112
 in analyzes, identification of issues and formulating of
intervention strategies within the said context. Further in
order to proceed in such an engagement the social worker
has to first capacitate oneself with a thorough analysis and
understanding of the contextual reality. In this formulation
the context takes precedence over ‘a single procedure or
way of doing something in a regular, systematic and orderly
planned manner’.

It is not difficult then to see that social work practice from

this point-of-view fundamentally rejects the very idea of the
‘method’ in engagement, viewing the same as delimiting,
restricting and parochial. This is because this ‘point-of-
view’ is wary of tank-tight conceptions around individual,
groups or community(s), as such classifications exist only at
a real/conceptual level while the ‘actual’ present itself as
layered realities, engulfed in intersections and multiplicities
in a context. The formulation of this ‘point-of-view’ is as
shown in Diagram 17.

Diagram 17 : Points-of-view: Four113

Context as premise (Skill needed‐analytical expertise)

Identification of Issue
(Skill needed-theoretical expertise)
Formulation of Intervention
(Skill needed: experiential expertise and a value position)

Social Worker as ‘self’ in context

(Skill needed- action for change & empowerment)

113 Also ‘Context approach’ to Methods in bodhi s.r, 2011

113
Social Work ‘Methods’ seen from this ‘point-of-view’ are a
hindrance to good practice as there is high tendencies on
the part of the social worker to get lost in a conceptual
world of methods, trying to formulate and make sense
about a preconceived and pre-formulated ‘action’ even
before comprehending theoretically an ever changing,
radically unpredictable and untidy context. So it follows
from this position that as regards social work education,
what should be actually taught to social work students, are
sound theoretical frames (emerging from a context)
coupled with the latest available information, and following
this, concomitant practice skills (both macro & micro) in
relation to the identified context. The content of ‘doing’
then is formulated around fields and sites of practice rather
than methods. The only boundaries that exist are
boundaries of the dynamic open system in a state of
process.

Conclusion

As a social work educator, I have had number of

opportunities to be part of sorority gatherings over a period
of seventeen years where there have been stimulating
academic debates about social work methods. Minute
observations: both content and process have given me
insights on method-formulation, their constitutive
elements, issues concerning methodology, intricate
pedagogical processes and above all perspective and the
play of ideologies.

In most of these gatherings, it is to be noted that rarely

have social work academics problematised and taken a

114
detailed microscopic peep at the constitutive elements of
what the profession identifies as a ‘method’ vis-a-vis their
epistemic premises, ideological source, practice paradigms,
strategies, principles that govern their formulation and
above all their relationship with Indian reality.

Thus in attempting to revisit methods which arose from an

understanding that there are too many formulations in
social work education that are generally accepted as given
and sacrosanct, one also hopes that this chapter contributes
to the numerous efforts of many other critical social work
educators across the country in liberating Indian social
work from rigid conceptions, self serving interventions and
disempowering engagements.

115
 Chapter V

On the Politics of Social Work Curriculum

and Pedagogy114

In brief, this chapter is a conversation with self about social

work education and practice. Equanimous in nature, it
attempts to unravel the subject/object experience and
analysis of some key fundamental issues that one has been
involved in over the years as a social work educator. I have
divided the chapter into three parts; (i) laying the context
and frame of contemporary contestations in social work
education; (ii) social work education- a case study of the
TISS restructuring processes and (iii) critical reflections on
curriculum, pedagogy and programme frameworks in social
work. I attempt to discuss threadbare some of the
emerging challenges that confront social work education in
the current context and brings to light issues that the
discipline should probably concern itself with in the future.

114 I wrote this note to clarify my own thoughts about the dynamics of
curriculum formulation in social work in 2011 in relation to a
number of questions raised by students about curriculum. Later I
lectured on this subject to my new students to give them a glimpse of
the structures of social work programmes. There have been three
colloquiums of the Center for Social Justice and Governance in TISS,
Mumbai and several lectures within TISS and outside that I have
delivered related to same subject. I was a consultant for the Royal
University of Bhutan in its curriculum formulation for the social
work programme and have used this note as a basis to share with
colleagues in the RUB to support the formulation of their
programme.

116
A. On Context and Frame

I have often heard social work educators pointing out, and

have in many occasion articulated the same myself, that a
social work programme by the very nature of its vision,
mission and practice must have the intrinsic ability to adapt
to changing contextual reality in consonance (or at least as
close as possible) to the dynamic changes taking place in
the external environment. However, while keeping pace
with such dynamic changes and intervening accordingly,
social work's vision to achieve welfare and development
with social justice remains intrinsically non-negotiable.
Fundamental principles such as protection and promotion
of human dignity and self worth of every person; equity
and equality, non-hierarchical and non-discrimination of
human groups; conscious elimination of systemic
discrimination and marginalization of vulnerable groups
such as dalits, women and tribes; ensuring universal and
equitable access to essential resources, peace and
collaborative social relationships; etc., are core to social
work struggles and politics. Holding firm to this vision and
mission, social workers position themselves in ways that
would be meaningful and empowering to peoples,
structures and systems they engage with and work through.

Having stated the basis of social work as above, it must be

stated, however, that on matters concerning the ability to
read reality and position intervention efficaciously, it must
be accepted (at least among social work educators), that
social work has faltered at every step in its nearly eighty one
long years of existence in India. Unfortunate, when viewed
retrospectively, social work programmes have had the

117
tenacious ability of being and remaining anachronistic
throughout, and thereby irrelevant and obsolete to many
structural contexts that seek its attention. Theoretical
formulations conceived as early as those postulated in 1936,
in terms of focus and practice areas which got
differentiated further in the late 1950s into specializations,
such as Family and Child Welfare, Medical and Psychiatric
Social work, Criminology and Correctional Administration,
Urban and Rural Community Development and a few
others, have remained static and unchanging till date.

Perceived from such a stand point, one could argue that

either the socio-political or economic environment has
remained static for the past eighty one years and therefore
social work specializations as conceptualized in the early
1950s are still very much relevant today, or, Social Work
Educators themselves are stuck in the thinking process and
literature of the fifties and are resistant to any change of
their perspectives and practice domain, while the
environment has moved on. In other words, social work
educators seem immune and sightless to the changes taking
place around them, whether related to new forms or forces
of marginalization or new structural discrepancies that have
crept into the system leading to a renewed discrimination
and the peripheralization of peoples; bounded, conceived
and oppressed around varied new social realities and
identities.

However, no matter how critical we may be of such

processes, we must admit that historical attempts to stay
abreast and efficacious have been made among educators.
So we observe that in response to very complex realities of

118
 the earlier decades beginning 1940s, the history of social
work education tells us that educators have responded by
ingenious formulation manifesting two streams of Social
Work education made available to Social Work students
across India; one is the generic stream, as in the Delhi
School of Social Work with few optional courses in key
sectors and, two, the specialization stream; as in Loyola
College Chennai and Tata Institute of Social Sciences
(TISS), Mumbai. While two115 UGC review committees,
one in 1965 and 1985 have made relevant suggestions
about vision, mission and subject content of social work
training, yet one is left wanting about the Review
committee’s analysis and understanding of
macro/structural Indian reality.

In this regard, the specializations which had a sectoral

thrust still remained as they were conceived in the initial
days of social work education implemented across Social
Work institutes in the country, with the exception of TISS,
that went on a super specialization spree as it restructured
its programme in 2005-06.

At the TISS, it is important to note that many new

conceptions in the form of FOPs are formulated much
more around ‘perspectives’ rather than sectors. The
historically dominant 'sector-wise' specializations, was an
evolutionary outcome of a particular 'way of conceiving'.
This approach relied much more on conceptualising social

115 While the third review committee set up by the UGC for social work
education have taken place. I am yet to get access to its report.
Apropos to this inaccessibility i have consciously not quoted the
same.

119
work education on the twin notions of 'sectoral
differentiation' and 'intervention areas', rather than on any
informed analysis of social structure, pro-poor ideological
leaning or even on systems of oppression and exclusion.

These shifts being made from ‘sector’ to structure, power

and discourse could be because of many reasons. But one
that is most obvious is that there is an increased sense of
theoretical saturation and methodological poverty about the
'sectoral conception'.

I have often reflected deeply about these processes. Over

the years what has become obvious to me as an educator is
that these are articulations of an organic need; as in a
movement among social work theorists and practitioners
towards 'ways of seeing’ as in ‘perspectives' rather than
‘domains of doing’ as in 'sectors'. I firmly believe that this
felt need to shift social work episteme towards the direction
of 'perspective' at this juncture in its history is an organic
social and theoretical necessity. This is occurring, I opine,
as social work educators attempt to rejuvenate, deepen and
make efficacious social work education to contemporary
socio-political realities and current politico-economic
contexts of the Indian conditions. This does not mean
however, that one devalues historically conceived and
identified social work sectors. The processual shift only
indicates that social work education would have to or even
begin to encapsulate new areas and fields of practice as we
proceed in time and space.

120
 B. On Restructuring of Social work Education: A Case
of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences

To get a better understanding of social work curriculum

debates and propositions let me attempt to take a look at
the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), the institute
where professional social work education was first offered
in India. The TISS went through a radical restructuring
(both academic and administration) in the year 2005. The
outcomes and processes that led to a new formalised
restructured system in 2006, were initiated as early as the
mid 1990s, picking momentum around 2002 and earnestly
pushed forward by 2005. While the restructuring impacted
‘research units’ much more, than social work teaching
departments itself, (whose details are beyond the scope of
this paper), few fundamental changes did also take place in
the social work academic structure and the social work
curriculum. The erstwhile five departments of social work-
Urban and Rural Community Development (URCD),
Criminology and Correctional Administration (CCA),
Family and Child welfare (FCW), Medical and Psychiatric
Social Work (MPSW) and Social Welfare Administration
(SWA) became 'Centres'.116 They are the Centre for
Community Organisation and Development Practice,
Centre for Health and Mental Health, Centre for Disability
Studies and Action, Centre for Equity for Women, Children
and Families, Centre for Criminology and Justice and the
Centre for Social Justice and Governance.117 Under one
116 TISS (2005). Prospectus of Masters Degree programme 2006‐2008,
Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai
117 TISS (2012). Prospectus of Masters Degree programme 2012‐2014,
Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai

121
overarching social work masters programme, each of these
Centres offered ‘major concentrations' (a set of six courses-
twelve credits) in the third semester, and a set of minor
concentrations (a set of four courses-eight credits) in the
fourth semester. The major concentrations were called
‘Fields of Practice’, and the minor concentrations were
divided into two types- ‘Thematic/Knowledge based
concentrations’ and ‘Skill based concentrations’. Diagram
18 shows the title of each of these concentrations-both
major and minor concentrations. The conceptualization of
these processes comes from my own understanding and
interpretation and is not the official position of the TISS.
Having participated actively in the restructuring I have my
own views on each of these processes and have stated so.

Within the concentration framework that was initially

offered, students were given the choice to choose after a
more generic first and second semester, from any of the
third semester major ‘Fields of Practice’ (FOP)
concentrations, followed by any two of the minor
concentrations in the fourth semester. Those who opted
for research dissertation needed to opt only for one of the
concentrations in the fourth semester. The experience of
this initial framework (also called the 'cafeteria approach')
which was laid down based on the recognition of student's
capacities for choice and decision making. This framework
however produced much skewed results.

122
 Diagram 18 : History of Social Work Education in TISS
HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL WHY TISS RESTRUCTURED? WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MID PHASE
WORK AT TISS -Social work at TISS was existing for itself, had TISS 2007-2009
2007:Restructured SW Programmes Offered become non responsive to the changing environment 2007-09: Women Centered Social Work and Child and
2005: Restructuring of TISS -Isolated from the external & disengaged within/among Youth Development. Minor concentration Social Policy
2003: FCW, MPSW, URCD Curriculum Review itself course was renamed Social Policy and Planning, Social
1988 to 1990: UGC national level curriculum -Disconnected to emerging realities, groups & sites of and Development Planning and Advocacy was dropped.
review. Social action, social development, policy & marginalization 2008-10: M.A Disability Studies & Action
planning and social conflict considered important -Rigidity of organizational structure, rules and 2009-2011: Merging of the minor, knowledge
for inclusion. regulations becoming an academic hindrance based/thematic concentrations and the skill based
1983: Unit for Labour Studies & Unit for Family -Decrease in innovations & innovative response to concentrations to offer 12 minor concentrations:
Studies dynamic context Rural Development, Environment and Sustainable
1982: Unit for Women's Studies -Non usage of Faculty expertise (especially located in Livelihoods, Urban Development: Unorganized Sector and
1981: Unit for Rural Studies research units) Livelihoods, Social Work in the Field of Mental Health,
1978: Unit for Social Policy and Social Welfare -“Lethargy has set in…” “We are degenerating...” “We Social Policy and Planning, Community Health, Disasters,
Administration have become a big non responsive organization…” Impoverishment and Social Vulnerability, Juvenile Justice
1977: Unit for Urban Studies “WHY & WHAT ARE WE HERE FOR?” and Youth in Conflict, Developmental/ Therapeutic
1970: Unit for Research in the Sociology of Counseling, Socio-Legal Rehabilitation Practice,
Education Advanced Practice with Children and Families, Youth and
1969: Unit for Child and Youth Research WHAT HAPPENED DURING TISS Change, Conflict, Peace and Human Security.
1968: Department of Social Welfare RESTRUCTURING Optional courses: Governance of NPO, Organizational
Administration -Discussions & debates among faculty cutting across Behavior in NPO, Strategic Management for NPO,
1967: Separation of M. A in Social Work & PMIR departments & research units Financial Management in NPO, Project Management,
1959: Department of Urban & Rural Community -External expertise brought in for organization Training for Social Work Personnel, Non-formal
Development feedback Education, International Social Work, Spiritual Social
1955: Separate Department of Rural Welfare and -Internal and External environment match (The Indian Work
Department of Community Organization and reality – The TISS reality)
Development (for urban areas) -Reformulation of Internal organization structure
(Centers instead of Dept. under Broad Thematic
WHAT DOES TISS HAVE NOW
1954: Department of Psychology (terminated
Schools) In 2012-2014 another restructuring took place and the
1962) and Department of Tribal Welfare (funding
-New themes sprang up post analysis of external School of Social Work, TISS (Mumbai) now offers 9+1
withdrawn in 1966)
reality Thematic Masters prog.
1953: Department of Criminology, Juvenile
-Faculty moved to new reformulated themes around MA. Social Work in Criminology & Justice
Delinquency & Correctional Administration
the notion of TEAMS in Centers MA. Social Work with Children & Families
1952: Department of Group work and Community
MA. Social Work with Community Organization & Devp.
Organization
Practice
1949: (i) Rural Reconstruction and Welfare -
Product of First Phase of Restructuring MA. Social Work in Disability Studies & Action
Agriculture and village industries, sanitation, health
(2006-2008) MA. Social Work in Dalit & Tribal Studies & Action
and housing, village education, village
COMMON FIRST YEAR MA. Social Work in Livelihoods & Social
organization, village culture; State and social
Foundation Courses + Bridge Courses: Entrepreneurship (change to Livelihood & Social
service which included a small section on ‘Harijan
Social Work Practice: Principles & Concepts I (8 Innovation in 2014)
Uplift’ and recommendations on Welfare of Tribal
credits) MA. Social Work in Mental Health
People (ICSW)
Social work Practice: Principles & Concepts II (4 MA. Social Work in Public Health
1949: Family and Child Welfare
credits) MA. Social Work in Women Centered Practice
1948: Medical and Psychiatric Social Work &
History & Ideology of Social Work (2 credits) MA in SW in Rural Development (Tuljapur Campus)
Community work incorporated in curriculum
Participatory Communication (2 credits) MA in SW Generic (Guwahati Campus)
1947: Indian Conference of Social Work was set
up - identified Refugee problem, Child Welfare, Quantitative & Qualitative Research (2 credits each)
MAJOR CONCENTRATIONS (12 credits each) 16 Credits of Common Courses in First Year:
Health Service, Physical Fitness programme,
-Community Organization & Devp. Practice Social Case Work
Environmental hygiene, Youth welfare and
-Family Social Work Social Group Work
community organization as the fields of social work
-Person with Disabilities & Equalization of Community Organization
practice. The need for a ministry of social welfare,
Opportunities Social Welfare Administration
council of social agencies, importance of voluntary
-Health & Development Quantitative Research
agencies, co-ordination of social work, social work
-Criminology & Justice Qualitative Research
training, with sarvodaya as a final goal. Focus was
-Dalits & Tribes: Social Justice, Equity & Governance History & Perspective of Social Work
on beggary, prostitution, juvenile delinquency and
MINOR CONCENTRATE (8 credits) Critical Perspective on Social Work: Intro to Social
urban, industrial labour.
(KNOWLEDGE or THEMATIC CONCENTRATES) Theories
1940: Courses - Family and Child Welfare; Medical
-Rural Development Compulsory Research
and Psychiatric Social Work; Juvenile and Adult
-Environment & Sustainable Livelihoods Fieldwork:I Year at School level II Year at Centre Level
delinquency; Industrial Relationships; Social
Service Administration; Social Research and Field -Urban Development, Unorganized Sector &
work Livelihood AREAS REMAINING UNRESOLVED
-Social Work in the field of Mental Health -Is there anything like a ‘Core’ of Social Work?
-Social Policy & Social Welfare Administration -Does context determine practice or does our method
-Child & Youth Development determine practice?
-Community Health -Is all of social work the same: Are there different types
-Disasters, Impoverishment & Social Vulnerability of social work or one social work?
-Juvenile Justice & Youth in Conflict -What is indigenous social work. Do we have an Indian
(SKILL BASED CONCENTRATE) specific social work?
-Management of Non-Profit Organizations -Are TISS M.As generic programmes, specializations or
-Developmental Therapeutic Counseling separate Masters
-Social & Development Planning & Advocacy -What are objectives of each key curriculum activity
-Rehabilitative & Correctional Social Work (Group Labs, Fieldwork first year, second year, Rural
-Child & Youth Practice Practicum, Field Visits, -Common ‘core’ courses,
FIELDWORK Perspective that inform us, Curriculum principles,
Common First Year & Second Year-Third sem teaching pedagogy)
concentration based-I Sem: Concurrent, II Sem: -Are we Welfare Practitioners, NGO workers, Social
Blocks, III & IV Sem: concurrent or block as decided Activist, Charity Workers?
by concentration -Are we ‘Agents of Control’ or ‘Agents of Change’?

123
In the first year, out of the six ‘Fields of Practice’
concentrations, three received twenty students and above,
with one FOP receiving nearly fifty plus students, while
three FOPs had less than ten students. This was 2007. The
second year-2008, saw four FOPs receiving students above
ten and two FOPs with less than ten. By 2007-2009
academic years, two new FOPs were added- Women
Centred Practice and Child and Youth Development. The
FOP concentrate- Disability Studies and Action became a
full-fledged Masters programme separate from the main
concentration-based social work programme in the
academic year 2008-2010.

Throughout this period, that is from 2007-2009 to 2012-

2014 the programme structure was constantly being
modified and changed around the framework of the
concentrations. However by 2012-2014 a new programme
structure under the rubric of ‘Social Work Thematic
Masters Programme’ was introduced. A total of nine, plus
one in 2014, thematic Masters in Social Work programme
were offered. Diagram 18 shows each of these Thematic-
Masters of Art in Social Work programmes.

It has been nearly eleven years since the restructuring of

the social work programmes in TISS took place. However,
current debates regarding fundamental issues about
curriculum remains. Most of these questions as represented
in Diagram One concern social work vision, mission and its
curriculum. In the next section, I reflect on some of the
questions that emerged after the TISS restructuring process
especially those that concern the curriculum principles.
While I will touch upon social work vision and mission, my

124
thrust would be on unravelling some of the positions,
perspectives and issues concerning social work curriculum
and pedagogy.

C. On Curriculum Principles, Structure/Components

and Pedagogy

Before dwelling into curriculum issues, it is important first

to capture in a few words about the key stakeholder in the
education process. These are the social work students. I
have often noticed that there is a peculiarity to the
background of students pursuing social work programmes.
While the initial period of social work education saw many
urban based students filling the seats of social work
institutes, the trend is starting to change. Since most social
work institutes were located in urban locales, they attracted
many more urban-based students. However in due course
of time many more institutes have sprung up especially in
semi urban and rural areas. Plus with the entry of the
Indira Gandhi National Open University offering Bachelors
and Masters Programmes in Social Work the field of social
work education is wide open and accessible by students
across spaces. However I have observed that while rural
students apply for urban and city based institutes, there are
few urban students applying for rural institutes. The general
trend as of today is that there is a dominance of rural
students in semi-urban and rural based institutes and there
is a dominance of urban students in urban based institutes.
However much one may desire and try, an effort to admit
rural students in urban based institutes does not seem
possible. Breaking this barrier is difficult as students from
rural areas intersect caste, (English) language competence

125
and region specific behavioural specificities; traits that
urban social work institutes rarely treasure and see as
useful. Plus the attraction towards elite upper caste English
speaking students among many urban based social work
educators still rules the roost in urban located institutes.

Nonetheless Social Work students, with the exception of a

few, generally come with a high degree of commitment to
the cause of the oppressed or to other related issues such
as environment protection, sustainable livelihoods,
development, human rights, etc. While I have observed that
there is a general distaste for theory, with a thrust more on
practice, they are keen to understand macro structural
issues. In a number of occasions students have shared that
they find certain courses 'meaningless', especially those with
an increased focus on behaviour and pathology. There is
however a small portion of students whose interest in
cognitive-behavioural issues far outweighs socio-structural
issues. In feedback meetings that I have sat where students
shared their experience of two years in the last days of
their stay in campus, they would give very interesting
insights into what they go through in the two years of
training. One student gave this feedback to me: 'when I had
come to join the programme, there was so much
enthusiasm and commitment. Now that I am about to leave
I feel dead, exhausted and have lost the meaning as to why
I pursued social work studies'. I have heard this feedback
from many students over the years. I have often interpreted
the above feedback as recognition of the student’s
awareness about one’s frustration with a course that gave
nothing more than remedial based information and

126
description. ‘Remedial work’ attacks symptoms and
promises nothing more than immediate relief. A student
who comes to do a Masters programme in social work
wants to be the change, hoping to see and experience it
both at the levels of theory and practice, all this within the
value framework that social work profession professes to
uphold.

I. On Curriculum Principles

Social work education at its core is ‘education for social

change’. It stands for peace and collaborative social
relationships and works to realize and uphold peoples’
dignity, self respect and self worth. Its vision is attaining an
equal and non-hierarchical society where people are
ensured universal and equitable access to essential
resources. It challenges any form of discrimination and
consciously work to eliminate systemic marginalization.

Distinct from other academic programmes, social work

education is generally envisioned around three fundamental
premises that take into consideration its vision of society
and its commitment and methods to realize the same.
Thrusting on 'education for change' towards realization of
its ideals, its first premise is generally formulated around an
‘education that deepens its stated values’ in its varied
stakeholders which includes educators, students, trainees
and practitioners. The second premise is conceptualized
around an ‘education for service and conscientized
livelihood’ for those who take up the programme and will
in the future become social work practitioners, and finally,
the third premise is conceived around an ‘education that

127
capacitates its trainees for knowledge production’ for the
overall good of society as it progresses in time and space.

II. On Curriculum Structure / Component

Drawing upon the above premises, let me first begin to

critically reflect separately upon each of the components of
the social work curriculum. I begin by looking at fieldwork,
followed by Group Labs, Rural Practicum, Methods and
last but not the least, the time table. Since each of these
reflections are my personal views on each component, they
are kind of disconnected. However they are linked to the
overarching social work programme framework in every
way.

(i)Fieldwork: On many occasions I have had to explain to

my colleagues from the social sciences the difference
between the fieldwork' that is practiced in social work
education as compared to the concept of fieldwork as
practiced in the social science. I opine that the fieldwork
that we practice in social work is very different from
fieldwork as generally understood in the social sciences.
While the description of these differences in detail is
outside the scope of this chapter, I would however like to
touch upon some salient features. In social work education,
field work constitutes one symbiotic half of the teaching-
learning process, the other component being caste/class
room teaching. It is conceived as a space in society and
ecology where the agent (social worker) would consciously
and actively participate in the process of change towards
realisation of social work ideals. The idea that through this
process, the change agent would be capacitated to produce

128
 new knowledge about reality is but one objective of
fieldwork. While this is generally the case for the social
sciences, the same does not hold true for social work
education. Other objectives such as actively mobilising
people for change, engaging peoples struggles for better
access to state resources, assisting peoples in welfare
practice, intervening in situations where people need
support whether psychological or social, strengthening
peoples livelihoods, etc constitute the many other aims of
social work fieldwork. Further the demands of praxis in
field work, opens up opportunities to both student and
educator to deepen their own understanding of social
reality and also clarify the role of the ‘change agent’ in the
process of continuous engagement.

The social work programmes at the Master’s-level are

generally divided into four semesters over a period of two
years. In this context I strongly believe that each of the
semesters within the two year Master’s programme of
social work has their own content thrust and concomitant
pedagogical processes. In an earlier article118 I had reflected
deeply on processes related to social work supervision and
other components of field work engagement. Through my
personal experience i consider it important to unravel and
state the premises in which field work could probably be
formulated:

1. First Semester: Period of unlearning,

2. Second Semester: Period of contextual deepening,

118 Please see chapter four of the book for a better understanding of my
conceptions of field work

129
 3. Third Semester: Period of intense engagement with
self in context towards producing practice based
output.

4. Fourth Semester: Period of intense engagement with

self in context towards expansive conceptual insights
and ability to theorize

On the structuring and location of fieldwork within the

curriculum I believe that the debates about fieldwork in
social work education has been framed and will probably be
so for a longer period of time, about how it is organised
rather than why we do it. That fieldwork in social work is
fundamental is agreed by most educators. This is so
because in social work education the thrust is on
epistemological reconstruction and being immersed in the
context is one of the way in which a learner can be nudged
to become both knowledgeable about the 'social' and use
such knowledge through direct engagement to empower
people as a 'practitioner'. To take away the component of
fieldwork from social work education is to turn social work
education into any other social science education. However
having stated the above let me turn to the persistent and
perennial debates in social work education about fieldwork.
Should fieldwork be organised through a concurrent
process with class teaching? or should fieldwork be located
as a block of not less than thirty days per semester either
before or after some amount of teaching has been
committed?

On this matter i would opine after some reflections that the

structure of how we organise fieldwork should be

130
conceived as per the demands of the field and the context.
There are some fields of practice in social work education
that require concurrent placement, as in two days or three
days per week augmented by class room teaching in the
remaining days of the week. This acts as a very responsive
way in which the student can engage in informed praxis.
However there are some fields of practice that require
intense and continuous engagement with the field without
which the student would find great difficulty in making any
sense of the field or make any meaning of the engagement.
Such placements requiring continuous and longer duration
of practice are generally those that relates to structure and
structural issues. I would disagree in this context with those
who argue that one-system-fits-all and that all social work
fieldwork must be organised in only one particular way.

(ii) Group Labs: Group laboratory in social work

education is an interesting addition to social work
curriculum. The main objectives of lab sessions with
students, organised in the initial stages of the programme,
are related to facilitating reflexive, egalitarian and
participatory group processes within and among students,
while arming them with skills that could come in handy
during field work engagement. The group labs at face value
seem noble. But like many other components in the
curriculum, there are problems that are somewhat
generated by ideological tussles between the remedialist and
structural perspectives. Having had the opportunity to
experience the Group laboratory within social work
curriculum, both as a trainee and trainer over a period of
six years, I feel that it is imperative to revisit some of the

131
group lab exercises organised during the lab sessions with
students and the pedagogy that is used. The increased
psychologising of social work education by remedialist,
posing lab sessions purely on remedialist lines, thereby
labelling and subjecting social work education to individual
centricism is a matter of concern. This is so because such
processes are most likely to subject the social work
discipline and the profession to increased depoliticization
which defeats the very vision and mission of social work's
liberatory and pro change agendas.

(iii) Rural Practicum: Rural Practicum is one of the most

innovative formulations made by social work educators that
over the years have been mainstreamed in social work
education. The thrust given to the notion ‘rural’ within
social work programmes has challenged and altered the
very urban centric conception and character of social work
teaching. Rural Practicum has various facets especially
pertaining to pedagogy, location and content. While there
are debates and discussion about what should constitute
rural practicum and how should rural practicum be located
within the larger social work programme, the incorporation
of the rural practicum in social work curriculum has served
an important purpose - that of deepening social work
education around the notion of the 'rural'.

Over the years, having accepted the tremendous richness

added and importance of the rural practicum component, I
have engaged myself in clarifying certain content and
pedagogical issues that would sharpen the practicum
process. In trying to clarify these processes I have had to
confront certain issues of pedagogy and context, such as-

132
how does one organize a practicum within a perspective,
what role is envisioned for the community (generally Dalit
and Tribe) in the training of social work personnel, what
are the theoretical and practical components of the Rural
Practicum, what pedagogy is most suited for the
engagement in Rural Practicum and what are the field
assignments that will strengthen the process, insert rigor
and strengthen seriousness of purpose in students.

(iv) Methods: In the context of social work practice,

methods are constituted by frameworks and technical rules
which lay down the procedures for how one should
proceed with analysis and intervention. As procedural rules,
they tell social workers what to do and what not to do if
they want their intervention to make any significant
‘impact’. Methods lay down the procedures for
comprehending an issue, for designing an intervention
strategy and the process of applying the same. Also for
clarifying the way and nature of receiving feedback, of
monitoring change and of the application of newer
strategies. While the above framework is not difficult to
comprehend and may even seem harmless, viewed critically,
one tends to question the source, ideological position and
epistemic premises in which ‘methods’ are formulated and
constructed both theoretically, and as part of a ‘skill set’ in
the arena of practice.

The historicity of social work methods reveals its deep

American roots - this now being common knowledge
among social work educators in India. In this context, a
question often heard in many social work discussions
relates to, 'the diagnostic thrust of the methods developed

133
in America and eastern Europe and later imported to India
- how relevant, how efficacious, and how practical?' This
question has never been so real as much as it is today with
the kind of realities that we experience in India. It is not
difficult to see that in a method one does not only import a
way of ‘doing’ but also a way of looking, a perspective, a
world view. The western perception of the marginalized,
exploited and the discriminated is at best paternalistic and
if scrutinized thoroughly, are delimiting and greatly
disempowering. With such an approach, one may question
its ability to empower the ‘marginalized populace’ of the
‘third world’. What we do, our behaviour and our
interventions greatly depend on how we view and see the
world. The dichotomy of how someone ‘sees’ and what
one ‘does’ is only for the purpose of analyses; one cannot
separate these two during the course of practice. In this
context the time has come to give serious thought to
redefining social work methods and incorporate
perspectives beyond the delimiting diagnostic schools.

(v) Time Table: The ‘Time Table’ of any programme is

the mediating tool between the overarching macro
curriculum frame, the courses and its content and the
micro pedagogical processes. The curriculum's aims and
objectives are realized and manifested in courses and
pedagogy, but throughout, the process is guided, laid down
and mediated by the structure of a time table. My personal
experience tells me that efficacy of a programme is greatly
dependent on the structure of a time table.

However the time table is often considered the most

apolitical mandatory activity in social work curriculum

134
formation. It is an opinion most carries, that the same is
best confined to the wisdom of the administrative section
rather than being made a responsibility of a Teaching
faculty. However having been fortunate enough to avail the
opportunity to be the convener of a committee that
structures the time table of a social work programme and
also a social work concentration over a period of seven
years, I have now come to see that the time table is far
more than what it seems to be. From these experiences, I
have gained insights into minute processes that have simply
demolished every single notion I held prior to taking up the
responsibility. I now opine that a time table in Social Work
Programmes is definitely not ‘merely an innocent activity’
devoid of any political nuances. In reality, it is a conscious
political project complete with, and fuelled from all corners
by perspective tussles, ideological tensions, preposterous
stakeholder demands and above all, subtle political agendas.

What do we see when we look at the time table of a Social

Work Programme? Is it the allocation of systematized time
for teaching, properly organized schedules, well laid out
structures of learning, a proper location of individual
courses and above all, a physical tangible output of
curriculum principles? I have often found myself
wondering on many occasions, why is there so much
tension manifested through debates around the location of
specific courses in a semester; especially Methods courses,
like Casework, Groupwork, Community Organization and
Social Action. Should Casework be taught first or should it
be Social Action. While there are educators who are bent
on introducing Social Work through Casework teaching,

135
other educators would prefer Social Action while others
still would prefer Community Organization. I have now
come to see that the time table is the best mirror of the
perspective and holding ideologies (dominant) of a
programme at a period in time. It reveals the dominating
perspective from the location of courses, faculty perception
about ‘social work’ as a profession and it reflects the
political position of the programme in context.
Notwithstanding the fact that normal social work
educator’s physical demands of early morning classes, long
distance of travel, weekend teachings, etc which are purely
logistical, the location of courses in the overall semester is
where political agendas are situated and thus unravelled.

III. On Pedagogical Frameworks

When it comes to any discussion on pedagogy in social

work education, there arises a natural political tension
between educators who subscribe to the remedial school
and those who are positioned around the structural school.
Epistemologically, while the remedial school perceives its
task to be intervention at the individual level (located
within a functionalist episteme), the structural school sees
its task as intervention at the systemic level mostly
focussing on system and structure, manifest through
collective action and policy practice (located within a
structural/conflict episteme). While there is an agreement
at some levels that no matter what the context and
contestations between these two contending perspectives, a
social work curriculum at its core must reflect a sound
analysis of contemporary reality. However when it comes
to pedagogy, the case is that the more dominant manifest

136
perspective generally takes over the teaching-learning
process.

External, yet connected to pedagogy, it is interesting to

note that if the perspective thrust of social work in a
particular period in time is remedial, the likelihood that
courses stressing on cognition, affect and behaviour would
occupy more space in teaching content. Thus courses such
as Human Growth and Behaviour, Life span and life cycle
approach, Casework and even Group Work would take
centre stage. In such a framework these courses are
conceived as the core content of the social work
programme. Added to this would follow a whole gamut of
behavioural manipulation strategies which includes ‘Group
Labs’, Institutional visits, training, etc.

However if the thrust of the programme, on the other

hand is structural, the likelihood that content related to
democracy, development, justice, equality, culture, identity
would make up the core of the teaching content. Courses
such as those discussing Caste, Class, Gender, Ethnicity,
State, Market, Democracy and Development in India,
Political Theory, Polity, Governance and Public Policy,
Modern Indian History, Political Economy, Globalization,
Anti-oppressive Social work, etc are likely to take centre
stage especially in the first year of the programme.

Thus it could be argued that the principle that governs

curriculum formulation in social work is greatly dependent
on a ‘holding dominant perspective’. This perspective also
manifests itself in a vision statement of a programme and
in course content, generally represented by name of

137
courses.

Most of the above issues discussed, finally manifest in

pedagogy. While an overarching pedagogical framework is
generally agreed upon, as in the way we frame and teach
methods, or fieldwork and even other social work courses,
nonetheless, one cannot miss the point that even after
pedagogical frame is laid down, what finally matters is- who
teaches rather than what is taught. Within this context I
would like to reflect upon three pedagogical principles
which I personally consider important for social work
education to take note off.

1. Pedagogy formulated on conceiving knowledge

acquisition as a truth seeking life process:

Among many social work educators, social work is

envisioned as an educational process and a means towards
personal growth, social consciousness, and acquiring deep
sense of empathy for others, self fulfilment, deepening
sensitivity to other realities and cultures with a willingness
and natural proclivity to act for the good of others. The life
of every individual is characterized by a process of
constant change directed towards self-realization, that in
the process, acquires a socio-political taste imbued with
profound love for the world and for fellow beings, intense
faith in them and an endogenous feeling to do ‘good’ to all
beings; humans or non-humans. Seen within this
framework, social work education is time spent to connect
and deepen such values in oneself while in constant
relation with others within a social work programme.

138
2. Pedagogy formulated on conceiving knowledge
acquisition as a power acquiring process:

There are other educators within social work education

who perceive the knowledge acquisition process as an act
of gaining more power for self and for community or in
other words, acts that leads to an equal distribution of
power among communities. In the context in which our
education is offered, there are peoples whose communities
have been subjected to historical marginalization and thus
excluded from the process of power. More power to the
marginalised then becomes a pedagogical premise. It is not
without substance that a person as great as Babasaheb
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar made a call to education as the primary
basis for reclaiming power in a hierarchical society such as
those we find in India. His famous “Educate, Agitate,
Organise” conceived education of the excluded as the key
means by which change in power relations could take place.
Among many social work educators whose perspectives are
structural as compared to those who adhere to a
functionalist perspective, define their engagement much in
consonance with the above slogan of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar.
Knowledge imparted within this pedagogical framework is
more critical, structural and progressive.

3. Pedagogy formulated on conceiving knowledge

acquisition as a livelihood mobility process:

Another way in which social work education is conceived

relies on seeing social work as a process towards acquiring
the ability to guarantee livelihood among its trainees and
students within the framework of a profession. While

139
seeming apolitical for its thrust on individual growth, the
perspective does contribute tremendously to the growth of
self and the profession. However there is tendency among
educators to lean too heavily on social work only being a
profession and thereby ending up depoliticizing social
hierarchies.

Conclusion

Social Work curriculum and pedagogy, in my opinion are

fundamental in social work education. It is innovations in
curriculum and pedagogy that makes social work
programmes stay abreast with changing times and
challenges faced in difficult political environments. That
there is a need for more reflection on curriculum and
pedagogy is something that many educators do not
disagree. However from what is available in terms of social
work literature, it is clear that not much work is going on in
this domain.

Current demands on social work education for innovative

and newer ways of formulating social work content are
being felt across social work institutes. This has become
much more pertinent in the light of the introduction of
Distance Social Work programmes by IGNOU and the
recent emergence of the Social Work Education Network
(SWEN) under the Ministry of Human Resource
Development, Government of India. However while there
have been attempts to reformulate and thus rejuvenate
social work education, making it relevant to context, yet the
discipline is yet to seriously re-imagine itself under these
new historical circumstances.

140
 Chapter VI

Some Thoughts on Navayana Social Work

The secret of Zen is just two words : not always so…Anonymous

Social work education and social work educators in India

are confronted by an extremely chaotic and a politically
charged complex social reality. The Indian populace has
distinct traits marked around caste, language, , region,
ethnic and religious lines. The country has more than two
thousand ethnic groups with many more sub-groups spread
out along caste and non-caste (tribal) realities. ‘There are
4693 communities, which include several thousands of
endogamous groups, speak in 325 functioning languages
and write in 25 different scripts’.119 Its population of
1,210,854,977 (2011), is characterized by a multi-ethnic,
multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-religious
environment which is heavily skewed by rural habitats over
urban agglomerations. This kind of an extremely untidy
concrete condition poses a big challenge to social workers
who find it very difficult to comprehend and intervene,
thus making theorization an uphill task.

Further the political economic conditions currently

encapsulating the Indian context are such that we are in
that juncture of social work history when theoretical clarity,
depth and width, plus a more grounded axiological
understanding are being felt to be an urgent necessity.

119 Ramachandran, R. (2008, June 6), Genetic Landscape. Frontline

Magazine , p. 90.

141
This chapter, in many ways is posited to respond to these
emerging complexities, attempting to provide theoretical
insights about social reality through the gaze of navayana
social work. However I wish to seek pardon from the
reader that since the ideas expressed in this chapter is very
new, am myself in the process of clarifying and deepening
both its theory and practice.

Nonetheless, while operating consciously on such a

shortcoming, what I will try to do is lay down these still
rudimentary but equanimous reflections of mine around
five specific domains. The first is an attempt to unravel the
fundamental theoretical premise of navayana social work.
The second will discuss how perspective building could
take place within the framework. This will be followed by
some thoughts on the positionality of navayana social work
within the various schools of social work. The fourth
engages with my understanding of curriculum and
pedagogical principles within this framework and at the end
I will think out loud the learning/educating process of
teaching ‘skills’ in the navayana framework.

How to look at Reality the Navayana Way

Navayana ways of seeing and thinking is very different both

in the process of perceiving and ‘acts of knowing’. The
‘text’ in the navayana framework is not written within the
framework of ‘meaning making’ and requires a counter-
intuitive approach to engaging with the same. I thus
caution the reader not to expect to immediately
‘understand’ the text. My attempt in this first section is to
slowly go ‘beyond meaning’ and derive perspectives and
142
principles from such a locale. This is difficult since
language itself, being formulated on binary principles, are
not outside the meaning making process. However from a
‘beyond binary’ perspective when dualities are eventually
resolved into a unity, a ‘text’ within such a locale becomes
merely an indicator. They must not be taken as ‘given’ and
absolute.

At the core of Navayana ways of looking lays

aesthetics/ethics. Aesthetics and ethics in this framework
are one. They are two separate conceptual entities only
when viewed and experienced from a location that is
fundamentally dualistic. Beyond dualism they reverberate as
a unified pulsating wholesome experience. The navayana
way of looking stems from the subtle truths much beyond
the dualistic mind and constitutes a more wholesome,
holistic way of experiencing the self in the social world.

There are multiple ways of engaging and representing

reality, both apparent and the underlying, from a navayana
perspective. Based on my own experience, I will attempt to
provide a glimpse of how I personally imagine such a reality
through a self explanatory framework, as shown in
Diagram 19. I have titled this framework as ‘The Seven
Navayana Realms’.

I use the word realm here to signify the fluidity of

movement from one realm to another. These realms are
not water tight compartments of lived experience or
realities and there are no rigid lines separating one realm
from another. I have used the same in the diagram for ease
in meaning making with the simple intention of initiating

143
the reader into an alternative way of looking. The number
seven within the seven realms are also merely for the sake of
simplicity in representation. There are, at least in my
conception, countless realms which cannot be boxed in the
way I have done. Following this brief simplistic
representation of the seven navayana realms, I will then
attempt to discuss a more complex level of the “navayana
way of looking within to see without”.
Diagram 19. The Seven Navayana Realms

Unity Principle
The Realms of truth(s)… (Beyond the Binary) Equanimity
(Wholesome View)

The Realm of Discourse Binary Principle Historicity

(Points‐of‐view)
The Realm of Meaning (Frames of Reference) Reflexivity
(Relativism)
The Realm of Common (Dualism) Responsitivity
Sense

The Realm of Sensation & Instinct Principle Reactivity

Perception (Dialectics)

The Realm of Quantum Entanglement Mindfulness

Conditions Principle
(Probabilistic)

The Realms of Truth(s)… Void Principle Emptiness

(Consciousness)

Ontology Epistemology Methodology

In brief, just as a short explanatory note to the propositions

about the seven navayana realms, the realm of quantum
conditions constitutes of the realm of dark energy, dark
matter and atomic matter. The realm of sensation and

144
 perception constitutes of our five sense organs and sense
experience. The realm of common sense constitutes of
thought, words, cognition and concepts. The realm of
meaning constitutes of purpose and categories. The realm
of discourse constitutes of theory, the cosmological
arguments and the source of power. The realms of
truth(s)… which lies beyond discourse and quantum
conditions constitutes the axiological realm and a reality
experienced ‘as it is’. Each of these realms have their
concomitant epistemological and methodological processes.

In the next part of this section I will attempt to unravel a

navayana conception of perspective building. By
perspective building I mean a way to provide a framework
full of open ended spaces for showing the way towards
deepening insights into the realms of reality. I will try to
conceive such a perspective as emanating from ‘beyond the
binary’ framework.

It will be difficult to comprehend, especially for those

whose knowledge pursuit is grounded fundamentally in
‘search after meaning’. But such is the perspectives
emanating from the ‘unity beyond the binary’ that the usage
and even the symbolic presentation of such a locale is both
counter intuitive and beyond the bounded vessel of
rationality. From my personal experience, an engagement in
the deepening of perspectives (especially with my students)
is a process. Thus it is important to take time and reflect
deeply on what I present below. As one gaze into what is
presented, it is important to engage in satipatthana,120 that
120 Satipatthana is a pali word that refers to ‘turning your gaze within’
or ‘self‐introspection’, a practice that often requires tremendous

145
 is, to turn one’s gaze within oneself and to equanimously121
observe how it engages your imagination in the domain of
‘perspective’ or ways of seeing the world. It is important to
note (at least from my point-of-view) that no perspective is
perfect nor a ‘given’. We must be wary when one’s mind
convinces the ‘self’ that the perspective that one currently
has is perfect, a given and is complete. Insights from those
people who have gone through deep experience in the said
domain, points to the process that when one’s perspective
has become more holistic, wholesome, and one is able to
see things in the ‘round’, one will have arrived at a point of
knowing. None however can see this except the ‘seeking-
knowing self’.

As I have asserted above, the navayana way of engaging

with text is very different and those who are looking at
making immediate meaning with the presented text will
find it ‘meaningless’. This is because the textual
representation attempts to break the principle of binary
conception.

effort, concentration and mindfulness. This is not an easy task in the

light of the fact that most of our human senses are positioned to the
see, touch, taste, hear and smell the external world rather than the
multiple processes going on within the bounded self.
121 Equanimity is a human capacity beyond reactivity, responsitivity,
reflexivity and historicity. While at the level of sensations and sense
data we are capable of ‘reaction’, at the level of shared sensation or
common sense we are capable of ‘responding’, beyond common
sense and in the level of abstract concepts, categories and meanings
we are capable of being ‘reflexive’, the pursuit of ‘that’ which is
beyond meaning requires another human capacity that is possible
but needs to be cultivated. It is to this realm that equanimity is
possible… For those who have experienced the crisis or ‘cracking’ up
of the mind, they will know what equanimity is….

146
For example if one was to attempt writing a text from a
navayana way, it would probably read as follows:

...the text is always wrong…the text is not the

reality…some say there is nothing outside the text…the
world is a creation of the mind…the mind works on binary
principles…the mind plays a beautiful dualistic meaning
making game with and through words…reality itself is a
creation of such a mind…beyond the binary lies the
reality… there is so much more reality(s) beyond text…

Any reader viewing the syntax above from a binary lens

would find such a text perplexing. But when viewed from
‘beyond the binary’ it might probably point to underlying
realities that are not immediately apparent.

There is another way of representing the text from a

navayana perspective, in a way I am more familiar with and
a technique I have often used with my students in the
learning/educating process. I have also shared the same in
training workshops that I conducted for other social work
institutes. I will share the same just as an exercise in
navayana ways of seeing and thinking. I have titled the
representation as ‘From a place beyond the binary: looking
Within to seeing without’.

The reading of the same is positioned in ways directly

connected to the representation of the seventh navayana
realm, with its concomitant epistemology(s) and
methodology(s) as shown in Diagram 19. My intention is to
gently enter the space in which all dualities are processually
resolved into a unity and begin to look at the social reality
from the lens that such a location avails.
147
 From a place beyond the binary: looking Within to see
without 122…

No-Thing

Discourse
History
Structure
Evolution
System
Context Sector
Person Mind
Consciousness
Body
Void

Ecology

122 Since language itself is constructed on binary principles and have

proclivity to set the rules of thinking and meaning making for the
reader as represented in Diagram 19, I have used a different way ‐ a
navayana way to present the same idea. While I would have
preferred to leave the fluid conceptual representation as it is and
open it for the reader to make their own connection(s) and
meaning(s) of the set of interconnected and interdependent
concepts/epistemologies, it suffice to say that I have arrived at these
concepts/epistemologies after some deep reflection and have thus
located them accordingly. However there is no fix rule of why they
have been positioned in specific locations. As you can see, the
intention is to move beyond the construction and production of a
structure of meaning that is fixed, stable, universal and ahistorical.
Instead an attempt is made to transcend the binary and enter the
domain of the fluid, the unstable, the diverse, the historical, the
discursive, the void… power is everywhere…oh its agency…where is
the subject…turn the gaze inwards… real but not there…you don’t
even exist, how can you die…

148
Navayana Social Work : Theoretical Location

It is important that I begin by locating the idea of Navayana

Social Work within current existing frames of social work.
This will facilitate the understanding of its positionality in
the multiplicity of ideas. I will thus improve on the earlier
framework that I have developed in Diagram 10 that shows
the different social work practices that prevails in India.
The list, as I have stated is not exhaustive and many more
can be positioned within the frame.

As one can observe, most of the schools of thought in

social work are located around the ‘individual’, ‘community’
or ‘structure’. They identify these domains as their areas of
focus thereby positioning their intervention as such. While
one school focuses on ‘problems’, the other focuses on the
‘class structure’ , some on ‘consciousness’ and few more
schools on ‘meaning’. As I have asserted in the
introduction, in India the struggle against caste, patriarchy
and class is at the core of perspective and practice among
social workers who focus their intervention on structure.
Among Indian social workers focusing on community, for
some, their interest lies in reforming society and
reconstructing a new society, while for others within the
community school, they thrust their practice on culture,
diversity, dialogue.

Further each school is premised on varied formulations.

While some premise their social work on anti-caste and
anti-patriarchy, others take a position for change and
equality, for raising consciousness and on anti-oppression.

149
Each position have their own perspectives, born out of the
way they conceived social reality.

In such a framework, where does one place Navayana

Social Work? From my understanding the navayana
perspective does include all of the schools of thought as it
is not pitch against any of these, not because it is for or
against but because it operates on a totally different realm
as shown in Diagram 20 below.

Diagram 20 : Locating navayana social work

Focus on navayana social work
Unity Unity Beyond {seekers of truth…(s)}
Realm the Binary {Harmonious Wholesome Perspective}
Radical Social Work Structural Social Work Women Centered Dalit Social Work
(Raisers of [Pro Equality] Social Work {Anti Caste}
Focus on consciousness) {Pro Change {Anti Patriarchy} {Perspective from
Structure {Anti Oppression Perspective} { Pro Women below}
Perspective } Perspective}
Binary Tribal Social Work Gandhian Social Work
Realm Focus on {Diversity - Dialogue} {Reform - Reconstruct}
Community {Perspective from within} {Perspective from above}
Interactionist Social Work Traditional Social Work
Focus on (Seekers after meaning) (Fixers)
Individual {Systems Perspective} {Status quo Perspective}
Note: Howe’s labels for each grouping are given in parentheses ( ) and Mullaly’s label for Structural Social
Work is given in square brackets [ ]. The author’s formulations are given in curly brackets { }.

While navayana is concern about the ‘individual’, the

‘community’ and the ‘structure’, it is also interested and
concern with experiences as I have stated in Diagram 20 –
a “Focus on Unity Beyond the Binary’. That is to argue that
all the other schools of thought in social work focuses
fundamentally on binary frames. Navayana on the other
hand goes beyond the binary and begins to unravel a social
work emanating from such a locale.

For navayana social work the goal and path is the pursuit of
truth. In a sense, one could identify such social workers as

150
seekers of truth or ‘truth seekers’, which transcends the
dialectics of meaning that is fundamental to the ‘seekers
after meaning’ . Some people make the mistake of thinking
that ‘truth seekers’ are nihilist who leave society and live the
life of ‘hermits’. But actually it is the other way round.
‘Truth Seekers’ from a navayana Perspectives are soaked
and grounded in the day to day struggle in society.

It is difficult to understand the conceptions of perspectives

in navayana social work. This is because the idea per se
cannot be contained or defined by word. Words are too
limited to capture the ‘meaning’ of what it signifies. The
idea itself is beyond meaning. It has entered the realms of
‘truth’, for whatever ‘truth’ (plural) might mean. It is not an
idea that is easily comprehensible by mere sensation,
definitely not by common sense, probably and only
probably, by theoretical and discourse. Yet even discourse
is not close enough. This difficulty is simply because words
must die for a non-binary reality to emerge and for the self
to begin to experience being from such a locale. This is the
best that I can say about the possibility of getting a peep
into such a reality, since it is beyond the rational and no
more operates within the dialectical binary mind.

Further in Diagram 20, I have noted the perspective as

‘harmonious wholesome perspective’. The word
‘harmonious wholesome’ is closely related to other words
like total, cyclic, holistic, perfect, proper and overarching.

Within the navayana framework there is a fundamental shift

away from seeing the ‘mind’ as the fundamental bases of
life, or the most stable premise of a self that perceives,

151
 experiences, understands and know the world. This shift
happens because there is a turning away of the gaze from
the perceived external observable reality to the reality
experienced within the bounded physical body.

When one begins engaging satipatthana, it is posited that

once this gaze is turned away from the ‘without’ towards
the ‘within’, the sublime four states or ‘subtle truths’ that
begins to unravel are Upekkha,123 Mudita,124 Karuna125 and
Metta126. The person who has worked deeply into clarifying
these processes is a ‘tathaghata’ or ‘truth seeker’, and the
theorist par excellence who has unraveled these processes
deeply is Siddhatto Gotamo. He lived and shared his
teachings (‘teaching’ is too rigid a word, ‘pointing to the
path’ is better), arrived at through his own humanly
attempts and experience with the hoipolloi of current day

123
Upekkha here is translated as equanimous, looking within to look
without. It is beyond the ‘reactive’, the ‘responsive’, the ‘reflexive’,
which are ways of seeing and reflecting that are grounded
fundamentally in a binary conception of social reality. Upekkha
refers to the observer that arises within self that is detached from
the mind, can observe it and not fall prey to its diktat. Upekkha is a
method, a capacity and a state of being.
124
Mudita is happiness experienced in the body with the dilution of
binary conceptions and the experience of the initial unity beyond the
binary. It is not pleasure that is often derived from the assuaging the
five sense organs, but happiness arising from the harmonious
relationship of the melting binaries.
125
Karuna is used here to refer to compassion, a state deeper than
empathy and sympathy that arises as a way of experiencing and
seeing the social world.
126
Metta is used to refer to loving kindness emanating from a state of
‘samma’. Samma is often translated as harmonious. This is the locale
of deeper levels of the state of unity that is becoming free from
binary mind centric experience.

152
 Nepal and North India about 2500 years ago. He pointed
this path to many who in turn have, over the years, further
expanded and deepen the same across the world.

The word Navayana on the other hand, which means the

‘New Vehicle’ was posited by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar in 1956
when together with half a million people embraced the
framework as formulated by Siddhatto Gotamo. As a
matter of history, the framework of Gotamo was destroyed
and banished from the land of its birth for nearly 2000 plus
odd years. Dr.B.R.Ambedkar brought back to the
consciousness of people this framework that had
experienced a near complete annihilation. While re-
embracing it, he historicized the content, contextualized the
practice and cleansed it from theoretical distortions that
were inserted by vested interest to fundamentally destroy
the same.127 It is to this cleansed framework that the word
‘Navayana’ is referred to in this section.

This then is the probable location of navayana social work

as a school of thought in social work. It is an idea, a
perspective, a philosophy and also a practice.

The Guiding principles of the navayana

learning/educating process in the Indian Context

Over the years, as I engaged more intensely and deeply with

the learning/educating process in social work education, I
did gain some interesting insights into curriculum building,
pedagogical practices and the learning/educating process.
127
More readings on the subject can be made on the numerous writings
of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar himself and of the writings of Laxmi Narasu, and
Iyothee Thass.

153
There is an important methodological interjection that
needs to be made here regarding social work training. One
thing about social work education that stands out amongst
the social and applied sciences and a process that I
personally value, is the innovative curriculum, which thrust
on many organic dimensions of learning rather than merely
lectures, reading, research and thinking. The component of
an engaged fieldwork, rather than a data-collection oriented
fieldwork, which embedded in social work education is in
my opinion the most fundamental pedagogical strategy of
the learning/educating process in social work.

These multiple very enriching ways of learning, embodied

in the social work curriculum are processes that I have
engaged deeply with and learnt from. However the insights
gained have also come about from responsibilities
entrusted on me to develop the curriculum of a
Concentration and later a Masters in Art in Social Work in
Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action in the Institute that I
teach. The demands made on me to ground theoretical
content to the Indian context, the pedagogy to be used for
the learning/thinking/action community and the
curriculum to be framed to set the tone and sight of the
learning/educating process on the path of knowledge
pushed me into spaces that required a multi-pronged
approach to curriculum building. But even though the task
was multiple, the curriculum building process also
demanded that I articulate a succinct and cohesive
framework of the learning/educating process under the
framework of Master’s programme.

154
In the light of this I will attempt to recollect and bring
together some of my thoughts that acted like an
epistemological guide post while in the process of engaging
in the above task. The axiological intention is posited at
two levels. One is to share these insights with the social
work sorority, and the other is to provide a peep into the
overarching perspectives and ideas that informs the
formulation and content of my ideas. Laced throughout the
following text are certain ‘guide post’ that ran across my
thinking process while writing this section.

Over the years, as one engages more deeply with the

learning and teaching process in social work education, I
have began to think seriously about guiding principles in
the learning/educating process. The opportunity to unravel
and understand these guiding principles also came to me
when I had to develop the Concentration and later Masters
in Art in Social Work in Dalit and Tribal Studies and
Action. Below I will attempt to share my insights on these
dynamic guidelines, more so as a means to provide a way to
understand the Navayana learning/educating process.
These principles arose as and when I attempted to produce
teaching content located fundamentally in a Navayana
perspective. Many have also come about from detailed
intellectual discussions with my own students and in deeper
reflections with some of my colleagues and the Navayana
community.

I strongly believe, and this is rooted in the Indian context,

that it is a historical responsibility for social work educators
to fundamentally alter the learner from a 'Recipient of
Knowledge' to a 'Producer of Knowledge'. The danger with

155
social work education is that it is trapped in received
theories that indirectly accept a position of ‘recipient’ rather
than a ‘producer’. This is at times projected through our
students. I hold firm to the argument that social work
theories are cornered and invisibilised by western theory.
Such processes began as early as 1492, when the Western
European colonial project kick-started. These Western
theories beginning in the 1600s that have now become
universal have also absorbed social work education in India
as part of its territorializing project. If one is not aware of
this larger colonizing project, one reproduces such
processes through students. Interestingly engaging in
western theories gives one a sense of philosophical
sophistication and superiority, but only a few can see how
western theory indirectly ties one to the rules of knowledge
production that presupposes the superiority of the western
european mind/gaze over all others.

These processes of invisibilization are difficult to decipher

for one who is not looking deeply enough. How does one
counter this? My position on this is that we must deepen
the learner’s ways and the learning process itself around the
principle of engaging with reality from ‘context’ to ‘theory’
rather than from ‘theory’ to ‘context’. Here both the
teacher and the taught are to be fundamentally rooted in
decolonial thinking and equanimous engagement. A
challenge to such a project is to turn the very framework
that perceives non Western Europeans as recipients of their
knowledge to producers of knowledge.

This however does not mean that we must reject everything

Western; instead we should learn its ‘language’ and expand

156
 the conceptual repertoire of both teacher and taught. In the
process we refine reflexive thinking skills across contextual,
language and knowledge domains. The only process we
must be awake to is the epistemological tussles that ‘must’
take place against what Linda Tuhiwai Smith (1999)
identifies as ‘western’ being equated to ‘universal’ and the
non-Western as ‘particulars’.128

In addition to the above, I also strongly hold on to the

principle that all social knowledge is historical, bound by
body, space-time and context. Any claim that social
knowledge can be ahistorical and (uni)versal is a myth.
Thus, in my point-of-view, thinking historically is
fundamental to knowledge and a very important process
especially in India. I see engagements grounded on such
premises as part of what I believe is fundamental in social
work education, that is, the attempts at epistemological
reconstruction.

Further, I have come to realize through the years as a

educator that very less learning takes place among students
till such time that the learner take ownership of her/his
own learning process. Once the learning process has begun
it is important to posit the same on a path that is

128 The indigenous people’s scholar Linda Tuhiwai Smith makes a

critical point on this stating “The globalization of knowledge and
Western culture constantly reaffirms the West’s view of itself as the
centre of legitimate knowledge, the arbiter of what counts as
knowledge and the source of ‘civilized’ ‘universal’ knowledge,
available to all and not really ‘owned’ by anyone, that is, until non‐
Western scholars make claims to it. When claims like that are made
history is revised (again) so that the story of civilization remains the
story of the West.” From her book “Decolonizing Methodologies:
Research and Indigenous Peoples” published by Zed Books Ltd., p.63.

157
fundamentally rooted in a search for justice, civility,
democratic participation, anti-oppression and social
inclusion, gaining in the process self-respect, dignity and
freedom of mind for both teacher and taught.

Finally, I also believe that no matter what pedagogical

practices are operationalised within both the
learning/educating process, we must always employ a
pedagogy that heals…Now this is something which only
the excluded and oppressed understand. Healing however
requires everyone to participate.

These ideas above that I have recollected based on my

experience can be stated as curriculum and pedagogical
principles. They are definitely not exhaustive but
constitutes of a few ideas that came about as and when I
engaged with the multiple context(s). These principles are
as follows:

• First Principle: From a 'Recipient of Knowledge' to a

'Producer of Knowledge'. We can also perceive the
learner as a ‘Co-Producer of Knowledge’.

• Second Principle: Deepening the learner’s process of

learning from context to theory.

• Third Principle: Both teacher and taught

fundamentally rooted in decolonial thinking and
equanimous engagement.

• Fourth Principle: Expand language and conceptual

repertoire of both teacher and taught and refine
reflexive thinking skills.

158
 • Fifth Principle: Nothing is ahistorical and given, we
always need to historicise and engage in historical
thinking

• Sixth Principle: The learner take ownership of their

own learning process

• Seventh Principle: Informed and equanimous action

in process

• Eighth Principle: Grounded in valuing civility,

democratic participation, justice and social inclusion

• Ninth Principle: Always towards self-respect, dignity

and freedom of mind

• Tenth Principle: Epistemological reconstruction as

fundamental in the learning process. This is a means
to becoming a wholesome being

• Eleventh Principle: Towards an education and a

pedagogy that heals…

Teaching Social Work ‘Skills’: The navayana way…

Over the years I have been reflecting on the subject of

transmitting skills in social work practice. In these
reflections I have been confronted with many fundamental
questions such as how do we conceive the idea of skill? Is
skill outside of perspective? Can skills be taught? If it can
be taught, then how does one approach the
learning/educating process of ‘skills’ in social work? What
is the suitable pedagogy to use to transmit skills to a
learning/educating community?
159
In attempting to engage with these questions, my initial
thought on the subject is that skills in social work include
many dimensions and aspects of the learning/educating
process. However at its very core lies the conception that
every act of doing is fundamentally embedded in the
perspective of the doer and vice versa - every perspective
embodies the act. The perspective and the act of doing are
in unity. The binaries are merely conceptual and even real
but not actual.

However from a social workers perspective, the concept of

‘skill’ in the most fundamental domain of self and being,
envelopes a much larger conceptual frame. I have
presented the same in Diagram 21 titled ‘Teaching Social
Work Skills – The Navayana Way’. The idea of ‘social work
skills’ in the way I have positioned it, constitutes of five
interrelated domains: (i) a concept driven/centric processes
in perspective building (ii) an understanding and knowledge
of varied theoretical approaches to practice (iii) the
identification and refining of core practice skills (iv)
capacity for knowledge production skills and (v) direct
field-based intervention skills. This whole framework
however is fundamentally grounded on ethics and
aesthetics, conceived as core in social work.

160
Building perspective requires an engagement with a
learner’s experience around conceptual unraveling and
theoretical de-layering. As awareness about perspective
begins to take place, clarity about social work models and
approaches to field engagement becomes important. This
requires the learner to begin refining certain skills both
within the self and with the professional self. In the social
work profession, there is now an increase demand from
trained professionals for expertise in knowledge production
and direct field intervention.

From my point-of-view the basic skills required in social

work practice are generally divided into three components.
The first constitutes of life skills, people’s skills and social
skills. The second constitutes of language skills,
conceptualization skills, thinking skills and writing skills.

161
The third and the most fundamental is what are contained
in satipatthana, mindfulness, ‘deep self introspection’ or
‘self-observation’. These are noted down under the theme –
Refining Practice. These, in my opinion are the bedrock of
the skill-sets that social workers should possess. Another
two skill-sets – knowledge production and direct field
intervention are more in the professional domain of
practice. All the above stated domains are interdependent.
Each feed into the other and each enrich and deepen the
other.

The first domain of professional skills which can also be

identified as advanced skills concerns knowledge
production. In fieldwork training, research is one of the
many ways in which a being attempts to deepen and widen
one’s insights into the world that is fundamentally relative.
Gaining expertise and being at ease with ways of producing
knowledges is imperative in social work.

Further, the social work profession also requires

intervention skills. This stems from various sectors in social
reality that as social workers we engage in. These are the
sectors of health, housing, food security, education,
livelihoods, water, etc. These are major areas of social work
intervention and each demands their own sets of skills.
While there are some generic skills such as writing,
documentation and even computer skill, each sector
requires some degree of expertise cutting across a range of
skill-sets.

162
Conclusion

When viewed from beyond the binary, the teaching

learning process is both wholesome and holistic. It is
neither the search for definitions nor the pursuit of more
information; instead it becomes the search for deeper
truths and the realization and practice of aesthetics.
Growth from this perspective is not measured in financial
terms, nor in status but in how humane one is as a being in
a binary dualistic world.

Navayana in this sense is a healing process, but a healing

process gained through knowledge and insights rather than
through more information and a higher status. This
learning process is centered within and without the self in
society and not out of it. The gains made are for everybody
and not for a few.

163
 Chapter VII

De-familiarizing Content and Pedagogical

Processes in Fieldwork Supervision 129

“The teacher and the taught together create the teaching”

Anonymous

In brief, within social work education, field work

constitutes one symbiotic half of the teaching-learning
process, the other component being class room instruction.
The demands of action and reflection in field work, opens
up opportunities to both supervisee and supervisor to
deepen their understanding of social reality and also clarify
the role of the ‘change agent’. This chapter focuses on
knowledge frameworks, pedagogical processes and
constitutive content of fieldwork supervision during the

129 This article was first published as a training note of the National
Association of Dalit and Tribal Social Workers in 2005. Later I had
reworked this note in 2012 and use it for lectures on the subject.
This note was written to basically clarify my own thought process
while engaging with my field work students. As a pedagogical tool I
would ask them to read this paper at the end of their first and
second semester fieldwork to get clarity on the processes that I have
engaged in. Since 2005 I have been lecturing on this issue from a
skill perspective and also taken two workshops on supervisory skills
for fieldwork supervisors. In retrospect I feel that some of the issues
I discussed are not as sophisticated or very relevant now. But for this
book, I have left the training note as it is with some minor
improvement in resource and analysis. Over the years I have had
many more insights on the same issues and developed different
techniques and strategies of field supervision. I have also moved
away from being too dependent on western social work theory and
have tried to formulate a more context specific and context relevant
social work as posited in the previous chapter..

164
 first and second semester of a Master’s program in social
work.

My attempt is to critically engage with issues concerning

social work perspectives, methodological premises, ethical
issues, pedagogical congruency and emancipatory content
within the supervisee-supervisor relationship.

Fieldwork Engagement in Social Work Education

A number of social work educators from various schools of

social work in India have through the years attempted to
clarify the fieldwork component in social work education.
Singh(1985)130 while attempting to define field work in
social work education stated:

“Field work in social work is carried out in and

through social welfare agencies and communities,
where the student learns skills and tests out
knowledge according to an educational plan. The
whole programme is student and field-specific. Field
work training is supervised practice of social work
under the guidance of a trained social work educator,
or field personnel. It has been defined as an
educationally sponsored attachment of social work
students to an institution, agency, or a section of
community, in which they are helped to extend their
knowledge and understanding, and experience the

130 Singh R.R.(Ed.) (1985). Field Work in Social Work Education‐ A

Perspective for Human Service Professions, Concept Publishing
Company, New Delhi

165
 impact of human needs. Such an experience is
deliberately arranged on a whole or part-time basis”.

Little (1949)131 laid down nine broad educational objectives

of fieldwork engagement articulating what a social work
program should equip students with; from providing
students with field work experiences of working with
people in simple and complex situations to awareness of
the use of social work records as a means of providing
continuity of services and a basis for research. Sytz(1949)132
further posits that to achieve such educational objectives,
schools of social work in India should place as much
emphasis on structuring field work curriculum as on
theoretical contents as part of social work education. As
early as 1953, Moorthy133 while arguing for a scientific
approach to field work proposed that “field work is
intended to give the student (i) first hand acquaintance of
social and personal situations or problems of which he
reads; (ii) to inculcate in him the ability to apply techniques
developed in each social work area for the solution of the
said situations and (iii) to give him experience of the use of
routine procedures relating to recording and administration
which is incidental to the second”. Moorthy also
introduced different dimensions in fieldwork training that
are important for assisting students to learn. He referred to

131 Cited in Desai, M. M.(1975) Student Recording in Field Work

Supervision. Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol.35 (4), p.345‐352
132 ibid
133 Moorthy, M. (1953). Scientific Approach to Field Work, Indian
Journal of Social Work, Vol.14 (2), p.144‐159. 27. Also see
Moorthy,M.V & Rao,S.N. (1970). Field Work in Social Work. Andhra
University, Andhra

166
 seven sets of circumstances in which a problem is set, or
with which a problem is closely knit or tangled. Matthew
(1975)134 posits that “the process of professional education
in social work consists of the acquisition of knowledge and
skills, values and attitudes appropriate for social work. Class
room courses as well as field work instruction are designed
and operated in such a way as to facilitate this educational
process”.

R.R.Singh,135 published an edited volume titled “Field Work

in Social Work Education- A Perspective for Human
Service Professions” which detailed fieldwork supervision
and micro supervisory processes within Indian social work
education. Singh listed specific goals and assignments to be
completed for a first and second term which includes
observational processes and tools of assessment,
understanding and knowledge to programme formulation
and implementation. Subhedar (2001)136 in his book
Fieldwork Training in Social Work also adds a creative
dimension to field training in the form of fieldwork
through films. Subhedar argues that “students can learn
much faster ways to present their ideas, views, opinions,
etc., by observing the effective characterizations in the
film”.
134 Mathew, G(1975) Educational and Helping Aspects of Field Work
Supervision . Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol.35 (4), 1975, p.325‐
333. Also see Mathew,G. (1992). An Introduction to Social Casework.
Mumbai: Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
135 Singh R.R.(Ed.) (1985). Field Work in Social Work Education‐ A
Perspective for Human Service Professions, Concept Publishing
Company, New Delhi
136 Subhedar I.S. (2001) Fieldwork Training in Social Work. (Pg. 196)
Rawat Publication. Jaipur

167
 The Emergence of a Critical Social Work Episteme
from varied Context in the World

In India, as I have stated in the earlier chapters, efforts to

insert liberatory and emancipatory elements into Indian
social work education, are now visible in some spaces and
are being articulated in the public domain. We see the
emergence of two organic perspectives that are located
within a critical Indian episteme; Dalit Social Work137 and
Tribal Social Work Practice.138 The above formulations
that have arisen from context, point to the emanation of
critical organic social work content and theory in Indian
social work education.

In other parts of the world as I have pointed out in chapter

2, we also observe the rise of aboriginal social work,
indigenous social work, and decolonial social work. In the
western world, there are a number of theories within the
critical school. An idea that has somewhat caught the
attention of many social work educators across the globe is
‘anti-oppressive practice’139. This is generally understood as
137 Ramaiah,A. (1998). and bodhi.s.r (2011,)
138 bodhi.s.r (2011,). Also see Akhup, A. (2009). Interface between State,
Voluntary Organisation and Tribes: A Perspective towards Tribe‐
Centered Social Work Practice. Indian Journal of Social Work, 70(4),
507‐615.
139
Dalrymple and Burke (1995) describes the practice of working from
an Anti Oppressive framework as constituting of personal self
knowledge; knowledge and an understanding of the majority social
systems; knowledge and understanding of different groups and
cultures; knowledge of how to challenge and confront issues on a
personal and structural level; awareness of the need to be ‘research
minded’ (Everitt et. al., 1992); commitment to action and change. (p.
18) and contend that these six points, together with an
understanding of power and oppression, contribute to the

168
 an umbrella term that encompasses a variety of practice
approaches including, but not limited to, radical, structural,
feminist, anti-racist, critical, and liberatory frameworks. It
represents the current nomenclature for a range of western
theories and practices that embrace a social justice
perspective.140 Most of the western social workers who
premise their practice within an anti-oppressive position
share a few basic characteristics, “they are strongly critical
of the oppressive nature of the dominant discourse; they
are theoretically incisive in analyzing ‘oppression’ and see
social work fundamentally as an activity of professionally
trained people towards social transformation”.

Critical Pedagogy in First Year Fieldwork supervision:

The Concept and Frame

A. Reassembling Content and Pedagogical Processes

We find a number of articles within Indian social work

education articulating aims, objectives and processes related
to field work supervision. While some articles lay the
framework of various fieldwork components in social work
training, discuss educational objectives and helping aspects
of supervision such as those of Kapoor, 1961; Maurya,
1962; Khinduka, 1963; Bannerjee, 1972; Thangavelu,
1975,141 few such as Khinduka, 1962; Mehta, 1975; Desai,

development of anti‐oppressive practice in Carolyn Campbell (2003)

Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
http://aosw.socialwork.dal.ca/index.html.
140 ibid
141 See Bannerjee, G.R (1972). Some Aspects of Field Work Supervision.
In Papers on Social Work: an Indian perspective. 270‐284. Tata

169
 1975 deal with micro processes related to identifying
fieldwork tasks, the importance of recordings and goals of
individual and group conferences.142 It must be noted that
while very few social work educators have dwelt deeply into
curriculum and pedagogical processes, attempts to
articulate the same is now being made.

Across the world, critical social workers as noted by

Campbell (2003)143 have noted down these principles as
constituting of (i) a comprehensive conception of the role
and responsibility of educators, (ii) promoting critical
analysis, (iii) supporting student engagement in learning,
(iv) nurturing relationships and establishing community, (v)
using experience as a pedagogical base, (vi) facilitating
practice and classroom discussions, (vii) working with
affect in the classroom.

Institute of Social Sciences, Bombay. Also see Maurya,M.R. (1962)

Field work Training in Social Work. Indian Journal of Social Work.
Vol 23(1) April; 9‐14; Thangavelu,R. (1975). Field work Supervision:
Its Place in Social Work Education. Indian Journal of Social Work.
Vol. 35(4) Jan; 359‐366; Kapoor,J.M (1961) The Role of Field work in
modern social work education. Indian Journal of Social Work Vol.22
(2), p.113‐120, September and Khinduka,S.K. (1963) The role of
supervision in social work education. Indian Journal of Social Work,
Vol.24(3), Oct; 169‐180
142 Khinduka,S.K (1962) Group Supervision of social work students.
Indian Journal of Social Work Vol.23 (1), p.105‐114, April. Also see
Mehta, V. D. (1975) Integrated Methods Approach‐ a Challenge
Possibility in Field Work Instruction. Indian Journal of Social Work
Vol.35 (4), 1975, p.335‐34; Desai, M. M.(1975) Student Recording in
Field Work Supervision . Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol.35 (4),
p.345‐352 and D’Souza,P (1978) Field Instruction In Social Work
Education: a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of the Doctorate of Philosophy. Bombay:
TISS.
143 ibid

170
In the Indian context, I have been part of a group drafting
the objectives of critical field work training in Indian social
work education. The aim here is to accommodate and work
towards increasing the capacity of students to (i) develop
skills and methodologies of working in partnership with
communities, groups and individuals where there are
differences in power in relation to caste, ethnicity, class,
gender, age, ability and other differences in status, (ii)
develop the ability to recognize and value the
expertise/experience of individuals, families, groups and
communities of Dalits, Tribes, Women, Aged and the
Differently Abled, (iii) develop an awareness of structural
processes of social exclusion, discrimination, social
disadvantage, prejudices and differing forms of oppression,
(iv) develop insights into the role of structure in
constructing identities and self, and to identify and clarify
one’s own value premise in such contexts, (v) develop
strategies that challenge oppression, discrimination,
exclusion, disadvantage and other forms of
inequality/injustice based on caste, ethnic, class, gender and
ability, (vi) evidence in practice the ability to listen, respect
and promote the views and needs of the oppressed within
the context of engagement, either through social
movements, social action, development organizations,
service organizations or government departments and (vii)
in the process of engagement, clarify one’s role in/within
the context as a change agent and strengthen commitment
to the cause of the oppressed.

Within such a framework and directly in relation to the first

year fieldwork supervision in a Masters in Social Work

171
programme I will engage in greater details of the process of
supervision. While each of the semesters within the two
year Master’s programme of social work have their own
content, thrust and concomitant pedagogical processes, I
propose to perceive, identify and formulate such a learning
trajectory as follows:

1. First Semester is identified as the Period of

Unlearning,

2. Second Semester as the Period of Contextual

Deepening,

B. First Semester Fieldwork Supervision

For students, the first semester is a period of extremely

high expectations. Students bring a spirit of enquiry and a
thirst to know that spans across a range of fields of enquiry
and practice, from psychology to politics and even religion
and philosophy. There is also an eagerness to know about
fieldwork component. Once in fieldwork, they encounter
problems of language, inability to make sense of theory vis-
à-vis field context and the incongruity between field reality,
practice and theory. Many students are pressured by the
learning context to display intelligence, sensitivity and
commitment.

First semester fieldwork is a challenge to the supervisor-

supervisee circle, not only to clarify basic processes in
social work training but to provide some direction to
students while anchoring them in their engagement
process. It is in such a context that the author would prefer

172
to identify the first semester as a period of critical field
engagement aimed at unlearning.

The Period of Unlearning: Processes in Supervision

I. Change in pedagogy

Most students take methodologies of learning for granted

and make the mistake of using the same pedagogical
method learnt during schooling and bachelor studies
(graduation) to learn in the social work programme. While
during schooling and graduation most teaching, especially
in India, was didactic, fieldwork demands that students
learn through experiential engagement. This needs to be
stressed and awareness about learning other methods of
learning be made conscious for the learner.

Introduction to linear and circular processes of observing

and analysis, together with the ability to formulate both
linear and circular questions are important. Students should
also be introduced to the process of problematization of
concepts, issues and situations. This would help them
refine their questioning process. It is also necessary to assist
students in the art of paraphrasing and reframing feelings,
thought, behaviors and even issues/situations. This
strengthens their ability to arrive, see and make meaning of
their experience and the experiences of the people they
work with. Most of the students in the first semester are in
search of meaning and making meaning becomes
fundamental to the fieldwork process.

173
Supervisory Content and Process

• Banking concept of education vs. Problem posing

education/ critical learning

• Learning how to learn - Didactic Classroom Teaching

vs. Experiential Field based learning: Subjecting banking
concept of education to de-emphasis and highlighting
different methodologies of learning.

• Introduction to the notion and theoretical frame of

dialogue

• Role of Active Listening in dialogue

• Clarifying Linear Analysis

• Attempting a conscious Circular Analysis: Reflexive

process

• Assisting students to formulate and ask questions

• Facilitating processes towards problematization and

argument formulation

• Questioning the learnt method and process of learning

• The politics of ‘meaning’ : The art of Reframing and

paraphrasing

• Introduce the process of unraveling what lies beyond

problem focused analysis

174
II. Working towards a new value orientation in the
Student

In India, a country such which is characterized by high

degree of diversity, reality could present itself in very
complex ways, especially when it comes to
intersectionalities of caste, religion, ethnicity, language and
gender. In India diversity is perceived as a strength and
accepted as good in itself. But, it is not beyond one’s
imagination to perceive and comprehend that this
perceived celebrated ‘strength’ has produced a system that
has touched the nadir point when it comes to legitimized
oppression. The product manifested in the form of the
caste system, where such diversity, coupled with legitimized
inequality has become, in its most diabolic sense- lethal.

It is extremely helpful while working on the issue of value

orientation with students to encourage them to take
positions in social work. Some students prefer not too as
they see social work as an apolitical activity while others
have proclivity to do so. In this regard the biggest challenge
faced by the supervisor is in clarifying the line that
separates the professional from the personal. I have come
to regard the personal-professional dichotomy as only
important in the initial phase of learning. The same holds
no ground for structural workers. The earlier one can
transcend this binary demarcation, the clearer the structure
becomes and the more efficacious the practice in structure.
However the capability to see things holistically takes time.
It is a long drawn process which begins with the highly
analytical act of ‘essentializing’ which entails the
identification of key constitutive elements of a social

175
category, be it identity, context or sector, that one is
engaging with in the field.

Other important issues that are existential in nature but of

great value when it comes to clarifying the value base of
students are conceptual engagement with categories such as
responsibility, freedom, power, loneliness and guilt, posit in
the form of questions to think and ponder about. It opens
many doors for students in the process of learning. They
experience these situations very frequently in the field.

Further, clarifying the understanding of concepts such as

equality, justice, liberty, dignity, harmony, good, bad, beauty
help strengthen the ethical and fundamental base of the
students. It is also important to introduce through
problematization certain foundational principles such as
self determination, acceptance, non-judgmentality, etc in
order to help students arrive at their own understanding
and meanings about the same. Since most social work
principles stems from ‘beyond the binary’, they are not easy
to understand when viewed from a binary location. This
engagement is purely theoretical and requires both reading
and intellectual discussions.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Clarifying the personal-professional dichotomy in social

work

• Problematising existential categories such as

responsibility, freedom, guilt, loneliness, power and
finiteness

176
• Working at the base of value construction by revisiting
notions of fraternity, equality, justice, liberty, harmony,
and dignity

• Introducing basic principles that guides engagement -

problematising the notion of acceptance, non-
judgmental attitude, controlled emotional involvement,
purposeful expression of feelings, uniqueness of self,
individualization, self determination and confidentiality

III. Praxis

Social work has often relied heavily on this learning

technique made popular and refined by Paulo Freire. While
there have been far more sophisticated techniques develop
by Indian theoreticians themselves, like those of Siddhato
Gotamo and Dr.B.R.ambedkar who focuses on body,
sensation and history, yet there is a greater reference to
Freire when one uses the word ‘praxis’. With the
publication of his celebrated book “Pedagogy of the
Oppressed’, the term praxis has become an integral
technique and has definitively enriched social work training.
For Freire, both supervisee and supervisor are ‘learner-
teacher’ and ‘teacher-learner’ respectively. Both bring with
them an ability to teach and to learn. In the process of
action and reflection as an ongoing dynamic movement,
(with an explicit acceptance that there can be ‘no final
action’ or ‘no final reflection), the supervisor and
supervisee, deepens their understanding and knowledge of
their own self and the world. Deeper insights into the
process of action-reflection is unraveled cognitively as ‘auto
reflection’ processes constituting of a forward movement

177
from ‘thought-word-action’ to ‘action-word-thought’
further leading to awareness, action and organization. In
connection to the ‘cultural circle’ formulation of Freire, it is
important to note that because both the supervisor and
supervisee are said to have based their understanding on
the basis of their own investigative reasoning through
dialogue and not on imposition or blind acceptance of the
word of either one, both the supervisor and supervisee gain
deeper knowledge.

It is useful to also engage with the notion of ‘observing’ as

a logical extension of the action-reflection process,
although the same seems out of place in relation to the
Freirian conception. Using ‘cultural circle’ and praxis as
epistemological premises, it is useful to also demonstrate to
supervisee the difference between linear and circular
processes of questioning, although one would have
preferred discussing ‘logic’ instead. Most students come
with backgrounds that have no introduction to philosophy
and the usage of logic formulation, be it inductive or
deductive. This also helps them write different types of
fieldwork recordings and clarifies the minute processes of
recordings identified as being linear or circular. Linear in
this context refers to the unraveling of reality premised on
the question Why and circular, referring to questions of
Where, When, What, How and Why.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Introducing the culture circle constituting of ‘teacher-

learner’ and ‘learner-teacher’

178
• Acting-reflecting-acting-reflecting as a process

• Auto reflection- from thought-word-action, to action-

word-thought

• Awareness-organization-action

• Introducing the concept of Observing (acting-

reflecting-observing) as a process

• Awareness-of-process and reflection-witnessing of self

• Linear questioning and circular questioning

• Capturing Linear, Curvi-linear and Circular field work

recordings

IV. Deepening students understanding of structure

and processes of oppression through critical thinking

Clarifying the boundary and minute differences between

traditional social work theory, critical social work theory
and those theoretical perspectives located in spaces beyond
the binary as shown in Diagram 20 provides supervisee
with an initial basic frame to learn to perceive how to read
theory and where to locate oneself while in the process of
analysis. It is essential to introduce to supervisee the notion
of critical thinking expounded as being the capacity to
understand a situation located in history, ability to collect
reliant information, substantiate one’s arguments, see and
differentiate between right and wrong in a given situation
and the capacity to make valid conclusions about a situation
and one’s position. Furthering this process, the supervisee
should be introduced to the act of problematising. One
179
could pose questions such as: What is problematising? How
does one go about the process of problematising? When
are you problematising? Is critique, problematising? This is
done not only to facilitate the supervisee’s ability to identify
limits of theoretical conception or identify the notional
boundaries of a concept but to lead the supervisee to
contest various ‘received notions’ and pre conceived notion
(prejudices) that are taken as given.

Before acting in society, we need to have the ability to

analyze society. As social workers we have too often been
accused of being opinionated and having a flimsy,
impressionistic understanding of social reality. Our ability
of understanding the social in social work is at best
mediocre. This is more so because we often simplify our
very complex Indian reality by easily comprehensible and
encompassing categories such as class, gender or religion.
We often fall trap to the process of seeking to capture the
essence of social reality in a single word only ending up in
an unconscious over simplification and exclusion of other
realities.

The concrete Indian condition is determined by complex

factors such as geography, region, language, race, caste,
class and gender. In such a context it is important that
social work educators/supervisor have the capacity to
understand the historical and regional context, identify and
locate overarching realities (such as caste), identify the
objects of inquiry, open up various lines of inquiry and
engage the supervisee reflexively. As social work educators,
we do not have the luxury of being naïve about society, and
any act to the contrary is fueled by the obvious dangers of

180
 abandoning the critical edge which our profession so
demands.

For the Indian context while I refer heavily to

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar’s conception of historical oppression,
religious social exclusion and violent domination, I have
also found Marion Young’s conceptualization of
oppression very sophisticated. For many social work
students in India, the ideas of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar are very
hard to digest so to dilute the regid resistance Marion
Young may be used. For Young (1992)144 Oppression
means not simply its traditional connotation of “the
exercise of tyranny by a ruling group” but also its new left
designation of the disadvantage and injustice some people
suffer not because a tyrannical power intends to keep them
down, but because of the everyday practices of a well-
intentioned liberal society. It “refers to systemic and
structural phenomena that are not necessarily the result of
the intention of a tyrant but are in fact part of the basic
fabrics of a society, not a function of a few people’s choice
or policies… Oppression refers to structural phenomena
that immobilize or reduce a group…To be in a social group
is to share with others a way of life that defines a person’s
identity and by which other people identify him or her”.
She identifies five faces/dimensions of Oppression: (i)
Exploitation, (ii) Marginalization (iii) Powerlessness (iv)
Cultural Imperialism and (v) Violence.

144 Young.I.M (1992).

www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/young.pdf

181
Supervisory Content and Process

• Introducing and positing critical theory (conflict theory)

against traditional theory (order theory)

• Introduction to the conception of critical thinking

• Clarifying ideological lenses: Problematising students

preconceived conception of social reality

• Challenging and creating awareness about stereotypes

and prejudices- deconstructing and deepening students’
understanding of ‘oppression’.

V. Introducing Social Work Methods

What are methods? What are the constitutive elements of a

method? How does one arrive at a method? What is the
difference between methodology and method? What is a
premise? How does one identify an object of inquiry? How
does one select a unit of analysis? What is intervention? Is
there a way of intervening in a context? These and many
more questions are critical in facilitating a supervisee’s
comprehension of a ‘method’ and to finally make meaning
with the same. Not agreeing in totality with the school of
thought that posits ‘received methods’ as core to Indian
social work practice, I instead suggests engagement on
‘methods’ by clarifying ontological epistemological issues
that are fundamental to arrive at a comprehensive
formulation of a ‘method’.

In India, to this day, the generally accepted systematized

procedures or methods that are taught to students at the

182
 MA level are identified as casework, group work,
community organization, social action and social research
together with social welfare administration. These are
coupled with detailed descriptions of ‘techniques’ in the
form of tools or instruments (questioning, clarification,
information giving,…) used within a method and social
work ‘skills’ in the form of an ability to use a systematized
body of knowledge or procedure (casework, group
work,…) effectively in intervention (recording, supervision,
evaluation…). In my opinion, a ‘method’ should have an
organic base rooted in the realities of its context.145 Rather
than introducing the concept of the ‘method’ directly, it is
important that one begins with epistemic issues linked to
structural realities rather than leap into didactic teaching of
the well packaged bookish western definitions and content.
Facilitating the formulation of a systematic and orderly
procedure to evolve from analysis of the organic context
opens up avenues for students to get insights into why a
method is needed and therefore meaningful. I have detailed
my understanding of the concept of method in chapter
four.

The concept of ‘change agent’ is central to field work

engagement, linked closely to the purposeful and conscious
use of self while in field work. However, it is detrimental to
hasten the process of imposing the ‘change agent’ notion
on supervisee. No amount of theoretical explanation will
help clarify the concept. It is the supervisee herself/himself
145 I had put down my thoughts in a paper bodhi.s.r (2011,a). "Critical
Reflections on Approaches to Methods in Indian Social Work
Education", in Jharkhand Journal of Development and Management
Studies, Vol.9, No.4 (October‐December, 2011)

183
who must slowly unravel its meaning in practice using the
supervisor as a stable reflecting mirror. Within the same
frame, one needs to also facilitate discussion on categories
such as subjectivity, objectivity and reactive, responsive,
reflexive (which I have noted in Diagram 19) even though
any emphasis on the same is contradictory and antithetical
to the process of dialogue and a dialogical relationship. The
notion of empathy I believe also falls within the same
realm.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Clarifying ‘premise’, ‘objects of inquiry’, ‘unit of

analysis’, ‘line of inquiry’, ‘methodology’, ‘method’

• Clarifying ontological epistemological premises and

theories of perception- realist, idealist, intuitionist

• Introducing the ‘change agent’ concept

• The purposeful and conscious use of self

• The process of receptivity, subjectivity and objectivity

in relation to self

• Introducing empathy as a process

• Relating basic social work principles to self within

dynamic social reality

• Clarification of methods, techniques and skills

emanating from context

184
VI. Introduction to the process of work- identification

In social work training one often encounters the problem

of facilitating supervisee to be able to identify ‘work’ in the
‘field’. Previously discussed was the ‘social’ in social work.
But what is ‘work’ in social work? And what is ‘field’ in
field work? Unfortunately these questions are greatly
determined by the kind of field work ‘agency’ or system
that the student is placed in. Pertaining to the former, work
differs from one setting to the other.

The notion, nature and content of work vary between a

government setting, non government setting and
community setting. Within this framework, at a personal
level, I would conceive that any act which emanates from a
conscious and purposeful use of self directed towards
ameliorative and structural change within a context could
qualify as work. Further, because we perceive ourselves as a
profession, these conscious acts formalized within the
framework of ‘professional service’ are quantified by
financial remuneration.

Connected to the concept of work, in-depth clarification

about the notion of ‘field’ in field work becomes
imperative. I have detailed this in chapter two. From within
social work education in India, the ‘field’ has been viewed
primarily from three perspectives: (i) generic, (ii)
specialization and (iii) interdisciplinary concentrations or
fields of practice. The first formulation perceives the ‘field’
as a generic ‘context’, simply understood as a demarcated
space characterized by a dynamic confluence of time, place
and person that is experienced in the here and now. This

185
conception of field is generally conceived by those schools
of social work offering a generic M.S.W programme. The
second formulation perceives the field as a context
demarcated by/ into sectors (Medical and Psychiatric Social
Work, Family and Child Welfare, Personnel Management
and Industrial Relations, Urban and Rural Community
Development). This kind of conception is witness among
those schools offering a M.S.W programme with
specializations.

The most recent formulation perceives the ‘field’ as a

context (Community Organization and Development
Practice, Children and Families) demarcated by sectors
(Mental Health, Public Health, Criminology and Justice,
Livelihood and Entrepreneurship) whose meaning,
interpretation and experience depends greatly on socio-
politico-historical locations and standpoint epistemic
premises (Dalit Social Work, Tribal Social Work, Women
Centered Practice). The M.A in Social Work programme
offered by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences currently
interwoven under the broad category of ‘thematic
programmes’, formulates the ‘field’ in the form of
interdisciplinary concentrations or ‘fields/sites of practice’
that circumscribes context, sectors and positionality around
identities.

Over the course of a century, the Indian context has been

characterized by myriad manifestations of a modern social
life marred by increasing structural discrepancy. Such are
the structural realities of the field, that sometimes even a
contract with the State is positioned directly against
community, especially poor communities. At times, when

186
one is struggling for the rights of the marginalized (which is
work in social work), one is also paradoxically breaking the
law or so it seems. However, theoretically informed action
is something we cannot tease and run away from. It is
useless to only take pride in remaining in opposition
without making any dent on the structures that excludes
and oppress. We must carry on the historical momentum
towards change, clearly in a direction that liberates and
emancipates the oppressed. In this connection we must be
able to identify work (change) that demands process, and
work (changes) that require immediate cause-effect action
bearing immediate outcome.

Connected to the above it is helpful to dialogue with

supervisee on positionality and the reality unraveling
processes especially (as an initial technique) by positing the
problem focus and strength focus dichotomy as understood
and applied in social work practice. How does one’s
positionality change what we perceive and experience is a
pertinent question to engage with.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Helping to identify work: structures and levels of work

(self, agency, client/community, policy, system) and
fields of practice

• The ‘here and now’ perspective and comprehending the

change process. Change the only constant

• Process orientation and Cause-Effect orientation

187
• Positionality and the unraveling of social situations-
Problem perspective and the strength perspective

The first semester is responsible for determining whether a

student feels part of, or alienated from the two year social
work programme. The role of the supervisor in this regard
is critical. Students joining the social work programme
bring with them a high degree of enthusiasm, a deep sense
of concern, a commitment to learn and a willingness to
engage. As supervisor I have often felt myself wanting on
two counts. One, to provide a stable macro theoretical
structure located within a critical anti hegemonic position
that is organically located and contextually relevant to the
Indian reality, and two, the ability to anchor them
emotionally while at the same time opening my own self up
to them in order to deepen our relationship in learning. The
challenge is to accommodate their search and quest, to
motivate them and at every possible juncture to model
behavior that is at the same time critical yet accepting of
their life experiences, whatever their caste, class, creed and
gender. Starting from where they are rather than from
where I am has always been the key for striking and
consolidating the initial rapport developed, that in the
process goes on to establishing a strong, reliable and
trusting relationship premised on the spirit of dialogic
enquiry. However, this also calls to question the role of
supervisee. In several occasions I have unfortunately been
simply unable to connect with them and at times felt utterly
helpless. I find myself making analogies ranging from the
intellectually sophisticated to the almost nonsensically
mundane. I once stated to a supervisee whose interest

188
levels were far beyond my ability to connect, about a
statement supposedly made by a Zen master, “It is great
injustice not to dialogue with a student who is willing to
learn, but it is an utter waste of time to even try to dialogue
with one who is not yet ready to learn”.

C. Second Semester Fieldwork Supervision

Key reflections on my experience of the second semester

have led me to an understanding that the second semester
as a whole is a period of intense conflict and confusion for
students. Reasons such as a sense of incongruousness;
feeling out of place vis-à-vis social work profession,
mismatch between initial expectations and what the
programme offers, a sense of being overwhelmed and
helpless in relation to social reality and change, theoretically
dry and intellectually non stimulating, difficulty in adapting
to new situations and different pedagogical processes and
an overall pressure to locate oneself within a large group of
students from varied cultural backgrounds. There are
personal issues as well, such as career choices; students
wonder if they are cut out for the social work (referring to
content being taught), family expectations, financial needs,
having to make new friends and overall adapting to a new
environment with different sets of rules, regulation, culture
and lifestyles.

The second semester fieldwork is therefore a challenge to

the supervisor-supervisee circle, not only to deepen
understanding and make meaning but to also bring in new
perspectives and an overall intellectually stimulating
engagement. It is in such a context that the second

189
semester can be identified as a period of critical theoretical
engagement aimed at contextual deepening.

The Period of Contextual Deepening: Processes in

Supervision

I. Philosophy, Methodology and Method

I have often felt myself cornered by friends from the

discipline of philosophy on questions relating to the
epistemic premise of social work methods. Do we locate
our methods on an empiricist episteme or constructivist
episteme, or are we ‘eclectic’, if such a foundation is
epistemologically permissible. For those among us who
comes from a navayana framework it is much easier to
engage students around premise that are frame around
binary principles and ‘beyond the binary’ principles. What
is the premise of a method such as Casework, Group work,
Community Organization or Social Action. Methods
cannot exist without an epistemic base and any act that
negates the same is to fall trap to a conservative project
that negates theory in order to promote the status quo
principle. Also important within this debate are the
questions of ontological positioning that concerns
categories or categorization that captures and represents
the identity of those we work with, within the context of
action and reflection. This demands that we take a good
look at our social reality and concomitant notions that
subsumes it, for our final engagement is with such a reality,
not outside of it. Our methods are an organic product of
our reality. In our hurry to ‘do’ we have actually borrowed
formulations that are incongruous to our reality and

190
problems. The tag of being a profession that has stayed
afloat and survived depending on ‘received theories’ is a
truth we cannot deny. While engaging in the ‘dialogue
circle’ (supervisee-supervisor circle) I have felt it important
to engage on ontological and epistemological issues. This
helps clarify many ‘vague’ and even invisible areas in social
work especially related to the organic reality and its
relationship with perspectives and methods.

Following this, another core content that needs to be

expounded concerns schools of thoughts in social work or
various ideological positions as presented in Diagram 20.
Based on these perspectives deeper discussion with
supervisee on various perspectives prevailing in Indian
Social Work helps clarify ideological locations without
being theoretically parochial. The aim is to generate
awareness about every single position rather than try
convincing supervisee about the superiority one single
position. However, an anti oppressive epistemological
standpoint steadies the process of theoretical unraveling
within the ‘dialogue circle’.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Introduction to the philosophy of critical social work

methodology: the ontology-epistemology-axiology axis
(category-method-value)

• Social reality as an outflow of the self (idealist) versus

existing social reality independent of self (realist) - the
realist and anti-realist perception debate

191
• Practical engagement with and through systems,
structures, communities, groups and individuals

• Reframing, practicing and refining ones purposeful

interaction in structural work, working through
community, working through groups and working with
individuals

• The applications of social work research and process

oriented organizing / social work administration

• Introducing Schools of thought in Indian Social Work-

clarifying and locating dialogue within varied ideological
position.

II. Society and Self - Restructuring and Reorganizing

Organic Structures

The dialogue circle which constitutes of the supervisor-

supervisee relationship is a safe boundary where
restructuring and reorganizing of organic structures can
take place. With social reality and society as the
standpoint and the self as a mirror of that reality, one
could bring congruency and symmetry between belief
structures within self and structures operating in the
outside reality. There is often great resistance to this
process; however, reflecting on social work’s vision and
mission is imperative. We are a pro poor people-centered
profession whose singular mission is to struggle for the
oppressed, with the oppressed and through the
oppressed by promoting and protecting their dignity,
rights and liberty in the forward movement towards
achieving social justice and equality. To me there is no
192
 social work outside this frame. Any subversion, diversion
or revision of the profession’s vision and mission is an
act of hypocrisy and betrayal of the ideals of the
profession. We are against caste, against patriarchy,
against the dominance of one class by the other, against
exclusion of disabled, against the discrimination of
children, aged, minorities, sexualities., etc. Every single
thought, word and deed of a social worker must be
measured by its ability to achieve justice, equality and
freedom for the socially excluded and oppressed. The
emergence of the new farmes of anaylysis in social work
as presented in Diagram 20 has given the profession a
wide framework to analyse and clarify both our politics
and our change agent role.

Another very important factor in the dialogue circle of

supervisor/supervisee that should never be compromised
is the reading, comprehending and understanding of the
Constitution of India. Detail discussion of the same is
essential.

Supervisory Content and Process

• Strengthening and deepening restructured perspective

positions

• Challenging, confronting and restructuring oppressive

social structures such as caste, patriarchy, class, age,
ableism, sexism within the cultural circle

• The importance of critical analysis, linear and atomistic

thinking and the possibility of circular and inter-
relational thinking

193
• Clarifying the political domain and structures of power
in society: The Indian Constitution and its frame

III. Clarifying Methodologies of Methods (skills)

Clarification of methodology in method formulation

permits the problematization of what we sometimes take
for granted ‘as given’. There is a need to look at the various
facets and premises of a method in totality (i.e., together as
a related set) even after the same is formulated. How is
each method related to the other when conceive
holistically? What is the relation between casework,
groupwork, community organization and social action, etc?

In chapter four I have identified the various ways to see the

method formulation process under various heads. The first
way of seeing is located around the identification of clear
lines of demarcation between one method and the other in
definition that are somewhat placed in different
permutations and combinations depending on the unit of
intervention, with an inherent belief that one single method
can do without the others at any given point in time. In the
second ways of seeing the methods are located horizontally
in a spectrum next to each other within a specified context
responding to situations as it presents. The third ways of
seeing is where community becomes the context and
community organization becomes the primary method,
subsuming other methods like casework, group work, etc.,
within its framework. The fourth way of seeing is where
intervention are formulated as context so demands rather
than giving precedence to pre formulated method to

194
 respond to context.146 To bring symmetry between these
ways of approaching methods is the challenge for
educators but imperative for the learning process.

Further in this context, discussion about various aspects

related to the thinking (cognitive) process, doing (action)
process and being (here and now) is important. How one
builds each of these aspects and the demands thereof to
deepen and strengthen ‘knowing’ allows supervisee-
supervisor a less bumpy movement towards clarifying
social work’s key element- the purposeful and conscious
use of self in relationship. This is a time consuming
process. However, even a short excursion to this domain
of engagement as an introductory process is helpful. The
same should be strengthened in the second year of training.

I have also found it extremely useful to introduce to

students the concept of social work skills as detailed in
Diagram 21. Over the years I have actually begun teaching
this framework as the introductory framework to field
engagement. Students begins to expand their ways of
looking encapsulating a larger reality beyond themselves
and changing their perspective on practice. The component
on understanding social work approaches to field
engagement has also been very meaningful to students.

146 I have also reflected on these processes in another article. bodhi.s.r

(2011). "Critical Reflections on Approaches to Methods in Indian
Social Work Education", in Jharkhand Journal of Development and
Management Studies, Vol.9, No.4 (October‐December, 2011)

195
Supervisory Content and Process

• From clarifying the methodological foundations of

social work methods to identification of the methods
perspective

• Identification of varied perspectives or points-of-view

within methods as detailed in chapter four

• The skill based approach through as detailed in

Diagram 21

• Identifying specific skills in relation to context, issues in

communities, structures and systems and giving
students field based assignments like conducting a small
sample size research, write a project proposal, etc,.

• Identifying techniques and formulation of strategies

• Understanding various social work approaches used in

the field

• Delineating between Thinking, Doing and Being

• The Purposeful and conscious use of self in

relationships

IV. Attitudinal Change

Student social workers are new agents of change. The

program envisions them as agents of change rather than as
agents of control. How social work students perceive
themselves currently and how they perceive themselves in
the future depends on how clear they are about the concept

196
of ‘change agent’. The ‘change agent’ concept is a
processual realization and it is in the process of becoming,
that clarity is arrived at. As a notion, it is theoretically
attractive but also painfully elusive. It is because of this that
we must have tremendous patience while building a
forward momentum towards arriving at the ‘change agent’
in ourselves and in our trainees. At the core of the change
agent lies the unraveling of both ethics and aesthetics.
While the same must be taken into the second year of field
training, introduction of the concept in the first year begins
the deepening of self in the said realm.

In conclusion to first year fieldwork it is important to not

lose sight, stay awake and even remind ourselves at every
point in time, (so that we do not blind ourselves by
pressures of the multi faceted, multiple task demanded
from us), to the single fact that what finally drives any
process in critical social work is a personal conviction and
commitment to the cause of the oppressed, without which
we have no reason to exist. In the context of personal
goals, value orientation of personal conviction and
commitment to pro-poor perspectives is important.

Supervisory Content and Process

• The use of self as an ‘agent of change’

• The ability of self to determine change- its course,

dynamic outcome and process

• Focus on process while not undermining input -

output oriented work - Holistic learning vs. Tasked
centered learning

197
 • In the context of personal goals - value orientation in
the context of personal conviction and commitment
to pro-poor perspectives

• Introduction to the concept of aesthetics and ethics

Conclusion

The supervisor-supervisee engagement in social work

training is an essential educational activity. The gains from
the relationship are for both supervisee and supervisor.
Students joining the social work programme bring with
them a tremendous sense of commitment and a will to
learn. The role of the supervisor is to tap this potential in
students and to engage with them towards deepening their
understanding of complex Indian reality while
strengthening their commitment towards working for
structural change.

Supervision has always been an experience that is both

emotionally and intellectually exhilarating. At the
culmination of one year of critical fieldwork training,
supervisees should be able at threshold level, to understand
how to make use of existing and potential networks to
challenge and confront discrimination and social exclusion
based on caste, class, gender, religion, ability and tribe.
They should be able to comprehend and understand the
importance and impact that personal values, principles and
ideological lenses can have on practice. They should also be
able to identify skill sets required to work within and with
organizations, together with the balance of influence,
power and resources of organizations - while working with

198
and through people. It is also important to deepen their
understanding and apply and observe the use of various
methods of challenging through practice, discrimination,
exclusion and social disadvantage. Finally they should be
able to apply theoretical knowledge of social justice to
practice with discriminated identities and groups which
include dalits, tribes, women, poor, children, elderly,
differently-able and religious minorities.

Within the current Indian context, the need for a

structurally conscious training in social work education is
imperative. For social work education in India to become
efficacious, it needs to reposition its perspective and
theoretical base, and incorporate methodologies that are
congruent to the Indian reality. The formulation must
however accept a great degree of social diversity and
complex political heterogeneity that the Indian reality
presents.

Fieldwork supervision in such a context is a challenging

task. It should stay theoretically abreast and in symmetry
with the latest theoretical formulations in other disciplines
within the sciences, social sciences and humanities and
have the inert capability to reposition critical content within
the boundaries of dynamic political economic processes
and macro structural change.

199
 Chapter VIII

Upekkha Reflections on an Interview in

Retrospect
A Discipline that silences its rebels has gained its peace. But it has
lost its future:A:nonymous

Over the years I have given a number of interviews on

curriculum development related to Dalit and Tribal Social
Work (DTSW). In some of the interviews I tried to clarify
the history and evolution of DTSW and in another I shared
the basic theoretical framework of DTSW. There is also
one interview that I gave to an international social work
magazine from Finland where I tried to explain the Dalit
and Tribal realities in India and the social work response to
the same.

Since its inception in early 2003, the idea of DTSW has

developed further, both in theory and practice, nonetheless
as on 2019 the idea remains confined to a few educators
and institutes. The issues of tribes and of dalits especially,
create subtle tremors among social work educators because
of the historio-philosophical nature of its theoretical
content and the politico-historical positionality of its
perspective. Right up till 2019, not many social work
educators and social work institutes were willing to openly
engage with the DTSW.

I remember in 2003 when the then Director of the TISS –

R.R.Singh opened the forum for an open discussion and
debate about social work education and the need to ‘think

200
out of the box’, the issues about Dalits and Tribes was an
extremely difficult issue to even mentioned. After
S.Parasuraman became Director and the restructuring of
the TISS was taken up in right earnest, some of us from the
Dalit and Tribal communities made an open request to him
that the issues of Dalits and Tribes must be mainstreamed
and brought to the center of the TISS curriculum. There
was a collective agreement among many colleagues, even
outside the ST/ST communities who shared the same
sentiment. Based on this collective wisdom and assertion
the DTSW was born.

Since 2006 when it became a programme in TISS, many

processes have taken place that could be documented for
history’s sake, plus for the theoretical value it upholds for
social work education. But I have not been able to
document all these processes. However two key
interventions I wish to state that are fundamental to the
carving out of the DTSW, first as a domain of study and
secondly as a field of practice.

In 2012, together with my colleagues, we launched the

Indian Journal of Dalit and Tribal Social Work. Then in
2013 we launched another journal in the name of the
programme offered in TISS called the Indian Journal of
Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action. Both these journals,
which are owned by a academic group - the Tribal
Intellectual Collective India, have survived to this day. Most
of the articles in the journals are contributed by colleagues,
alumni and practitioners in the field of Dalit and Tribal
empowerment. The experience of running a journal is
another interesting story to tell, but I will leave it for

201
another time. Suffice to say that the introduction of these
journals was a major boost to the programme since it
provided not only a theoretical base but also brought in
many more educators and practitioners to deepen and
enrich the thinking process further.

In the light of the same, I thought it judicious for me to

include in this book one such text, an interview that I gave
in the year 2012 to Mr.Nilesh Kumar Thool who was a
DTSW alumnus. The interview concerned mainly the
history and evolution of Dalit and Tribal Social Work as an
idea. This interview was published in the Indian Journal of
Dalit and Tribal Social Work in its December 2012 issue.
Although in retrospect there would have been many more
insights and interventions that I can now provide, I have
left the text as it is with a few minor corrections. Research
scholars and my students will find the interview enriching,
as it gives them a peep into the thinking process that went
into the development of DTSW.

The 2012 interview was as follows:

Q (Question). You were the coordinator of Dalit and Tribal Social

Work (DTSW) since 2006 and one of the key people who helped
facilitate the programme content of the Masters in Dalit and Tribal
Studies and Action. Tell us about the DTSW course content followed
by the course content of the M.A. in Dalit and Tribal Studies and
Action?

Ans (Answer). DTSW, anchored by the Centre for Social

Justice and Governance in the School of Social Work,
started as a concentration in Social Work in 2006. It initially
comprised of six courses and ten weeks of fieldwork spread
202
over two semesters in the second year of the M.A. Social
Work programme. Till 2012 DTSW constituted of seven
courses, i.e., Dalit and Tribal Social Work – Issues and
Perspectives; Political Economy of Dalit Development;
Political Sociology of Tribes; Advanced Practice Skills in
Dalit and Tribal Development; Innovative Intervention in
Dalit and Tribal Empowerment; Rural, Rurality, Caste and
Tribe (added in 2009) and a Seminar Paper in Dalit and
Tribal Issues.

A concentration was optional i.e., students were allowed to

choose a concentration at the end of the first year. We saw
a steady growth of students opting for DTSW over the past
six years. In the first year we had 18 students out of the
total student strength of 119. In the following year we had
21 students, then 26/126, 19/119, 35/140, 36/162 and, in
2012 we have 37 students out of total student strength of
168 and three international students.

The last time I gave an interview on a similar topic I

mentioned that plans were afoot to begin an M.A. in Dalit
and Tribal Studies and Action. Now, the idea has come
alive and the course has begun with the admission of 25
students. Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action is an intense,
theoretically engaging academic programme premised
within a Dalit and Tribal Episteme. It is located within Anti
Oppressive Social Work and articulates bottom up,
indigenous perspectives under the rubric of Dalit and
Tribal Social Work. The programme follows a meta-
discipline approach to knowledge acquisition and brings
within its theoretical ambit subjects such as Ontology,
Epistemology, Ethics and Aesthetics, Social and Political

203
Philosophy and Dalit and Tribal Science. The course begins
with an experiential engagement with Dalit and Tribal
epistemology coupled with an added seven day stay in
Indian villages. We have a total of 13 courses totaling 26
credits, plus 6 credits for research and 24 credits for
fieldwork out of a total 78 credit Masters programme. The
courses we offer are (1) Rural, Rurality, Caste and Tribes,
(2) Political Theory for Critical Social Work (3) Term paper
on Dalit and Tribal Studies (4) Dalit and Tribal Social
Work: Perspective and Concepts (5) Political Economy,
development and Dalits (6) Caste, State and Politics in
South Asia (7) Tribe, State and Governance (8)
International Social Work and Indigenous People (9)
Advanced Dalit and Tribal Social Work Practice Skills (10)
Law, Justice and Democratic Rights (11) Tribal and Dalit
Movements: Theory and Practice (12) Social Policy,
Government and Governance (13) Social Entrepreneurship
among Dalits and Tribes. An extra course on Project
Planning and Management is also offered.

Q. Tell us about the origins of DTSW – about the social analysis

that went into conceptualizing such a concentration within the
discipline of Social Work. Also elucidate as to why the categories
‘dalit’ and ‘tribe’ have been used in this conceptualization.

Ans : It was during the restructuring of the Social Work

programme at TISS in the year 2005 that DTSW came
about. While trying to match the external reality with our
internal programmes we found that one of the most
persistent factors that kept on recurring and defining the
external environment of our reality, which is Dalits and
Tribes, was constantly missing in our internal curriculum

204
content. It was as though caste and tribe (especially caste)
was an invisible reality in social work education; and
seemed to have warranted no response from social work
education for 70 years. On this count, most of us who were
working on issues related to Dalits and Tribes argued for a
more comprehensive response to these realities.

From then on we worked on the rationale of the

concentration. In the context of caste, it was easy to
formulate as there were already writings on the subject. On
anti-caste social work, the first theoretical formulation in
social work education, positioned within such an episteme
was articulated by A.Ramaiah (1998) in his article The
Plight of Dalits: A Challenge to Social Work Profession.
Professor Ramaiah castigated Indian professional Social
Work for ignoring caste and argued that most professional
social workers were caste-blind and inherently caste
prejudiced. He suggested that the first thing that
professional social workers need to seriously consider
doing is to de-caste themselves. He went on to state that no
social work practice paradigm could contribute
meaningfully and make any real dent on the marginalized
till the same is first accomplished. We have formulated
Anti-Caste social work which is the epistemological
premise of Dalit Social Work, and have positioned the
same as a theoretical position that challenges the structure
of graded inequality, based on purity and pollution (that is
closely linked to caste and descent) and proposed a social
work practice (both perspective and theory-practice) that
challenges the system that dehumanizes people.

205
Having stated the same, let me clarify why the category
‘Dalit’ was used. Am aware of other categories such as
mulnivasi for instance, but we thought it judicious to stay
with the Dalit category. On this debate I will refer to Gopal
Guru. I think Gopal Guru’s article Understanding the
category Dalit gave us an incisive and comprehensive
analysis of the category. Let me quote Guru – he argues
that in contemporary Dalit Politics, the category of ‘Dalit’
has become a part of the national and global, political as
well as academic agenda and has found articulation across
different socio-cultural situations. The category Dalit was
used by no less a person than Dr. Ambedkar himself in his
fortnightly publication Bahishkrut Bharat. The term Dalit
was defined by him in a comprehensive way. He says,
“Dalithood is a kind of life condition that characterizes the
exploitation, suppression and marginalization of Dalit
people by the social, economic, cultural and political
domination of the castes’ Brahmanical ideology”. While
addressing his own social constituency he used the term
‘Pad Dalit’ meaning those who are crushed under the feet
of the Hindu system. Further, Guru argues that the
category Dalit is not a metaphysical construction, but
derives its epistemic and political strength through the
material social experience. This social construction of
Dalithood makes itself more authentic and dynamic rather
passive or rigid. The category Dalit takes ideological
assistance from Buddha, Phule, Marx and Ambedkar and in
the process becomes man centred rather than God centred;
as the Gandhian connotation of ‘Harijan’ does. The
category Dalit, in fact; promotes both the cognitive and

206
emotional response of the collective subjects to the
immediate life world and its reconstruction.

Coming back to the formulation of Anti Caste Social Work,

there are examples of similar formulations across the world
especially from the United Kingdom and Canada against
domineering discriminating systems. I think the most
widely acknowledged is Anti Racist Social Work by Lena
Dominelli, (1994). She defines anti-racist practice as
focusing on “transforming the unequal social relations
shaping social interaction between black and white people
into egalitarian ones”. Dominelli insists that change must
happen at both personal and institutional levels and that
“individual conduct in inter-personal relations and the
allocation of power and resources in society have got to be
transformed if racism is to be eliminated”. Other examples
of the same are Feminist Social Work, Black Social Work,
etc.

With regards to the formulation of Tribal Social Work,

although there has been a long history of the profession’s
response to the plight of tribes, especially from Gandhians,
our formulation took into consideration the current
situation of Tribal peoples in the country. All of us know
that the indigenous and tribal people/communities are
encountered with an insurmountable crisis, hardly ever
witnessed before. The problem in tribal areas today is
grave. We are witness to an outright violent confrontation
in some geographical pockets, while in some areas there are
mass movements led either by tribes themselves or by
political formations of various ideological shades with the
tribal question at its core. While some of the contestations

207
are positioned against the State, others are resistance
movements aiming to protect and preserve tribal
communities. On one hand, there are forces of assimilation,
mainstreaming or co-option, operating on them at a rapid
and massive scale. On the other hand is the massive
deployment of state forces to facilitate their ‘willing
acceptance’ of the indomitable ‘nation state’ – premised in
a frame of integration, inclusion or affiliation which is
coupled with an understated and hidden neo-liberal agenda,
compelling them to operate within the Nation State’s
bounded, autonomous and rigid political boundaries.
Squeezed between these determined alternating resolute
forces, closing in from all ends, are the varied 700
recognized ‘Scheduled Tribes’, who have responded
differently to each of these forces, operating individually
and in combination. While some of their responses have
been within the realm of the socio-religious and socio-
cultural, some have been within the socio-political and
politico-economic domain. Interestingly, central to the
formulation and articulation of these organic tribal
resistances, is the overt, yet subtle, pulsating endogenous
need to differentiate them from the ‘other’ and to protect
and preserve their critical geopolitical and social spaces,
with respect to their territory, culture and politics.

Our formulation also took into consideration processes and

debates generated by the National Tribal Policy. In 2005
(the period of restructuring at TISS), debates surrounding
the Draft Policy document of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs
were very much alive. A number of discussions were held
at TISS on the said subject. For a long time tribes was

208
either seen as backward or isolated groups that needed to
be assimilated into the ‘mainstream’. We formulated Tribe
Centered Social Work as an organic process of working
‘with’ and ‘through’ tribes, which accept the relevance and
efficacy of endogenous methodologies as having the
capability to explain, protect and promote tribes. The first
comprehensive article arguing for the same was Interface
between State, Voluntary Organizations and Tribes: A
Perspective towards Tribe-Centered Social Work Practice
published by Akhup (2009). Currently we have moved from
Tribe Centered Social Work to Tribal Social Work. Tribe
Centered connotes a notion of tribe being a target group
locked in a hierarchy with those who wish to intervene.
There is an element of paternalism embedded in the
formulation. Tribal Social Work on the other hand refers to
Tribes as an epistemological community. The notion of
epistemological community is premised on community
rather than individuals and argues that community is both,
the generator and repository of knowledge. Theorization
includes lived and shared experience, observations and
reflections – leading to generalization and application that
stay close to the narratives of tribal people.

Q. But why did you use the category tribe specifically rather than
Adivasi?

Ans : ‘Tribe’ is still a useful and powerful category to

engage with reality. Over time, while some categories often
flatten, become stale and lose much of their representative
ability and analytic rigor, some categories go through an
increase in their heuristic value and overall usage. The value
of a category, in this case, tribe, is greatly determined by

209
perpetual critical contestations of varied perspectives;
allowing for new ways of seeing, meaning and
interpretation. In this context, however pejorative the term
tribe may have been, it still explains a history and sociology
of many very different societies in our country. Its political
usage is still in vogue in the Indian context.

The meaning of the category ‘tribe’ has come a long way

since the British colonial conception that generally meant
backward and uncivilized in an upward historical scale of
culturo-economic development. A tribe, in those days,
referred to a simple, illiterate and backward community
who will in time, as change takes place, become more
complex and advanced, thereby losing its tribal-ness.
Enactment of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act
and the Scheduled Areas Act (1873-74) pertained to special
instruments to govern such societies. By 1919 conceptions
such as ‘backward tracts’ and ‘unadministered areas’ were
articulated. All these referred to tribes inhabiting such
geographies in a manner as articulated above. G.S. Ghurye
and Verrier Elwin who were locked in fierce debate on the
tribal question from the 1940s to the 60s perceived tribes as
either Backward Hindus or as ‘special communities to be
isolated’ and later as a Kshatriya caste respectively. Well
known academics in Tribal studies, S.C. Roy and N.K.
Bose, identified tribes more in terms of cultural markers
and thereby locking tribe as a culturo historical category. D.
N. Majumdar in 1958 argued for a ‘tribe in transition’ sort
of conception (later challenged by Andre Beteille in 1986).
During the 1950s, we had at one end the Nehruvian
conception as articulated in his Panchsheel for Tribal

210
development – celebrating the concept of ‘own genius’,
‘rights to land and forest’, ‘endogenous development with
minimal outside interference’, ‘no over-administration and
development in consonance with tribal social and cultural
institutions’, and ‘stress on human character rather than
statistical results’. On the other hand, (beginning with)
Census 1931, followed by the Kalelkar Commission 1955,
Lokur Committee 1965 and Chanda Committee 1969,
identified markers such as primitiveness and backwardness,
distinctive culture, geographical isolation and having
shyness of contact with communities at large, as the
defining criteria for ‘tribe’. This was the general
understanding prevailing during those times. Whatever be
the conception, one cannot but see an element of
paternalism embedded in the same. The voice of the people
coming from tribal communities was fragmented. While
Jaipal Singh Munda preferred the category Adivasi, others
like Nichols-Roy were okay with the category ‘tribe’.
Babasaheb Dr.B.R.Ambedkar who initially used the term
‘aborigines’ was caught in the middle of this categorical
battle with Jaipal Singh, having first to find a category that
was acceptable to all communities that were to be
recognized constitutionally and thus ‘scheduled’, while at
the same time having to manage the venom being spewed
by dominant upper caste groups, against these ‘to be
scheduled communities’ by individuals who disliked him
personally and were dead against his attempts to establish
and insert strict protective mechanism for such
communities. Interestingly, in the late 1960s, the
movements emerging from the ultra left did give a very
interesting theoretical twist to the category ‘tribe’. But let

211
me go there a little later. Beginning from the 1970s, the
category ‘tribe’ has exploded in terms of what it means and
refers to. We read K. S. Singh who studied tribal
movements and referred to tribes as an ethnic group
engaging in ethnicity – using their identity to mobilize
themselves within a particular context to usher betterment
and change for themselves. Singh did not differ too much
from Majumdar’s conception of ‘tribe in transition’ but
brought in the element of ethnicity and distinctiveness
forcefully – which in my opinion has done great service to
the understanding of tribes. There are many more
sociologists and anthropologists, like S. C. Dube and L .P.
Vidyarthi who have contributed immensely to the tribal
debate. Another important person in Tribal studies is
Jagannath Pathy. Pathy initially referred to tribes as an
ethnic minority in his 1988 book Ethnic Minorities in the
Process of Development, this created a furor, and later
conceived ‘tribes’ as an identity located within political
economy. For Pathy, tribes were subjects of history with
their own political space and cognitive specificity. He
defined them as historically evolved societies, biologically
self-perpetuating with common cultural features,
subordinated in several ways to dominant society and for
long, engaged in struggles to preserve and promote their
distinguishable features as well as territorial survival
resources. Other people from the Left, like A. B. Bardhan
and Archana Prasad have also written interesting pieces on
the tribal question. I still remember Bardhan’s 1973
definition of tribes as being a single, endogenous socio-
political entity with a cultural and psychological make-up of
a community at a definite historical stage of development.

212
In 1986, Andre Beteille challenging Majumdar’s ‘tribe in
transition’ formulation, articulated ‘tribe’ as a historical
necessity locked in a hierarchical accident with caste based
civilization within a coexistence framework. This
conception is referred time and again among us in Tribal
Studies, more so because of an interesting approach that
Beteille argued for. He called it the historical approach,
which in his words emphasized ‘coexistence’ as compared
to earlier writing that were condemned to an evolutionary
approach which emphasized ‘succession’. Then there are
sociological and anthropological stalwarts such as T. K.
Oomen and B. K. Roy Burman arguing for tribes as ‘nation
and nationalities’. All of these conceptions held sway till the
writings of Virginius Xaxa emerged. In the post Xaxa phase
within tribal studies, by ‘tribe’ we mean not only a socio
cultural entity existing in time and space but a culturo
political entity perceived vertically, and a politico historical
entity located horizontally in time and space. As much as
tribe is a socio cultural entity, it is also a political unit, a
nation, in and by itself. It is neither a caste, nor a peasant
group and neither is it a stratified grouping which in due
course of time will lose its sense of nationhood in the sea
of greater traditions. However, for the Indian state, ‘tribe’
still remains only a politico administrative category. Dr. B.
D. Sharma gave us interesting insights into this kind of a
conception in his book Tribal Affairs in India: the Crucial
Transition. There are very many more interesting debates
but not much has changed.

In my opinion things will not remain so simple anymore

with the appropriation of the tribal category by the ultra left

213
forces in the country. I have observed a radicalization of
the tribal category to such an extent that it would be
difficult for the state not to take note of. There is a very
interesting intersection between the semi colonial, semi
feudal conception of the nature of the India state by ultra
leftist groups and the organic process of tribal resistance
against the ‘other’, in various regions that tribal inhabit. It is
on this politico-historical intersection, that the ultra left and
the tribes seem to meet vis-à-vis the Indian state. It is sad
for the tribes as they are being taken for a ride by the ultra
left and I am of the opinion that the ultra left is riding piggy
back on the tribes on this count. Their basic agenda is to
overthrow the state and to probably replace the same by a
so called ‘egalitarian communist structure’. For us tribes, all
we want is a state that is humane enough to respect our
claims to our lands, waters and forests and treat us with
dignity and respect. With the exception of a few tribal
movements, most of our struggles are only to humanize the
state and to make it listen to our pleas. To make it pay heed
to our historical right, nothing more than that. You know,
from my own experience I do not think that most tribal
communities envisaged their politics as wanting to move
out of ‘India’. They are a few who undeniably demand for a
separate nation, but their demands have to be understood
in the right historical context and perspective. Many tribes,
even those in the North East, have seen the plight and
treatment of similar groups in neighboring countries like
Bangladesh, Myanmar and China. I do not think any tribal
community with the exception of a few would want to
venture out of the confines of the Indian State. Even tribes
in Chottanagpur, and I have spoken to a number of friends

214
and activists on this issue. Am not wrong to assert that all
they are asking for are basic rights to land, water and
forests and dignified treatment and respect for their life and
culture by the state. I do not think that is too much to ask
for considering the history of our indigenous existence and
how we came to be part of the Indian state. It is historical
injustice done to the tribes if such an analysis is not taken
into consideration. Some of us wonder why this very state
that promised us constitutional safeguards to be part of it
right from the days of independence, is unleashing such
brutalities – not even considering us human enough to seek
our consent on matters pertaining to our lives. I mean, ok,
we are locked and accepted within a very different notion
of citizenship in the country as there are a number of
protective, promotive and preservative mechanisms
guaranteed to us within the frame of the constitution and
we are different to other citizens on that count. Now does
that make us lesser human? And if the case is that you
perceive us so, then at least don’t rob us of our humanity
so totally that we are bereft of anything that we have
considered dear for generations such as our relationship to
land, water and the forest. With every passing day it is
becoming more complex especially with the role that
capitalist forces are playing. While we are willing to partake
in the game of capital, some neoliberal forces are simply
disrespectful and antithetical to our worldview and
lifeworld. But yes, am aware of the basic historical facts
about capital. Capital does not know or care for tribal
values neither does it care for any rules. The situation is
complex, but whatever be the case, tribes are as much
Indians as anyone else and peace loving loyal citizens too.

215
We need the state to listen to us and to side with us on
matters related to our lives as enshrined and promised to us
in the constitution of the country.

Let me turn back to social work education. For us the

purpose of a category is not only to define a context
precisely, but also to facilitate the drawing of clear
boundaries that would allow an abstract delineation for
informed action and reflection. It is within such a
framework that we have used the category tribe and not
any other category although i must say that my colleagues
and I are deeply embedded and connected to the adivasi
category.

Across the world the emergence of a similar frame known

as Aboriginal Social Work is widely acknowledged.
Individuals like McKenzie and Morrissette (1983) as cited
in Campbell, C. (2003) contend that an “Aboriginal (Social
Work) framework of practice rests on four key principles:
The recognition of a distinct Aboriginal world view; the
development of Aboriginal consciousness about the impact
of colonialism; cultural knowledge and traditions as an
active component of retaining Aboriginal identity and
collective consciousness; and empowerment as a method of
practice”. They also distinguish between culturally sensitive
and culturally appropriate practice stating that “while
culturally sensitive service advances awareness of issues in
the Aboriginal community in the context of involvement
with an ethnic minority, culturally appropriate service
integrates core Aboriginal values, beliefs, and healing
practices in program delivery”.

216
Q. How does DTSW conceive social work education and practice?

Ans : For us DTSW is a perspective, a way of doing, an

analytical framework, a ‘method’, an attitude and an
approach with a tightly knit sense of ethical values, morality
and responsibility to the most oppressed communities of
our country. Ours is a programme that has come about
from an in-depth analysis and understanding of the
overarching and defining Indian reality and the demands
that the historically oppressed peoples have made on our
profession. Contemporary social work practice needs
immediate reformulation. The old traditional school does
not seem to have the capability for a truthful introspection
into the problems that plague the profession or even the
courage to face the truth about this country. As a
profession we have brushed aside issues that need to be
confronted and challenged. A friend of mine told me about
a poet from Andhra Pradesh who wrote an amazing line.
The poet stated “we are the soldiers but we are the
battlefield too”. The biggest struggle that should be waged
by Indian social workers is the battle against ourselves,
against our elitist nature and attitude, our insensitivity to
historically oppressed groups, our weakness in analyzing
and comprehending structural problems, our own personal
location in structure, our over- reliance on received theory
from Europe and North America, our total lack of organic
attachment to our own reality, our inability to formulate
efficacious response to systemic and structural oppression
etc. The battle is directed at us, we are the biggest
battlefield.

217
Now, going back to the first part of your question, a quick
scan of social work programmes and content across India
shows that there exists a great degree of variation in
courses that are offered. Some of the programmes rely
heavily on teaching ‘methods’ while some thrust their
content on contextual analysis. Certain Social Work schools
like TISS still teach Methods in the way it was taught in the
1950s and 1960s; Casework, Groupwork, Community
Organization, etc. To DTSW these old ways of formulating
Methods are not only outdated but irrelevant. Methods are
not only a comprehensive skill set contained in the same,
understood as a way of doing, but also a way of seeing
(perspective) and a way of analyzing context (contextual). I
have dwelt on the subject at length in an article on
approaches to methods published in the Jharkhand Journal
of Development and Management, XISS, Ranchi and also
in an interview I gave to Ms. Sruthi Herbert published in
Acumen, Marian Journal of Social Work. In short I argued
for a contextual approach which presupposes the
probability of the existence of ‘Methods’ but it is not
imperative to identify them since Methods are not
absolutes and only come into play in a certain context. In
this formulation, it was argued that the context takes
precedence over ‘a single procedure or way of doing
something in a regular, systematic and orderly planned
manner’. This approach lends itself to a conceptualization
that one could view the context from any ‘way of seeing’
and ‘doing’ while proceeding towards analyzing, defining
fields of practice & practice skills. Analysis takes
precedence over doing as one has first to arrive at a
thorough understanding of the contextual reality before

218
acting in reality. Many educators professing this view are
critical of the concept of identifying compact
methodologies in social work. They believe that ‘methods’
are water tight compartments and rigid theorization of
processes that are false conceptualizations of an ever
changing dynamic social reality. Such a classification
(individual, groups, community), these educators believe,
does not really exist because, they argue, that ‘everything is’
and ‘everything is not’ at every moment. These educators
argue that it is only the contextual reality that should define
the intervention. They cite experiential evidence to
substantiate their position arguing that the moment one
approaches an issue from a Method standpoint; the context
tends to get overshadowed by the Method and in the
process, the context is unconsciously nudged to the
background, recedes and fades into oblivion only to
reassert back when intervention is not producing the
desired outcome. Time and again I have heard educators
within this viewpoint arguing that social work needs to
transcend Methods. This, they argue, is in order not to get
lost in a ‘world of Methods’ trying to formulate and make
sense about a preconceived and pre-formulated ‘doing’
even before comprehending theoretically an ever changing
radically unpredictable and untidy reality. Methods more
than anything else, hinder the process of intervention, as
they play middlemen between the social worker and
context. I believe that there is a need to move beyond the
methods approach and plunge directly into social reality
through the identification of a context skill matrix emerging
from the analysis of sites of practices and the identification
of units of intervention leading to action and change. The

219
other three approaches which I contested were identified as
the Hierarchy approach, which cannot conceive of a social
work practice outside of Methods; the Spectrum approach,
which conceives of Methods as located in a continuum and
the Organic Approach, which presupposes the notion of
‘community organization’ as the primary method
subsuming all other sub methods like casework,
groupwork, etc.

In my opinion there is weakness for structural analysis in

social work. This has had detrimental effects on social work
education, a product of which is our ‘caste blindness’ and a
pejorative understanding of tribes in both our teaching
content and perspective building. Prof. Ramaiah has stated
the same in the article I cited earlier. I might be wrong on
this one point but from what I know I think TISS is
probably the only institute in the country that offers
courses related to Dalits in the form of Dalit Social Work.
But I must state here that DTSW has not come as a gift
from anyone but is a result of the struggles of a very few
critical workers. Till today there is a resistance from
Traditionalists. Like always, their argument is that there is
only one social work (which is defined by them) and
anything different is a subversive act that will lead to a
fragmentation of social work. They simply cannot tolerate
or appreciate difference and have least ability for self
introspection at least in the context of the realities of the
country. You know, across social work schools in the
country the issues of Dalits are barely visible. It is only on
rare occasions that one gets to hear about the plight of
Dalits in the corridors of social work schools – from

220
educators and students alike; and you know all this in a
country where historical oppression experienced and
witnessed had dehumanized fellow human beings to a state
of untouchability. For a profession that claims social
justice, equality and human rights as its cornerstone, the
invisibility of the Dalit category and concomitant
engagement against caste oppression in our social work
training content is preposterous. Indian Social Work
education is characterized by a ubiquitous blindness to the
caste reality vis-a-vis Dalit reality. Many educators have
preferred to bury the caste phenomena as some system of a
bygone era, long dead and gone whilst passing nondescript
comments from time to time to score ethical brownie
points and project an overt image of sensitivity to the cause
of the marginalized. Reasons for caste blindness are not
hard to find. It is an open secret that majority of Social
Work Educators in India come from upper caste
communities – their world view dominates and is deeply
entrenched in social work education and at times, is
nothing less than all-encompassing. The very few critical
social work educators use this fact to point out the
hypocrisy of the ‘Caste Blind Traditionalist’ school in social
work. Notwithstanding the same, of late, critical
articulations have become far more explicit within social
work teaching content. It is in this context that one must
view DTSW. As an alternative discourse DTSW is deeply
entrenched in the Indian reality. DTSW has endogenous
roots and deep organic linkage to the Indian social reality
emerging from Dalit realities themselves which are mainly
attributed to their critical and aggressive conceptual
deconstruction of the notion of ‘Caste Hierarchy’ and the

221
historical brutality it has unleashed upon the masses of the
country. Further, pertaining to the hold that caste has had
and still have on the Indian social, political and economic
reality, this has led the oppressed to confront structures
that exclude and oppress them. In the same breath, while
tribe does not ruffle feathers too much within social work
education, it is deeply embedded within a paternalistic
frame.

Q. What has been the response from students and the academic
community as well as field practitioners to Dalit and Tribal Social
Work?

Ans : Well, among universities that steadfastly profess to

engage in education for social transformation, I think the
Tata Institute of Social Sciences is definitely a pioneer. New
ideas, especially those that are for the empowerment of
marginalized peoples within the ambit of our Constitution,
are greatly encouraged and nurtured. The Institute’s Vision
and Mission clearly states this and most of us work towards
realizing this goal. However, tension prevails when it comes
to caste and Dalits. The issue of Tribes creates lesser
ripples compared to the Dalit question. This is felt among
Faculty and even more among students. The overall
response from the academic community has been positive.
But the social work fraternity is yet to digest the very idea
that there can even be something like a Dalit and Tribal
Social Work. I’ve had a number of acrimonious debates
with social work educators on this count. The fact of the
matter is that most of the educators who resent the idea of
a DTSW come from the higher echelons of the caste
hierarchy. It is natural that one, who is not restricted by the

222
caste system, nor suffer the pains of its reality, will find it
difficult to even begin to comprehend the same. I think
Paulo Freire is correct in arguing that this is because “it
would be naive to think that the dominant classes will
create a form of education that allows the dominated
classes critically to perceive social injustices”.

Dalit and Tribal organizations on the other hand have

welcomed this breakthrough positively. Most people and
groups working on Dalit and Tribal empowerment have
often told me that till DTSW came, they were not able to
connect or make sense of professional social work. Some
of them go to the extent of perceiving professional social
work as an upper caste activity formulated by themselves
for themselves, in the name of the marginalized other. Let
me not elaborate further on this point. The truth about
professional social work, especially the borrowed traditional
kind, is out in the open for all to see. However, within the
social work sorority things are changing a bit, there is a
strong emerging resentment against traditional social work.
Educators are starting to see the lethal consequences that
traditional social work has had for social work practice in
India. There is increasing demands on social work schools
to shed the traditionalist and elitist nature of its practice
and engage more truthfully with fundamental socio-
political-economic issues that dictate the reality of India. In
this regard the direction for social work education and its
educators in India is clear – that the profession, as a whole,
must challenge the notion that social workers are agents of
control (hand in glove with all those who oppresses) and
reclaim our role as agents of change.

223
Q. Are any other schools of social work contemplating on starting a
similar course?

Ans : I have seen the Karve Institute of Social Service

taking up a similar conception at a seminar. At the
International Seminar to celebrate their Golden Jubilee,
Dalit and Tribal Social Work was one of the sub themes for
discussions. Some of us are also trying to create academic
platforms for social workers interested in publishing their
work and analysis in journals. DTSW in social work
programmes is an idea whose time has come. It would be
hard for professional social work to resist the idea if they
wish to become relevant to the Indian reality and its
concrete conditions. In my opinion the current traditional
social work content dominates social work programmes
across the 270 plus social work institutes in the country –
caste and tribe is invisible.

Q. Why did you not name it MA in Dalit and Tribal Social Work
instead of Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action?

Ans : There were many processes that where shaping up

when Masters programmes were formulated and sent to the
Academic Council. There were many who were against the
idea of a Dalit and Tribal Social Work and I know many
still are. We did propose the Master’s programme to be
named as Dalit and Tribal Social Work but the arguments
given by those who disagreed was that there is only one
social work, and the idea that in a single school of social
work there can be programmes named differently would
tantamount to saying that social work is not united and
would lead to the fragmentation of social work. Let me

224
leave the details of further arguments there and not tell you
more as I would be ruffling feathers unnecessarily.
However, I will state that I do not agree with the argument
given. This argument that there is only one social work is a
traditional conservative argument within the profession by
people who see the emergence of other schools of thought
in social work as subversive and a challenge to their
historical grip. Now that the programme is called M.A. in
Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action, we are able to bring in
massive content from Dalit and Tribal Studies into our
curriculum, coupled with a thrust on Action that is directly
related to the empowerment of these two socially
constituted and historically invisible identities. This way the
programme has become far more theoretically
sophisticated, and in tune with both the best in the social
science and critical social work.

Q. Can you tell us how do you organize field work for the MA
programme?

Ans : My responsibilities over the past five years have been

three fold (i) to coordinate the teaching programme (ii) to
coordinate fieldwork placement of students with various
fieldwork organizations across the country which includes
monitoring and evaluation of fieldwork and (iii) to work
towards quality control of both teaching content and
fieldwork processes. Regarding fieldwork, we have specific
organizations working on Dalit and Tribal issues which are
recognized by the Institute as official fieldwork agencies.
They provide field engagement opportunities for our
students and also take part in the evaluation process of
students. The number of fieldwork agencies working on

225
Dalit and Tribal issues has grown from an initial nine
agencies to twenty four agencies. Students are placed for
fieldwork for a period of five weeks (blocks) from end
August till end September in the third semester and for
another block period from mid November to mid
December in the fourth semester. We have in place a
different system for fieldwork. We train our students in
various other skills such as Community Radio and other
related skills. Our students have to also complete all tasks
assigned by the agency to them. At the end of each
placement our field supervisors from the agency evaluate
our students based on specified criteria. Each student has
to complete writing a Personal Placement Diary and a
Summary of Practice; to be submitted for their final
semester evaluation by their fieldwork supervisor at the
Institute. In the fourth semester students would have to
also submit a publishable article (at the level of a working
paper) based on their field experience on a specific issue
and defend the same in a viva as part of the final evaluation
process at the Institute.

Together with the above practice skills imparted to

students, the concentration’s main thrust is on student’s
ability to critically engage in an in-depth structural analysis
of the Indian social reality. We invest special efforts to
inform our students about indigenous frameworks and
debates rooted in the reality of our country. Dr.
Ambedkar’s writing is a compulsory reading in the
concentration. We pay special attention to the lives and
contribution of indigenous thinkers in their emancipatory
efforts against caste oppression, tribal empowerment and

226
inclusive development processes. The core theoretical
contents encompass history of the world, modern Indian
history; political sociology; contemporary political theory;
political economy; law, justice and democratic rights,
subsumed within an Dalit and a Tribal Social Work
paradigm.

Students are placed for a period of two months over two

semesters in Dalit and Tribal People’s movements across
the country, non government organizations and
international organizations such as International Labour
Organization, Action Aid, etc. Students can also opt to
work on specific self chosen themes under the guidance of
a faculty member. Till date students have chosen to work
on; Seed Rights, Tribal Rights, Tribal Art and Craft with
development workers and communities in Northeast, Land
and displacement with activists in Odisha and Jharkhand,
Indigenous culture and media with communities in Andhra
Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Manipur.

The programme also has a compulsory research

component organized in a very comprehensive manner by
faculty in-charge. The research component engages deeply
with subjects of ontology, epistemology, logic, axiology and
a range of research designs such as Narrative,
Phenomenological, Ethnography, Case study, Survey,
Policy and Participatory Action Research.

Q. From your own personal experience, what is the current debates

pertaining to social work curriculum?

Ans : There are six debates that are becoming stark at this
juncture of social work education. (1) is there anything like
227
a ‘core’ of social work (2) what are methods – does
methods define our practice or does context determine our
skills (3) what is indigenous social work; do we have a
specific Indian social work (4) does the Indian reality
demand a generic or specialization formulation of our M.A.
programmes (5) our we welfare practitioners, NGO
workers, charity workers or social activists (6) and finally
are we agents of control or agents of change, meaning what
is our political ideological position? I have been thinking a
lot on this issue, and I must tell you that among social
workers and within the social work profession, if there is
anything called a core in social work, it is our value system.
This is what brings us together and also probably ties us
together. We might not practice our values as we preach it,
but at least we do profess similar values overtly. Other than
that I do not think there is anything else which is core. The
‘methods’ are definitely not the core of social work,
especially Casework, Groupwork and Community
Organization. If I was asked to formulate a skill set for
social work at this juncture I would probably argue for
welfare practice, policy practice, social research and social
action.

Q. As I understand from what you have stated, this Masters

programme is not only academic in nature but aims to directly
intervene with the lived experience of people. How do you envision
delivering the same?

Ans : In DTSA, students are exposed to the latest

theoretical debates from a meta-discipline approach
pertaining to indigenous peoples, the dalit reality, Indian
state and world geopolitics. The programme uses reflexive

228
pedagogy led by faculty who are renowned for their ability
to facilitate such processes. Student’s testimony to this
stands witness to the theoretical sophistication, experiential
depth and emancipatory nature of the programme. A
number of academics and development workers from
across the world deliver special lectures periodically.
Students have the opportunity to work with people’s
movements and international organizations in India and
South Asia for a period of two months. A number of
students of DTSA have gone on exchange programmes
abroad after passing the International Students Office
interviews. Every year the programme receives exchange
students from across the world making the classroom
setting extremely diverse, theoretically stimulating and
experientially enriching. The programme is academically
rigorous and demands dedicated work, commitment and
very high standards from students. Student feedback of the
programme, faculty and fieldwork agencies have been
extremely positive.

Q. In that context what kind of students is DTSA looking for?

Ans : We are looking for academically oriented students

dedicated to the empowerment of Dalits and Tribes.
Students interested in understanding Indian structural
realities from the lived experiences of Dalits and Tribes
would greatly benefit from the programme. Those who
have a degree in History, Human Geography,
Anthropology, Sociology, Cultural Studies, Peace and
Conflict Studies, Political Science and any Humanities
subject would find the programme both challenging and
fulfilling. Students of Bachelors in Social Work with

229
interest in Dalits and Tribes would be greatly enriched by
the theoretical depth that the programme offers. Activists
with any academic background having few years of
experience with people’s movements would find the
programme extremely insightful and engaging. The
programme is the first of its kind in the world, providing
students with wide theoretical exposure to international
politico historical and political economic discourses situated
within the lived and shared experiences of Dalits in South
Asia and Tribes from India and other regions of the world.

Q. Tell us about the students over the years. Also, how do you deal
with sensitive issues like caste in a classroom of students from varied
social groups?

Ans : Our students come from varied backgrounds. While

in the beginning we had more Dalit and Tribal students
opting for DTSW, currently upper caste students and OBC
students outnumber Dalit and Tribal students. We have
students from various caste backgrounds from across the
country and Tribal students from Chottanagpur,
Meghalaya, Manipur, Assam, Tripura, Mizoram, Rajasthan,
Ladakh, Orissa and Andhra. We also had a number of
foreign students opting for DTSW from countries like
Argentina, Sweden, Czechoslovakia and France. Our class
room environment is really diverse. Diverse in all senses –
caste, tribe, class, gender, abilities, nations, regions,
language, religion, etc. It was initially very difficult to
handle such a reality but over the years we have learnt and
managed well. We give a lot of importance to pedagogy and
minute curriculum principles. We impart critical education
and use student centric pedagogy in the Ambedkarite sense

230
grounded around the freedom of mind. That is, we move
further than trying to dialogue about the cycles of
oppression in which oppressor and oppressed engage to
understand processes of dehumanization, to inserting at the
core of our dialogues, secular identity based categories of
Dalit and Tribes as we unravel layers of oppression and the
processes of intersectionality. We embed our dialogues
deeply in critical history and socio political realities. Political
economy is a key content and we bring the same in
discussions, but we do not make political economy core in
our analysis of Indian society. Most of us hold the view that
caste is the defining overarching premise of Indian society
and we opine that while class stratification of caste societies
is taking place at a rapid pace and there is definitely class
within caste, however there is no class identity across caste
yet. To us, there is poverty in any analysis of the concrete
Indian conditions that does not consider caste as a
fundamental defining reality. These processes are explained
to students from the very first day of the programme and
we have seen that it has worked well. In this context I must
state that all of our teachers are groomed in Dalit Social
Work and Tribal Social Work teaching pedagogies and
geared towards handling complicated situations pertaining
to student dynamics.

Q. In today’s very competitive job market, in the government or non

government sector – what kind of jobs are available for students
passing out from Dalit and Tribal Studies and Action?

Ans : The course provides perspective and skills to carry

out work in numerous sectors. Majority of the DTSA
alumni are deeply embedded in people’s movements across

231
the country. Some have chosen to work with International
Rights Organizations such as Action Aid, International
Labour Organization etc,. Some work with National
organizations like Kudumbashree, North East Research
and Social Work Networking, etc,. Others have joined
corporate organizations such as Tata Trust, ONGC,
NTPC, ITC, HPCL etc. Many are working with
government development agencies such as the Prime
Minister’s Rural Development Fellowship (Ministry of
Rural Development), Bihar Rural Livelihood Promotion
Society etc. Some are pursuing their doctorate studies from
universities in Europe and America and from Indian
Universities like JNU, HCU, IIT, TISS, etc. and many
alumni have entered teaching and research positions across
Indian Universities.

Q. Can I get your personal viewpoint on the upcoming Indian Social

Work Congress, 2013 organized by the National Association of
Professional Social Workers in India?

Ans : Am not a member of this Association, on this

ground I think it is unfair for me to make any comments
on the aims, objectives and agenda of this group. Probably
the only thing that I can point out is that they are both,
caste blind and tribe blind. I was reading through their
brochure and there was not a single mentioned of the word
Dalit or Tribe. We have our own Professional Social work
Association – the National Association of Progressive
Social Workers, and I think none of our members will
participate in such Congresses, especially those among us
who see these gatherings as acts of a few to invisibilise the
problematics of this country. However, I think that the

232
discipline is enriched with more Social Work Associations,
but it is an irony that these Associations rarely discuss the
defining realities of this country. The issues of dalits and
tribes are shunned in these gatherings and sadly that is what
defines educators and practitioners within the profession
today. Now, as to why these professional social workers
don’t discuss caste and tribes? All of us are aware of the
caste locations of professional social workers in the
country, you may make your own conclusions, I need not
say more.

Q. Any future plans that you would like to share related to DTSA?

Ans : Colleagues in TISS are working towards setting up a

Tribal Intellectual Collective India that would facilitate the
discussion and production of knowledge on tribal issues
more minutely and develop practice paradigms that are
congruent with the lived experience and felt needs of tribal
peoples. We also have plans to organize a series of regional
conferences on the theme ‘Reassembling Tribal Studies in
India’ and a National Dalit and Adivasi Women’s
Conference. Our students are brought into these forums to
participate actively.

In Retrospect

As a programme we have expanded tremendously and we

have also got deeper insights into the two realities we are
engaging with. Probably my conception of ‘Dalits’ and
‘Tribes’ now would be very different from the one I
articulated in 2012. I have incorporated some of these
understandings in this book embedded in the other
chapters.
233
There are also two very clear distinct themes that have
emerged in DTSA. One is the practice stream rooted much
around social entrepreneurship and another around
academics. Students who pursue the DTSA programme
come to the course with these kinds of objectives. It is both
challenging and exhilarating to teach the DTSA
programme. Many of the students are very grounded and
sincere, with an unwavering commitment to the
empowerment of historically peripheralised groups.

The latest domains and theories that inform our

programme are much more in the realm of philosophy with
a bent on methodology. Theoretical frameworks such post
structuralism and the Navayana learning framework
identified very closely with the ideas of Babasaheb
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, constitutes the core constituent of the
learning/educating framework.

Some Concluding Remarks

Finally, as a closure to all ideas expressed in this text, I take

liberty to express two points. One is that each of the
chapters in this book is my lecture and discussion notes
delivered to DTSW students. These notes constitute my
insights derived from field engagements, discussions with
my social work colleagues and reflections with my own
students in numerous occasions and spaces spanning a
period of seventeen years, from 2003 to 2019. When I
wrote these notes down, they were written as part of my
engagement with a certain context, and in many ways were
my ways of responding to such prevailing concrete
conditions and concomitant contextual demands. Thus

234
when I decided to bring each of these notes into this book
I did so with the understanding that plus the propositions
made in the process of responding to such unique contexts,
each of the chapters were also, in my opinion, of historical
value and significance to social work in general, and dalit
and tribal social work in particular. In the light of the same,
I believe that this is also how this text should probably be
read.

Secondly, it is important for me to also assert that many of

the ideas expressed in this book are markedly different
from the theoretical perspectives and content that
dominates social work education and practice. My intent in
sharing my lecture notes through this book has been to
engage with the more progressive intellectual community in
the discipline. This I consider imperative as part of an
effort to contextualize and enrich social work education,
notwithstanding the fact that such theoretical propositions
will be shunned and rejected by conservative educators
who dominate social work education even before such
ideas are read. Nonetheless, this kind of anti-intellectual
attitude within the discipline should not be the reason why
progressive, contextual, diverse, dialogical, organic and
humane knowledge should not be produced, written and
discussed.

235
236