Discussion 1: Translating Knowledge From an Evaluation Report

Historical Divides and Ethical Obligations Within Social Work
Jane Addams was a firm advocate for macro change that would influence society at all levels while Mary Richmond pushed for a bottom–up concept for changing the person, then the environment (Thompson, Spano & Koenig, 2019). As a social worker we know the field has its own basis root in a philosophical difference. These organizers of the social work field needed to positively influence individuals in both the present moment through individual assistance and in the long-term with policy changes to support a great many people. Inside the field of social work today these equivalent divisions obstruct the progression of the social equity plan, as spread out by the NASW Code of Ethics (2017).
  The inaccurate belief by different experts that social work is not a science or is inadequate can slow or stop any measure toward the formation of policies or programs that move bigger standards ahead (Hill, Ferguson & Erickson, 2010) while the trust by some social worker that social work ought to consistently concentrate on changing arrangement and progressing in the direction of full scale level effect gives the feeling that social work may quit being centered essentially around the person. The absence of instruction which would permit social workers to move in the full scale field of network based or significantly bigger projects have begun to be tended to yet at the same time leaves social worker caught off guard for the greatness of attempting to make or change a strategy or program at the nearby, state or government level (Jacobson, 2001). Social work programs have begun to address issues and the specialization of some social workers in the macro level of large scale social work help as a result of these experts and are valuable and useful assets for any social worker working just at the smaller scale level. Social worker should be effective at all levels of social work and on the chance that there is a requirement for experts, at that point they should be used to their fullest.
The issue of divisions inside the social work field with respect to social justice and the ability and need of each social worker to be pushing toward social justice as an essential generally speaking objective can restrain the progression of social work all in legitimize what social work does. Proceeding to teach social worker on the best way to be valuable not just at the micro level, which is basic to what we do as social worker yet consistently to have an eye towards affecting the bigger picture will help address any issues and make a social work field that can influence not just an individual and their quick social disagreement yet can after some time influence the more social environment but can over time also affect the greater community in general.
References
Hill, K. M., Ferguson, S. M., & Erickson, C. (2010). Sustaining and strengthening a macro identity: The association of macro practice social work. Journal of Community Practice, 18(4), 513–527

Jacobson, W. B. (2001). Beyond therapy: Bringing social work back to human services reform. Social Work, 46(1), 51–61

The NASW Code of Ethics (2017). Document retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/about/ethics/code-of-ethics/code-of-ethics-english

Thompson, J., Spano, R., & Koenig, T. (2019). Back to Addams and Richmond: was social work really a divided house in the beginning? J. Soc. & Soc. Welfare 3, (2019).