Time, the Written Record, and Professional Practice: The Case of Contemporary Social Work

Theresa Lillis The Open University ; Maria Leedham The Open University ; Alison Twiner The Open University

Abstract

Drawing on a three-year ethnographically oriented study exploring contemporary professional social work writing, this article focuses on a key concern: the amount of time taken up with writing, or “paperwork.” We explore the relationship between time and professional social work writing in three key ways: (a) as a discrete, measurable phenomenon—how much time is spent on writing? (b) as a textual dimension to social work writing—how do institutional documents drive particular entextualizations of time and how do social worker texts entextualize time? (c) as a particular timespace configuration of lived experience—how is time experienced by professional social workers? Findings indicate that a dominant institutional chronotope is governing social work textual practice underpinned by an ideology of writing that is at odds with social workers’ desired practice and professional goals. Methodologically, this article illustrates the value of combining a range of data and analytic tools, using textual and contextual data as well as qualitative and quantitative frames of analysis.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2020-10-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088320938804
Open Access
OA PDF Bronze
Topics

Citation Context

Cites in this index (16)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
Show all 16 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
  6. Written Communication
  7. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  8. Written Communication
  9. Written Communication
  10. Written Communication
  11. Written Communication
Also cites 43 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.5040/9781350933996
  2. 10.1075/ijcl.14.3.02bak
  3. 10.1017/CBO9780511619656
  4. 10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.000423
  5. 10.1515/text-2017-0014
  6. 10.21832/9781847692962
  7. 10.1080/1057356970130302
  8. 10.1017/CBO9781316106372
  9. 10.2307/j.ctt5hjn6c
  10. 10.1017/S0267190503000230
  11. 10.1515/come.2005.2.2.189
  12. 10.2307/3588284
  13. 10.4324/9781315179346-11
  14. 10.1093/bjsw/bcp155
  15. 10.1080/08841233.2010.539141
  16. 10.1093/applin/24.3.316
  17. 10.2307/25472188
  18. 10.4324/9780203451311
  19. 10.1515/9780748637492
  20. 10.1515/text-2017-0013
  21. 10.1075/aila.28.06lil
  22. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.03.008
  23. 10.1558/jalpp.36377
  24. 10.4000/pratiques.1929
  25. Marková I., Novaes A. (2020). Chronotopes. Culture and Psychology, 26(1), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/13…
  26. 10.1057/9780230511958
  27. 10.1515/text-2017-0011
  28. 10.1080/13639080600867141
  29. Prior P., Shipka J. (2003). Chronotopic lamination: Tracing the contours of literate activity. In Bazerman C.…
  30. 10.1080/0261547042000209170
  31. 10.1080/13562517.2012.719157
  32. 10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00341.x
  33. 10.1057/9781137035035_2
  34. 10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray
  35. 10.1093/applin/24.3.338
  36. 10.1515/text-2017-0012
  37. 10.1057/9781137035035_1
  38. 10.15453/0191-5096.3838
    Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare  
  39. 10.1057/9781137035035
  40. 10.4324/9780203647028
  41. 10.18084/1084-7219.5.2.161
  42. 10.1177/0020872808097750
  43. 10.1177/0261018310367675
CrossRef global citation count: 20 View in citation network →