Towards an integrated model of practice evaluation balancing accountability, critical knowledge and developmental perspectives

Against a backdrop of economic globalisation, where welfare practitioners find themselves caught between modernising policy reform and demanding practice realities, there is an urgent need to rethink the relationship between research, evaluation and professional practice. In this article three perspectives concerned with accountability, critical knowledge production and development will be examined as a basis for understanding the different methodological discourses on evaluation. The debate between evidence-based practice (EBP) and critical practice (CP) is deployed to highlight a choice facing both the practitioner and researcher between producing two competing kinds of knowledge for practice. The former is based upon technical know how and skills that may be equated with a ‘search for certainty’ and found increasingly in technocratic systems of accountability; whilst the latter is concerned with critical exploration and development in promoting more emancipatory forms of practice that may be equated with the ‘creative use of uncertainty’. Drawing on practice examples and research from the field of mental health, it is argued that balancing accountability, critical knowledge production and development offers a valid paradigm for achieving effective practice evaluation alongside a broader commitment to social justice.