Qualitative Social Work Vol. 1(1): 79-95 Copyright ®2002 Sage Publications London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi 1473-3250[200203]1:1;79-95;027746 ARTICLE Theorizing from Practice Towards an Inclusive Approach for Social Work Research Jan Fook Deakin University, Australia ABSTRACT Practitioner researchers often experience difficulties in understanding and using the plethora of approaches to the ways in which practice can be theorized, and mistakenly feel they must be committed to one main approach. In this article I argue that an inclusive approach to the many different methods is crucial to social work. I develop this approach by describing, in broad terms, the major different approaches to theorizing and the methods associated with this. I begin by relating an inclusive approach to the changes in knowledge-making becoming recognized with postmodernism. I then develop an inclusive approach by examining three major areas: what theory is; how it is generated; and who it should be generated by. I end by arguing that an inclusive approach best fits the range of practice which social workers wish to research, but that it must include research of the 'tacit' knowledge of practitioners. KEY WORDS: knowledge building practice research theorizing 79 80 Qualitative Social Work 1(1) How do we theorize from practice, and what are the best methods to use? These are central questions for all practicing professionals, but their answers are not straightforward. Complex processes and arguments are involved. There is a plethora of methods that, as social work researchers, we might use to effectively theorize our practice. Many of these are associated with different paradigms, which are seen as competing. Often the debates have polarized between the more positivist camp, and those who take a more `interpretivist' or constructivist line (Atherton, 1993; Haworth, 1994; Rodwell, 1998: 12-13). Sometimes the debate is couched in `quantitative vs. qualitative' terms, pointing up the differences between approaches which emphasize measurement and analysis of relatively static variables in a value free framework, and those of the latter which are more concerned with processes and generating meanings in a recognized political context (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994: 4-5). As social workers, interested in researching the theory of our practice, how do we make sense of these debates? How do we best approach the theorizing of our complex practice, when the choices seem framed in relatively rigid paradigmatic terms? What kinds of ways of understanding theory, practice and research will cultivate best practice in uncertain contexts? What approaches to theorizing from practice can we develop which will enable the practitioner researcher and the researcher practitioner to make sense of diverse perspectives, to act confidently and responsively in changing and unpredictable situations? A rigid, or even loose, commitment to one type of perspective, be it positivist, qualitative or deconstructive, does not seem to provide the flexibility of thinking needed to work in changing circumstances.