Weinbach\'s (2005) Introductory Chapter Has a Number

Weinbach's (2005) introductory chapter has a number of issues that make it awkward for the reader. For example Weinbach makes clear the difference between the terms evaluation (where a person is being scrutinized or appraised in some way) and evaluation research, for which Weinbach offers more than one definition. As a general term evaluation research refers to the application of formal research protocols to determine the effectiveness or validity of practices in social work. Weinbach then goes on to define the three major components of the definition: research, effectiveness, and the practice of social work. It is here that things get a bit elementary and a bit wordy. For example, if social work practice includes everything that a social work does, why is there a need to define this term along with services, service and program? Why not just define basic and applied research and then relate these terms as to their meaning in the context of social work. While generally well written, the first part of the chapter seemed a bit more like a high school vocation course than a college course in research methods.

Weinbach does a good job of defining some research associated terms although some of the term definitions are awkwardly stated. For instance, a cross-sectional design typically refers the observation of a population or subset thereof at a particular point in time, whereas longitudinal research follows a select group over a defined time period. It is often better to compare and contrast alternate concepts, which allows for a better understanding of their meaning as opposed to Weinbach's method of defining them separately and not presenting them as they relate to one another. Where are practical considerations? Why use one design over another? Isn't this important?

Another example of how the chapter can be confusing to readers is illustrated when Weinbach explains the difference between independent and dependent variables. Independent variables are manipulated by the researcher in order to observe how this manipulation affects some outcome (dependent variable). Why confuse readers who historically find these definitions hard to understand? In fact Weinbach never even tells us what a plain variable is (an observation that can take on different qualities). Giving examples of how these terms could be identified in relevant social work research examples would have been helpful. Saying that the dependent variable is the problem being addressed is confusing and could lead to misidentification. Other important terms are vaguely defined. Reliability does refer to constancy of measurement, but for overall research it refers to the ability to replicate the research findings. For example, would the research findings on the effectiveness of a certain type of group intervention for addiction be replicated with different subjects (Weinbach rightly refers to external validity but does not make the connection between reliability and the big picture). This is a major mistake in this chapter.