The paper "Community Work" is a wonderful example of a literature review on social science. Issues concerning how the community should be engaged, consulted and participate in community development have traditionally been considered as significant concepts in community work. Still, from detailed survey of literature, I conclude that few texts or researches provide theoretically-grounded guidance on how working with communities should be undertaken more respectfully and effectively (Pugh & Cheers, 2010; Worral, 2007; Nkwake et al, 2013). I reflect that Taylor’ s et al (2008) work fills this gap. It is my view a one-stop-shop that covers a multiple topics, ranging from the meaning of community to working with communities. Indeed, Taylor’ s et al (2008) book is split into three segments: Understanding community, approaches to working with communities and working with communities.
Indeed, Taylor’ s et al (2008) book is split into three segments: Understanding community, approaches to working with communities and working with communities. These three form the subjects of discussion in this report, as drawn from my weekly journal entries and what I have learnt on my pathway to understanding working with communities. Understanding Communities In my view, this module (chapter 1 to chapter 4) is focused on the theoretical and conceptual understanding of a community.
A critical message reflected in module is that a vital tool for assessing community functioning depends on the capacity to understand community as well as how the community functions. Taylor et al (2008) depicted an understanding of ‘ community’ from Aboriginal family relations, arguing that it is at the centre of understanding Aboriginal community and family relations. I tend to agree. In my critical understanding from the module, in the society, every individual has a place.
This offers order and sureness. Still, I feel that not each person can understand his place in the society. Taylor et al (2008) uses an approach that parallels that of Chong et al (2008) who describe the term community as individuals from a range of families and who use different languages. An example includes the entire Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who occupy parts of Australia. On reflection, I developed an understanding that the entire family groups that reside within a ‘ community’ may interact or not.
Taylor et al (2008), like Chong et al (2008), support this argument. Indeed, I feel that it is within this perspective that the existing health service arrangements for the Indigenous Australians are based on Western instead of Indigenous perception of community. As derived from Taylor’ s et al (2008) work, these services, and governance structures are specifically situated within geographical areas rather than families, clans or kinships. This, in my view, explains why some regional service centres like the Whyalla has diverse groups of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
In some circumstances therefore, the structure of service delivery used in such regional centres have the potential to exist as the case and Indigenous Australia will continue to pull together in such places for the reason. Deriving from Taylor’ s et al (2008) perception of community functioning, I begin to understand that the term is concerned with functioning within specific locations, such as a remote community, a rural town, neighbourhood, or centre. I believe therefore that Taylor’ s et al (2008) idea on community functioning allows the understanding of community functioning as a community’ s strength to grow as well as to develop positive social change using strong relationships in language groups or families.
I mention Pugh and Cheers’ s (2010) work in this regard as they argue that a strong group that advocates for and supports implementing of cultural identity across the components of community functioning comprises identifying, acknowledging and strengthening positive annotations of such individuals as well as their contribution to the community.