Transcript Re-examining the Settlement House Tradition of People

Re-examining the Settlement House
Tradition of People-Centred Approach:
Case studies of two North American Cities
Miu Chung YAN, PhD.
Assistant Professor
University of British Columbia
School of Social Work
Background



Is community “lost,” “saved,” or “liberated” (Smith,
1996, p. 235) or even collapsed (Putnam, 2000)?
The cosmopolitan condition of most urban centres
has made people strangers to their fellow residents
(Appiah, 2006).
Yet, on the other hand, people’s everyday life is still
primarily grounded in the local community (or more
specifically the neighbourhood) in which they live
and pursue their dream (Keller, 2003).
Recapitulation of the People Centredness of
Settlement Houses 1



Toynbee Hall in 1884 by Reverend Samuel Barnett
in London’s East End.
Social experiment of the Social Gospel ideal of lifting
people to a higher civic and spiritual level through
socially cohesive and unified community (Arneil,
2006; Meagham, 1987).
Toynbee Hall was established as a “machinery of
connection” to connect people in the community for
the common good (Meagham, 1987).
Recapitulation of the People Centredness of
Settlement Houses 2


Jane Addams (1999): the whole philosophy of the
settlement house movement as “solidarity of human
races” which she elaborated as “the way in which he
[sic] connects with his [sic] fellows; that his [sic]
motives for action are the zeal and affection with
which he [sic] regards his [sic] fellows” (p.95).
SH widely known as Neighbourhood
Houses/Centres extended all over the world.
The Studies



San Francisco: Neighbourhood Centre
(N=8), 1890 Telegraph Hill
Vancouver: Neighbourhood Houses (N=9),
1938 Alexandra/Gordon Houses
Participatory and multi-method approach
–
–
–
Individual interview (EDs, Key informants, CD
workers, Board Members)
Focus group (Vancouver, Frontline and Board)
Survey (Vancouver)
As a machinery of connecting people, how
do NH/Cs build community?
1. Flexible services for people of all age groups
2. A natural hub of community building
3. Community cultural events
4. Volunteering as community building
5. Coalition building and coordination
Discussion





Lack of social recognition – fragmented funding and
over-reliance on the state funding
Service users as volunteers = the first step toward
participation in their community.
Still the most effective machinery to connect people
in the fragmented, imagined, fluid community –
Putnam, Husock, Giddens
East European experience
http://www.ifsnetwork.org/index.asp
China: Community Construction