Compare and Contrast two Framework

Order Description

Community Development Practice is best supported by directed action, informed by theories of social change. With that in mind, we have examined two main organizing frameworks: the utilitarian approach (associated with Saul Alinksy) and Transformative Approaches (associated with Paulo Freire and Critical Theory). In this short paper I would like for to explore what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. I would suggest the following format:

Introduction
Overview of Both Approaches
For each approach (Utilitarian and Transformative) you should focus on what you believe to be the key ideas and then discuss what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of each. Be sure to draw on Alinsky (Utilitarian) and Freire (Transformative).
Application
As a community based practitioner, how would you apply these ideas? This is where you might, for example, argue for a blended approach. Be very specific about how you would blend the approaches and why.
Conclusion

Compare and Contrast two Framework

Order Description

Community Development Practice is best supported by directed action, informed by theories of social change. With that in mind, we have examined two main organizing frameworks: the utilitarian approach (associated with Saul Alinksy) and Transformative Approaches (associated with Paulo Freire and Critical Theory). In this short paper I would like for to explore what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. I would suggest the following format:

Introduction
Overview of Both Approaches
For each approach (Utilitarian and Transformative) you should focus on what you believe to be the key ideas and then discuss what you see as the strengths and weaknesses of each. Be sure to draw on Alinsky (Utilitarian) and Freire (Transformative).
Application
As a community based practitioner, how would you apply these ideas? This is where you might, for example, argue for a blended approach. Be very specific about how you would blend the approaches and why.
Conclusion