解构社会工作考试偏见:缩小差距的倡导实践指南。

Quincy Bloxom, Brandi Anderson
{"title":"解构社会工作考试偏见:缩小差距的倡导实践指南。","authors":"Quincy Bloxom, Brandi Anderson","doi":"10.1080/26408066.2023.2278691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The social work profession is in a precarious situation regarding licensure. Test takers of color are struggling to pass social work licensure exams at rates comparable to their White counterparts, per data released by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB). As a nation, we are required to meet the needs of our increasingly diverse population. Yet the recruitment and retention of a diverse body of social workers is unlikely to be actualized if disparities persist in these exams. Given ASWB's monopoly on social work exams and the likelihood that many states will continue to require the exams for licensure, we sought to explore public responses to the data released, using the National Association of Social Work (NASW) as our starting point. As the nation's largest association of social workers, having local chapters within each state, NASW serves as an area of connection between social workers nationwide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized content analysis to explore emerging themes and conduct a review of the state chapter's public responses to exam pass rate data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A variety of state chapter's responses, with few states engaging in advocacy efforts or taking action to facilitate change.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Advocacy efforts play a pivotal role in the restructuring of fragmented systems. This study revisits seemingly ignored disparities diverse test takers may face, while also serving as a call-to-action in advocacy engagement. We conclude with a set of advocacy practice guidelines for use in the promotion of equitable licensing opportunities for all test takers.</p>","PeriodicalId":73742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","volume":" ","pages":"236-264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deconstructing Social Work Exam Bias: Advocacy Practice Guidelines to Close the Gap.\",\"authors\":\"Quincy Bloxom, Brandi Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/26408066.2023.2278691\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The social work profession is in a precarious situation regarding licensure. Test takers of color are struggling to pass social work licensure exams at rates comparable to their White counterparts, per data released by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB). As a nation, we are required to meet the needs of our increasingly diverse population. Yet the recruitment and retention of a diverse body of social workers is unlikely to be actualized if disparities persist in these exams. Given ASWB's monopoly on social work exams and the likelihood that many states will continue to require the exams for licensure, we sought to explore public responses to the data released, using the National Association of Social Work (NASW) as our starting point. As the nation's largest association of social workers, having local chapters within each state, NASW serves as an area of connection between social workers nationwide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized content analysis to explore emerging themes and conduct a review of the state chapter's public responses to exam pass rate data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A variety of state chapter's responses, with few states engaging in advocacy efforts or taking action to facilitate change.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Advocacy efforts play a pivotal role in the restructuring of fragmented systems. This study revisits seemingly ignored disparities diverse test takers may face, while also serving as a call-to-action in advocacy engagement. We conclude with a set of advocacy practice guidelines for use in the promotion of equitable licensing opportunities for all test takers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73742,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"236-264\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2278691\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2278691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:社会工作行业在执照方面处于不稳定的境地。根据社会工作委员会协会(ASWB)发布的数据,有色人种考生正努力以与白人考生相当的成绩通过社会工作许可证考试。作为一个国家,我们必须满足日益多样化的人口的需求。然而,如果这些考试中存在差异,那么招聘和留住多样化的社会工作者就不太可能实现。考虑到ASWB对社会工作考试的垄断,以及许多州可能继续要求考试获得许可,我们试图以全国社会工作协会(NASW)为出发点,探讨公众对发布的数据的反应。作为全国最大的社会工作者协会,在每个州都有地方分会,全国社会工作者协会是全国社会工作者之间的联系领域。方法:我们利用内容分析来探索新出现的主题,并对州分会对考试通过率数据的公开回应进行审查。结果:各州分会的回应多种多样,很少有州参与宣传工作或采取行动促进变革。讨论:宣传工作在分散系统的重组中发挥着关键作用。这项研究重新审视了不同考生可能面临的看似被忽视的差异,同时也呼吁在宣传活动中采取行动。最后,我们提出了一套宣传实践指南,用于促进所有考生获得公平的许可机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deconstructing Social Work Exam Bias: Advocacy Practice Guidelines to Close the Gap.

Introduction: The social work profession is in a precarious situation regarding licensure. Test takers of color are struggling to pass social work licensure exams at rates comparable to their White counterparts, per data released by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB). As a nation, we are required to meet the needs of our increasingly diverse population. Yet the recruitment and retention of a diverse body of social workers is unlikely to be actualized if disparities persist in these exams. Given ASWB's monopoly on social work exams and the likelihood that many states will continue to require the exams for licensure, we sought to explore public responses to the data released, using the National Association of Social Work (NASW) as our starting point. As the nation's largest association of social workers, having local chapters within each state, NASW serves as an area of connection between social workers nationwide.

Methods: We utilized content analysis to explore emerging themes and conduct a review of the state chapter's public responses to exam pass rate data.

Results: A variety of state chapter's responses, with few states engaging in advocacy efforts or taking action to facilitate change.

Discussion: Advocacy efforts play a pivotal role in the restructuring of fragmented systems. This study revisits seemingly ignored disparities diverse test takers may face, while also serving as a call-to-action in advocacy engagement. We conclude with a set of advocacy practice guidelines for use in the promotion of equitable licensing opportunities for all test takers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信