Promoting Competence: Multistage Conceptualization, Empirical Evidence, and Current Controversies on Licensure to Inform a Future Research Agenda
Saved in:
| Title: | Promoting Competence: Multistage Conceptualization, Empirical Evidence, and Current Controversies on Licensure to Inform a Future Research Agenda |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Laura Curran (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Social Work Education. 2025 61(2):173-188. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 16 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | Social Work, Certification, Employment Qualifications, Job Skills, Competence, State Licensing Boards, Credentials, Racism, Caseworkers, Evaluation, Minimum Competencies, Standardized Tests, Test Validity, Test Reliability, Safety |
| DOI: | 10.1080/10437797.2024.2420091 |
| ISSN: | 1043-7797 2163-5811 |
| Abstract: | This article examines the role of social work licensure in the promotion, assessment, and oversight of professional competence in social work practice. We ground our discussion of licensure and competence within a broader conceptualization of professional competence. The article (a) presents conceptual and assessment models of a multistage competence, (b) considers the extant empirical evidence on the assessment of competence at each stage, (c) discusses the role of state regulatory and licensing bodies in credentialing and upholding entry-level and continuing competency in social work practice, and (d) presents recommendations for future empirical research to inform best practices. The article engages with contemporary debates around licensure, including evidence of structural racism in the licensure process. The unique challenges associated with articulating, assessing, and regulating competence in a broad-based, values-driven profession practiced in complex and diverse settings are considered throughout. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1507207 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFId3gTSr3cu2-s1s6QeKjyAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDGv822LLD98ZJ4MdSgIBEICBm8sOmhji1EDrp6SoGEbofOdg9tvFlRBCnGKd7c3NrnRFAo9Odcg7KfdlQ_hqg7oZzuiUNTetmIke5IEjtFPuyaGDMRQUSqln4Uih2BuGOtSrOLjE_JUray0-UN-hsV-diFqly_fOAexaglgcet3sCGoLQujk7nC8QWk98KOZgyFWE8zjxU4iXJ-wdZbTBqeHJO-Z3JH5P9Td72Qe Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0185784150;swe01apr.25;2025Jun10.03:27;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0185784150-1">Promoting Competence: Multistage Conceptualization, Empirical Evidence, and Current Controversies on Licensure to Inform a Future Research Agenda </title> <p>This article examines the role of social work licensure in the promotion, assessment, and oversight of professional competence in social work practice. We ground our discussion of licensure and competence within a broader conceptualization of professional competence. The article (a) presents conceptual and assessment models of a multistage competence, (b) considers the extant empirical evidence on the assessment of competence at each stage, (c) discusses the role of state regulatory and licensing bodies in credentialing and upholding entry-level and continuing competency in social work practice, and (d) presents recommendations for future empirical research to inform best practices. The article engages with contemporary debates around licensure, including evidence of structural racism in the licensure process. The unique challenges associated with articulating, assessing, and regulating competence in a broad-based, values-driven profession practiced in complex and diverse settings are considered throughout.</p> <p>Professional social workers are now eligible for licensure in all U.S. states. This development is the outcome of almost half a century of professional advocacy that follows the path of like-minded professional groups. Scholars of the professions and those who study licensure and other forms of regulation generally agree that licensure confers professional and occupational benefits, including status enhancement and consolidation and increased wages and reimbursement through limiting the labor supply (Kleiner, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref1">48</reflink>]; White House, [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref2">84</reflink>]). Others consider the effect of licensure and regulation on the public, suggesting that these mechanisms offer public and consumer protection in terms of quality and safety from harm (White House, [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref3">84</reflink>]). Despite the view that licensure benefits social work professionals and the public through enhancing professional competence, there is relatively limited scholarship and empirical research on the effect of social work licensing.</p> <p>According to Edwards and Green ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref4">39</reflink>]), "[C]ompetence is the constellation of knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes of an individual that is based on a set of criteria or a level of expectation; simply stated, competence is demonstrated proficiency" (p. 43). Licensure is based on certification of competence and has become increasingly important in healthcare professions given their accountability for public safety and need to justify costs. While consumers seek assurances of ethical and quality services, insurers wish to validate practitioners' qualifications and performance to hold them accountable for patient and client outcomes (Grossman, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref5">44</reflink>]).</p> <p>As part of a more comprehensive literature review on social work licensing, this article examines the role of social work licensure in the promotion, assessment, and oversight of professional competence in social work practice. We ground our discussion of licensure and competence within a broader conceptualization of professional competence, believing that the role of licensure is best delineated within this larger framework. The article (a) presents conceptual and assessment models of a multistage competence, (b) considers the extant empirical evidence on the assessment of competence at each stage, (c) discusses the role of state regulatory and licensing bodies in credentialing and upholding entry-level and continuing competency in social work practice, and (d) presents recommendations for future empirical research to inform best practices. In doing so, the article engages with contemporary debates around licensure, including evidence of structural racism in the licensure process. The unique challenges associated with articulating, assessing, and regulating competence in a broad-based, values-driven profession practiced in complex and diverse settings are considered throughout.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-2">Competence: Conceptual framework and assessment model</hd> <p>We begin our discussion of competence by providing a conceptual framework of professional competence and competence assessment based on interdisciplinary literature. Using this literature, we delineate the stages of competence in the social work profession and stage-based assessment practices in the professions.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-3">Conceptual framework</hd> <p>In degree-based regulated professions, professional competence starts with education and training and becomes a life- and career-long process (Leigh et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref6">51</reflink>]). Most understand competence as a developmental progression in which learners gain increasing expertise (Drisko, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref7">38</reflink>]; Lucas, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref8">56</reflink>]; McClelland, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref9">60</reflink>]). Individuals typically gain general, broad competence with an educational credential (stage 1), then earn a state-issued, time-limited license by demonstrating minimum competence to enter a profession (stage 2), and are later required by the state-regulated licensing system to demonstrate continuing and specialized competence (stage 3). Stage 3 competence is important not only for the maintenance of competence and reentry into practice, but also for facilitating specialty competence among experienced and advanced practitioners throughout their careers. The [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref10">25</reflink>]) described similar competence levels and their development as a pyramid (p. 12).</p> <p>Figure 1 depicts the competence pyramid (or continuum) for the social work profession, along with the professional entities that govern the standards and measures for each stage. As is generally true in professional education, such as medicine (Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref11">1</reflink>]) and psychology (American Psychological Association [APA], [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref12">3</reflink>]), social work's accreditation body, the Council of Social Work Education (CSWE), governs the educational competency standards for the profession and requires a competency-based curriculum. As state governments have the authority and responsibility to ensure that practitioners possess minimum competence for licensure, state licensing and regulatory boards regulate social work practices by setting up licensure and continuing education (CE) standards and taking adverse disciplinary actions against those who violate the standards. The state boards are supported by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB), whose mission is to provide "support and services to the social work regulatory community to advance sage, competent, and ethical practices to strengthen public protection" ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref13">14</reflink>], p. 1). With input from professional stakeholders, ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref14">11</reflink>]) established the Model Social Work Practice Act to provide the best practices framework for state-level licensure.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. A pyramid (continuum) of competence from a life-long perspective.</p> <p>On the continuum of competence depicted in Figure 1, there is a gray area between educational assessments for stage 1 and licensure exams for stage 2 despite differences in the intended purpose of competence measure at each stage. While educational assessment holds schools and educators accountable for student mastery of competence, licensure is the measurement of competence directly related to the health, safety, and welfare of the public (Davis-Becker &amp; Buckendahl, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref15">33</reflink>]). Buckendahl ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref16">33</reflink>]) argued that the use of competence assessment of one stage for the assessment of another, whether at the individual or programmatic level, can be problematic: "[T]he results from credentialing examinations are rarely designed to serve as a comprehensive assessment for program evaluation" (p. 15). He noted, "Credentialing examinations focus on knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for the credential and generally are designed to maximize measurement information around the passing score. ... [T]he alignment with a specific educational program is unintended" (Buckendahl, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref17">33</reflink>], p. 15). This argument raises the potential danger of reducing or simply equating educational and programmatic assessment to licensure exam outcomes. However, the use of licensing exam outcomes in the accreditation processes as <emph>one</emph> indicator of program quality is common in professional education (Spector et al., [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref18">76</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-4">Assessment models</hd> <p>Educational or regulatory bodies mandate the assessment of professional competence at each stage of competency development. Measures vary widely and discussion around the psychometric properties of these varying assessment measures has grown significantly over the last decade (Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia et al., [<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref19">86</reflink>]). Assessment typically evaluates the multiple dimensions of competence; that is, (a) knowledge, (b) practice-based skills and tasks, (c) professional attributes, and (d) professional decision making (Leigh et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref20">51</reflink>]). The quality of a competence assessment model is typically evaluated for its validity, reliability, fidelity, and feasibility (Leigh et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref21">51</reflink>]). That is, the model should be able to measure competence accurately, consistently, as designed for its purpose, and with reasonable costs, time, and effort.</p> <p>Accreditation bodies such as the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref22">28</reflink>]), APA ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref23">4</reflink>]), and CSWE ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref24">30</reflink>]) typically mandate the assessment of competencies as part of their educational accreditation standards. Educational programs have wide latitude in their assessment approach. Beyond traditional assessment measures, such as exams or essays, professional schools increasingly use direct measures of behavior, such as practice simulations, practice observations, or objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) with standardized patients or clients (Cox &amp; Grus, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref25">31</reflink>]). Evidence of assessment validity is generally not included in accreditation standards.</p> <p>For assessment of competence for entry to practice, a multiple-choice standardized exam is widely used as a large-scale, cost-effective assessment measure. Exam content is often based on a job task analysis of currently licensed practitioners, overseen by subject matter experts and methodologists, that surveys the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for entry-level practice and licensure and measures skills through case-based scenarios (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref26">12</reflink>]; National Council of State Boards of Nursing [NCSBN], [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref27">63</reflink>]). Nursing uses the National Council Licensure Examination exam (NCSBN, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref28">63</reflink>]), psychology uses the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref29">18</reflink>]), and social work relies on the ASWB exam. Some examinations, such as the United States Medical Licensing Examination ([<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref30">82</reflink>]), incorporate direct measures of practice behaviors through OSCEs. Clinical internship with qualified supervision is also required as part of licensure for many healthcare and allied professions, such as nursing, medicine, psychology, social work, and teaching.</p> <p>For the assessment of continuing competence, experts debate whether the assessment should be on general competence or specialized competence depending on practitioners' roles and settings. Most regulated healthcare professions use participation in CE activities without formal assessments as a method of ensuring continuing competence (Di Leonardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref31">35</reflink>]). A small number of professions combine CE with peer evaluation, professional portfolios, specialty certification, or verification of practice hours (Grossman, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref32">44</reflink>]; Hagler, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref33">45</reflink>]; Di Leonardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref34">35</reflink>]). More recently, some professions, such as teaching, have begun accepting microcredentials that allow practitioners to demonstrate competencies aligned to their individual needs and interests for licensure renewals (Long, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref35">55</reflink>]). To assess continuing competence, various measures, such as reexamination, CE, peer review, or self-assessment, are used across most regulated health professions (Grossman, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref36">44</reflink>]). Using this larger framework, next we provide a detailed overview of the extant literature on stage-specific competence definitions and assessments and existing critiques of competency assessments in social work.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-5">Stage 1: Competency in the social work academy</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0185784150-6">Definition and measures</hd> <p>The social work academy, as directed by CSWE, employs a competency-based approach to social work education that was adopted in its 2008 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS). CSWE ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref37">30</reflink>]) defined social work competence as "the ability to integrate and apply social work knowledge, values, skills, and cognitive and affective processes to practice situations in a culturally responsive, purposeful, intentional, and professional manner to promote human and community well-being" (p. 7). The EPAS promotes "a holistic view of competence; that is, the demonstration of competence is informed by knowledge, values, skills, and cognitive and affective processes that include the social worker's critical thinking, affective reactions, and exercise of judgment in regard to unique practice situations" (CSWE, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref38">30</reflink>], p. 7). The EPAS articulates social work competencies drafted by CSWE's Council on Educational Policy and subject to extensive feedback and review from member constituencies, largely social work educators who are not necessarily active direct practitioners (CSWE, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref39">30</reflink>]). As is well-known, the competencies do not simply address direct practice, but also speak to policy, macro practice, and research, reflecting the profession's unique historical scope and complexity.</p> <p>As is the case for many accreditation bodies of professional schools, CSWE ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref40">30</reflink>]) requires competency assessment but allows schools to construct their processes: "Because social work practice is complex and multi-dimensional, the assessment methods used by programs and the data collected may vary by context" (p. 7). CSWE requires at least two measures to assess its proscribed nine competencies. At least one of the assessment measures must be based on a demonstration of the competency in an actual or simulated practice situation and assessed by a qualified practice educator or social worker. Schools may set benchmarks for competency achievement alongside an accompanying rationale (CSWE, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref41">30</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-7">Assessment practices and critiques</hd> <p>Despite a robust assessment requirement since 2008 and a growing discussion of assessment practices within social work education, the literature on social work competency assessment in the academy remains limited, with a focus on efforts of individual institutions (Tajima et al., [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref42">77</reflink>]). A recent survey (Sellers &amp; Neff, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref43">71</reflink>]) of 116 deans/directors of social work programs found that most schools (58.8%) are using a combination of embedded assessments (tests, papers, etc.) and that 90% used field education–based assessments to assess practice behaviors. Yet "little is known about the validity or reliability of these measures" (Tajima et al., [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref44">77</reflink>], p. 46). Drisko ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref45">38</reflink>]), who has written extensively on assessment, emphasized the importance of face validity (i.e., assessments that are explicit and related to the competency being assessed). Others noted evidence of leniency bias, or a tendency to evaluate students more positively, among field instructors (Bogo et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref46">20</reflink>]; Drechsler et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref47">37</reflink>]; Jensen et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref48">46</reflink>]).</p> <p>A small number of papers address validity and reliability concerns. Tajima et al. ([<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref49">77</reflink>]) explored the validity and reliability of students' assessment measures at one institution, finding some evidence of validity for their measures while noting inconsistencies across sources. Jensen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref50">46</reflink>]) conducted a psychometric analysis of a generalist-level field education evaluation instrument that supported the general validity and reliability of the instrument, although they did not examine subpopulation performance. A published evaluation of the Social Work Educational Assessment Package (SWEAP), a set of standardized instruments that measure competency attainment and other program outcomes developed by a for-profit consultancy, supports its reliability and validity (Delong-Hamiton et al., 2015; SWEAP, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref51">74</reflink>]). It's unclear how many programs use the SWEAP, although Sellers and Neff's ([<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref52">71</reflink>]) survey indicated significant interest in the instruments. Tajima et al. ([<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref53">77</reflink>]) argued that the OSCE-related assessment literature, largely led by Marian Bogo et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref54">20</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref55">19</reflink>]), is the most developed within the social work field, as it effectively addresses questions of validity and reliability, shows positive outcomes, and can provide a model for assessment scholarship more generally. While there is increasing use of OSCEs within social work programs, OSCEs are costly and challenging to implement, prohibiting scaling and widespread use.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-8">Stage 2: Minimum competence for entry into practice</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0185784150-9">Definition and purpose</hd> <p>Competence for entry into practice is typically defined as the <emph>minimum level</emph> of competence, or knowledge, skills, and abilities, necessary to enter a vocation or profession (Buckendahl, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref56">33</reflink>]). As discussed earlier, entry-level competence, unlike educational competence, is meant to ensure public protection and welfare and is more tightly aligned with the shifting dynamics of employment contexts. The conceptual literature on the effects and purpose of professional licensure and regulation suggested that licensure functions to ensure applicants' minimum level of competence to protect the public by regulating quality in areas in which the public is unable or unqualified to make effective judgments (Grise-Owens et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref57">42</reflink>]; Kleiner, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref58">48</reflink>]). According to the CCSWR ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref59">25</reflink>]), a competency framework is "intended to specify the <emph>minimum</emph> requirements for entry to the profession" and is <emph>not "</emph>an exhaustive compendium of all the knowledge practitioners require" (p. 6).</p> <p>ASWB's Model Practice Act ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref60">11</reflink>]) speaks directly to competence as it "establishes standards of <emph>minimal</emph> social work competence, methods of fairly and objectively addressing consumer complaints, and means of removing incompetent and unethical practitioners from practice" (p. 1; emphasis added). The Model Practice Act does not offer a specific definition of competence. Instead, it guides states to provide protections from incompetent practice and, more recently, notes the need for CE to ensure "continuing competence" (p. 36).</p> <p>Social work licensure is a state-level regulatory and gatekeeping practice that typically includes a scope of practice definition and title protection. Individual state-level regulatory boards vary in licensing requirements, but what is common across all U.S. states is (a) a degree from a CSWE-accredited school of social work; (b) a state-defined background review; (c) corresponding exam passage at the bachelor's (38 states), master's (43 states; some states only offer provisional licenses at this level), advanced generalist (19 states), and clinical levels (50 states); and (d) for an advanced generalist or clinical license, approximately two years (or commensurate amount per state definition) of post–Master of Social Work (MSW) experience with a requisite amount of qualified supervision. As briefly noted earlier, this is consistent with many other healthcare professions (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref61">13</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-10">Assessment with ASWB exam</hd> <p>Like most other professions, the social work profession uses a multiple-choice standardized exam as an assessment measure of competence for entry into practice, and most jurisdictions in the United States and Canada use licensure exams developed by ASWB. Forty-three states, along with Washington, DC; the U.S. Virgin Islands; and Guam, include passage of the MSW-level ASWB exam as a condition for MSW-level licensed or conditionally certified practice, and all states require the clinical examination for licensed clinical practice (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref62">13</reflink>]). ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref63">12</reflink>]) defined the passage of its examination as a primary marker of minimum competence and readiness to practice.</p> <p>Following the practices of other professions discussed earlier, ASWB licensure exams are also constructed based on a practice analysis, a survey of job tasks/duties, and knowledge requirements comprising social work practice, which are conducted every 5 to 7 years among licensed social workers. According to ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref64">10</reflink>]), the practice analysis captures "what people in the profession are actually doing and how important—and even critical—those activities are to competent entry-level performance" (p. 3). In 2016, more than 32,000 social workers in the United States and Canada completed ASWB's sixth practice analysis survey, which it conducted in conjunction with Human Resources Research Organization, a psychometric consulting firm (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref65">10</reflink>]). Respondents rated the frequency of job tasks/duties performed and the perceived importance of job tasks/duties for effective practice. The second group of respondents, those with more practice experience, rated the importance of knowledge statements for entry-level practice. These findings or "blueprints" from the survey then shape exam content. For a task to be included in the exam, it must be performed by at least 25% of respondents annually (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref66">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>All examinations are multiple choice, with 170 items, 150 of which are scored and 20 of which are used as nonscored test items to assess psychometric properties. They are designed to measure the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for entry-level practice (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref67">17</reflink>]). According to ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref68">10</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref69">17</reflink>]), the process is overseen by a panel of licensed social workers. A practice analysis task force drafts the survey, reviews results, and makes recommendations for exam content percentages and a passing score. ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref70">17</reflink>]) emphasized the panel's diverse composition in terms of race, gender, ethnicity, geographical location, and practice background.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-11">Critiques of assessment</hd> <p>The existing literature contains several competency assessments focusing on the ASWB examinations. Some critiques are relatively long-standing, while others have emerged more recently. Most urgently, questions have coalesced around racial biases in the wake of the release of ASWB exam results, revealing deep racial disparities in passage rates.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-12">Differential approaches</hd> <p>Commentators have noted the differential approach to competency assessment adopted by ASWB and CSWE and called for greater alignment (Murrow, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref71">61</reflink>]; Thyer, [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref72">78</reflink>]). Apgar and Luquet ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref73">6</reflink>]) recognized CSWE's multidimensional approach to competency that assesses behavior "in a real or simulated practice setting" and how it diverges from ASWB's exclusive reliance on "the testing of knowledge and cognitive processes" (p. 521). Apgar ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref74">5</reflink>]) suggested that this differential approach to assessment and competency helps explain licensure passage rates, which hover around 75% among first-time test takers. In a more recent analysis, Apgar ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref75">5</reflink>]) found a lack of interrater reliability in linking CSWE competencies and ASWB content. This line of argument, while raising significant issues, potentially conflates the conceptually distinct purpose of stage 1 and 2 competencies and assessment.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-13">Microbias</hd> <p>Another critique of ASWB assessment relates to its direct practice or microfocus emerging from its practice analysis (Apgar &amp; Luquet, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref76">6</reflink>]). Even for the few states with the advanced generalist level of licensing, only 18% of the content is related to macro practice. Only nine states "specifically mention macro practice, policy, or community organizing in their state definition of social work," according to a review by Donaldson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref77">36</reflink>], pp. 58–59). Some have argued that the emphasis on direct practice in the licensing exam further marginalized and disincentivized macro work (Donaldson et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref78">36</reflink>]; Koeske et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref79">49</reflink>]). Lightfoot et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref80">54</reflink>]) study found that most community-oriented social workers held negative views toward licensure, suggesting that (among other critiques) it was not relevant to community practice. Again, this line of thought does not fully acknowledge the fundamental purpose of Stage 2 entry into practice with minimum competence.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-14">Reliability and validity</hd> <p>The extant literature further raises issues around the validity and reliability of ASWB exams and many have called for greater transparency and analysis in this area (Albright &amp; Thyer, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref81">2</reflink>]; Castex et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref82">26</reflink>]; Randall &amp; Thyer, [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref83">68</reflink>]; Senreich &amp; Dale, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref84">72</reflink>]; Thyer &amp; Biggerstaff, [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref85">79</reflink>]). Albright and Thyer published a 2010 study testing the validity of the Licensed Clinical Social Worker examination. First-year MSW students guessed more than 52% of the correct item response answers without viewing the questions on an ASWB practice test; they would have guessed approximately 25% of the responses by chance. The authors recommend validity checks, including confirmatory factor analysis and comparison with like indicators. Marson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref86">59</reflink>]), psychometricians involved in the ASWB test development, responded to critiques of the exam by reviewing its psychometric properties in a peer-reviewed paper. These include (a) high-reliability estimates (in the 90s) for both Item Response Theory (IRT) and classical standards, (b) item development process based on ASWB's task analysis and exhaustive review of items by field experts to support content validity, (c) pretesting of items to determine their psychometric acceptability—in this case, their ability to discriminate between high-scoring and low-scoring candidates—before inclusion as scored items, (d) ongoing monitoring of items' statistical performance, and (e) readability (10th-grade level). In 2010, they also reported that gender and ethnic bias in the ASWB exams is less than 1%, where "one subgroup performs better than a subgroup of comparable ability on the test item" (p. 96) and noted that all items undergo a statistical review and a sensitivity analysis to check for bias. This analysis, however, is now more than 10 years old.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-15">Racial disparities</hd> <p>For the past several years, multiple social work constituencies have expressed growing concern about potential racial bias and racial disparities in ASWB exam results (Albright &amp; Thyer, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref87">2</reflink>]; Bouette-Queen, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref88">24</reflink>]; Castex et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref89">26</reflink>]; DeCarlo, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref90">34</reflink>]). Senerich and Dale ([<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref91">72</reflink>]) found that White graduates of three MSW programs in the City University of New York system were significantly more likely to be licensed than Black, Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, or multiracial individuals. Kim's ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref92">47</reflink>]) recent analysis based on current population survey data of 3,990 social workers found racial disparities in licensing rates; the differences in the field of practice and employer type were associated with African American–White disparities at the master's level and the probability of licensing for Hispanic and social workers of other races did not differ from that of White social workers when education and state of residence were held constant.</p> <p>In response to mounting pressure, ASWB publicly released exam performance data by demographic group in August 2022, revealing deep racial disparities in pass rates (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref93">16</reflink>]). From 2018 to 2021, for the master's-level exam, eventual pass rates were as follows: White 90.8%, multiracial individuals 85.1%, Asian 75.5%, Indigenous peoples 72.2%, Hispanic/Latino 71.2%, and Black 51.9%. Data show similar disparities in pass rates on the clinical-level licensing exam: White 90.7%, multiracial individuals 86.6%, Asian 79.9%, Indigenous peoples 73.5%, Hispanic/Latino 76.6%, and Black 57.0%. The Bachelor's-level exam and the advanced generalist drew from a much smaller sample, but the disparities were similar. The report also revealed declining pass rates with advancing age and a slight advantage for female-identified test takers ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref94">16</reflink>]). The report's authors note that racial disparities are common across standardized licensing exams in other professions and refer to stereotype threat, socioeconomic hardship, and access to exam preparation resources as possible explanatory factors for these disparities ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref95">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>The ASWB ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref96">16</reflink>]) report does not consider the possibility of psychometric test bias. ASWB's website showcases a discussion of differential item functioning (DIF); that is, comparing items' performance between subgroups whose overall performance is comparable and eliminating those that show bias for a public and practitioner audience (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref97">17</reflink>]). Articles addressing ASWB's attempts to manage bias in the exam through DIF and by the use of diverse advisory experts have also been disseminated in practitioner-friendly outlets (Owens, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref98">65</reflink>]). Critics nonetheless contend that a holistic analysis of racial bias in exam outcomes is warranted (DeCarlo, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref99">34</reflink>]). Castex et al. ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref100">26</reflink>]) called for a robust check for disparity beyond differential items functioning to compare performance on items "between racial and ethnic subgroups as a whole" rather than "only those of comparable ability" (p. 216) and further suggest that some test items elicit cultural and racial stereotypes that constitute microaggressions.</p> <p>Racial disparities are indeed well-documented across standardized testing in primary, tertiary, and higher education (Arbuthnot, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref101">8</reflink>]) as well as professional licensing exams in law (Ward, [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref102">83</reflink>]), medicine (Yeo et al., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref103">85</reflink>]), and education (National Council for Teacher Quality, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref104">62</reflink>]; Petchauer et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref105">67</reflink>]). Most understand a complex interaction of factors related to inequality and structural racism as accounting for these outcomes (Grodsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref106">43</reflink>]; Lemann, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref107">52</reflink>]). Critics argue that these high-stakes, unidimensional tests further perpetuate a cycle of inequality by blocking education and professional opportunities (National Education Association [NEA], [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref108">64</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-16">Supervised practice standards</hd> <p>A final line of critique involves the lack of transparent assessment processes associated with competence developed through supervised practice experience for clinical licensure. All states require postmaster's client contact hours (typically around the equivalent of 2 years) supervised by the state's equivalent of a licensed clinical social worker. Yet states differ in other clinical-level requirements. Some articulate specific practice experiences that count toward client contact hours, while others do not; a majority of states simply ask for documented supervisory hours, whereas others require the submission of a detailed supervisory plan to be approved by the state regulatory board (Association of Social Work Boards, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref109">13</reflink>]). From an initial review of state regulations, no state requires a structured assessment of competence at the conclusion of supervisory hours. In her [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref110">81</reflink>] review article, Tracey found that allied disciplines, such as psychology, have slowly moved toward a structured competence assessment in supervision. Tracey recommended the use of the American Board of Examiners in Clinical Social Work's conceptual model to anchor assessment in lieu of individual supervisors' judgment.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-17">Stage 3: Continuing competence</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0185784150-18">Assessment models and prevalent practices</hd> <p>Stage 3 demarcates continuing competence for practicing professionals and is the most understudied component of professional competence. The CSWE's EPAS emphasizes lifelong learning for the development of competence, and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) grounds its commitment to CE on an ethical principle of developing professional expertise (Kurzman, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref111">50</reflink>]). Most states regulate the continued competence or reentrance competence of social workers and those in allied professions through CE hours. As stated, social work licensees, like those in other professions, must maintain continued competence and renew their licenses every 2 years in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories, effective January 2015. This continued competence requirement recognizes that social workers practice in rapidly changing and increasingly complex environments that require ongoing education and training for evidence-based practice (Kurzman, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref112">50</reflink>]).</p> <p>To create uniform standards for CE and to relieve state licensing boards of the administrative burden of assessing each provider and CE offering, ASWB has implemented an Approved Continuing Education (ACE) program. ASWB recommends that state licensing boards recognize ASWB ACE-approved providers in their jurisdictions rather than approving the local providers' course offerings. Except for New Jersey, New York, and West Virginia, states accept courses approved by ACE (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref113">15</reflink>]). ACE maintains standards around program content, with an emphasis on evidence-based content, and requires evaluation through the administration of a posttest.</p> <p>Because jurisdictional mandates for licensure renewal drive CE requirements, there are significant state-by-state variations in the number of CE hours and content areas. Many licensing boards mandate that licensees obtain a certain number of CE hours in general content areas rather than in a particular practice area. For example, some jurisdictions require CE in certain content areas, such as ethics and values, cultural competence, substance abuse, and so on. Similarly, the total required CE hours for clinical social workers vary: 30 in Texas, 36 in California and New York, and 40 in the District of Columbia and New Jersey. In addition, licensed clinical social workers in the District of Columbia and New York must have a minimum of 28 and 24 hours of face-to-face CE hours, respectively, and a maximum of 12 hours in a distance learning format. Other states, such as California and Texas, do not impose face-to-face credit requirements (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref114">13</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-19">Critiques of assessment</hd> <p>The issue of how best to ensure and assess social work practitioners' continuing competence is daunting. Currently, social work licensees' compliance with the CE requirements is checked either by reviewing attendance lists submitted by CE providers, by auditing a random sample of licensees as part of the licensure renewal process, or by requiring licensees to submit CE certificates, verification of CE units, or a list of contact hours obtained with their license renewal applications. Moreover, little research exists on how effective these practices are in ensuring continuing competence. A meta-analysis of studies addressing CE in medicine noted a lack of research but did find support for CE's effect on physicians' self-reported knowledge skills and behaviors (Marinopoulos et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref115">58</reflink>]).</p> <p>Research on CE in social work is limited but not wholly absent. Studies typically consist of pretest and posttest knowledge acquisition, with some examining self-reported implementation of methods within a short-term period (Parrish &amp; Rubin, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref116">66</reflink>]). Gianino et al. ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref117">40</reflink>]) reported considerable frustration among CE program stakeholders in Massachusetts regarding issues around the lack of transfer of CE-derived knowledge and skills to practices, in addition to access, cost, content areas, quality control, and employer support in the program. Similarly, Thyer and Pignotti ([<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref118">80</reflink>], p. 136) argued that there is very little oversight of the content of CE programs, given that providers are approved by bodies that do not closely scrutinize the content of individual offerings. Their article details examples of "pseudoscientific" interventions taught through CE programs. To the authors' best knowledge, only a few studies (e.g., Coyle &amp; Carter, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref119">32</reflink>]; Smith et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref120">73</reflink>]) attempted to develop a CE evaluation instrument or examine CE's effectiveness on practitioners' knowledge and skills. There has not been a national effort since the ASWB's Missing Link Project in 2011 to examine the assessment models for continuing competence and the effectiveness of CE programs in maintaining and advancing continuing competence (Ruth et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref121">69</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-20">Knowledge gaps and research agendas</hd> <p>In keeping with the larger literature outside of social work, this article offers a stage-based conceptual framework for understanding issues of competence in the social work profession and its relation to social work licensing. At each stage, we have detailed an understanding of social work competency in relation to a larger conceptualization of educational and professional competence; clarified the role of educational entities, professional entities, and state entities in overseeing competency; and discussed the major debates and challenges around competency assessment. This conceptual clarity is an essential precursor to addressing the disciplinary issues and debates, knowledge gaps, and research agenda we now pose.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-21">Competence and public protection</hd> <p>One of the most pressing questions in this area is if and to what extent social work practitioners' competence ensures public safety and health. Given the relative lack of empirical study, it is unknown if there is a relationship between assessed competence and outcomes of social work clients and consumers. This is true in the educational context, in which students act as interns (Drisko, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref122">38</reflink>]), and in the professional practice context. Archer et al. ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref123">9</reflink>]) provided a systematic literature review to examine the evidence for the validity of large-scale licensure exams. Although their study found a correlation between performance in the nursing licensure exam and some patients' outcomes and rates of complaints, they did not find any causal evidence between them. Other studies, such as Santagata and Sandholtz's ([<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref124">70</reflink>]) work on competency in mathematics instruction, found little relationship between teachers' scores on a traditional standardized licensing exam and classroom observation assessment. Goldharber and Hansen ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref125">41</reflink>]) determined that teacher licensure tests had different predictive validity for student achievement by teacher race, with test scores being most predictive of student achievement for White test takers. These findings may be attributed to the fact that licensure exams are constructed to set a measure of minimum competence and are not intended to measure job performance or consumer outcomes (Buckendahl, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref126">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>Examining the incidence of violations of the code of ethics, sanctions, or disciplinary actions against licensed social workers may be one way to assess the relationship between minimal professional competence and public protection. As noted, there is some literature in this area (Boland-Prom, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref127">21</reflink>]; Boland-Prom &amp; Alvarez, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref128">22</reflink>]; Boland-Prom et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref129">23</reflink>]; Magiste, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref130">57</reflink>]). In doing such research, researchers need to control for other factors that may affect the rates of complaints and violations and should be aware of the caveat that data on consumer complaints and violations may be arbitrary. That is, rates of consumer complaints may not accurately reflect the prevalence and severity of violations because reported and investigated violations and sanctions may have more to do with clients' characteristics and practice settings rather than actual prevalence and severity.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-22">Assessment of educational competency</hd> <p>As discussed, with a few exceptions, little is known about the reliability and validity of measures used for competency assessment in schools of social work (Apgar &amp; Luquet, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref131">7</reflink>]; Tajima et al., [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref132">77</reflink>]), and additional research in this area is needed to inform best practices that are scalable. While the 2022 EPAS does not require or incentivize work in this area, peer-reviewed journals and professional organizations could support dialog and research in this area with calls for papers that address common questions of face validity, leniency bias that leads to inflated ratings, interrater reliability, and subpopulation performance. CSWE could provide seed funding or other forms of support (data sharing, task force) for this research. This should produce best practice models for ensuring the psychometric soundness of assessment measures that are common across the schools of social work. Proper incentives could attract research talent to the effort and result in greater attention to and respect for competency assessment.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-23">Assessment of minimum competence for entry to practice</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0185784150-24">Addressing equity issues in assessment</hd> <p>The recent release of ASWB exam scores by race has revealed stark racial disparities. In response, ASWB has committed to launching an inclusive and community-engaged approach to its 2023 practice analysis, including a social work workforce coalition made up of diverse professional leaders, including representatives who will structure community input sessions (ASWB, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref133">17</reflink>]). While these efforts are necessary and could reduce disparity, additional, vigorous psychometric analysis reviewing for racial bias is necessary. ASWB should also consider the release of the raw data to independent social work researchers. It is also essential to recognize the challenge of dislodging the deep-seated inequalities that emerge in high-stakes standardized testing across various contexts. As critics argue, standardized testing and licensure exams have been used to deny educational and professional access and opportunities to minoritized groups (NEA, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref134">64</reflink>]). The continued use of an exam producing such outcomes is an untenable situation for a profession with an ethical commitment to social and racial justice, and its use undermines the credibility of the licensing process for social work constituencies.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-25">Development of a feasible multidimensional assessment</hd> <p>The high-stakes stand-alone exam has also been criticized for its unilateral assessment of the knowledge-based dimensions of social work competency and privileging those with academic skills that do not necessarily predict effective or competent multidimensional social work practice. As discussed, researchers promote using multiple measures for competency assessment, as triangulation produces stronger validity. While most allied professions also rely on a single standardized assessment, our discussion notes the increasing interest in using multiple measures, particularly OSCEs (used in medical boards), other standardized computer-based simulations, and portfolios (used in teacher licensing) (Di Leonardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref135">35</reflink>]). The introduction of computer-based testing, rather than multiple-choice exams, has stimulated the development of new item types with higher fidelity, as well as computerized simulations that present cases requiring the practitioners to make sequential and interactive clinical judgments and decisions that are higher on the fidelity continuum (Leigh et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref136">51</reflink>]).</p> <p>Given the inherent limitations of a single standardized assessment, these additions or alternatives should be explored, researched, and piloted while addressing feasibility and implementation issues. One of the greatest challenges in developing and using a multiple or holistic assessment would be balancing its feasibility with other assessment criteria. That is, it is difficult to reduce the cost and time burdens on those involved in assessing a large number of professional candidates while maintaining the validity, reliability, and fidelity of the assessment. Although developing a multiple or more holistic assessment may be much more costly than the existing licensure exams, professional stakeholders should invest in and remain committed to the development of an assessment that is true to practitioners' realities and contexts and helps reduce disparities produced by the current standardized exams.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-26">Development of an assessment model for continuing competence</hd> <p>While much of our current professional dialog focuses on education and entry-level competence, questions of continued competence are just as critical, given the rapid expansion of knowledge in the social work profession and emergent social problems. A CE infrastructure exists, but there are broad questions about quality and effectiveness, as participation in CE activities itself does not necessarily translate into ensuring continuing or enhanced competence. There is a lack of research on the effectiveness of different modes of CE, little understanding of how CE affects social work practices and clients' outcomes, and uncertainty about whether participation in CE achieves its goal of enhancing practice competence (Congress, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref137">29</reflink>]; Gianino et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref138">40</reflink>]). The challenges with defining and validating continuing competence for certification and licensure purposes seem widespread across many healthcare professions (Di Leonardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref139">35</reflink>]).</p> <p>The nursing profession has created a national task force and conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review to identify and validate general and specialty continuing competencies and their assessment methods domestically and internationally (Di Leonardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref140">35</reflink>]). Social work also needs to launch a systemic inquiry into CE at the national level with the same objectives. Without such an effort, it would be impossible to establish a clear link between CE participation and continuing and advanced competence. Social work stakeholders and researchers alike should focus on examining ways to determine if CE enhances practitioners' competence, improves practice outcomes, and ultimately helps to protect the public (Gianino et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref141">40</reflink>]).</p> <p>In addition, professional stakeholders and researchers should examine and debate using a more robust assessment of continuing competence beyond CE course participation and self-assessment to explore recertification, portfolios, and computer-based assessments. Sollars and Xenakis ([<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref142">75</reflink>]) recently found that social workers in a healthcare environment can enhance clinical skills and continued competence via simulation-based CE programs. Given the current level of state variations in CE and post-COVID-19 trends toward relaxing occupational regulations, the current feasibility of such initiatives is questionable.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-27">Understanding a continuum of competence throughout careers</hd> <p>As noted throughout this article, empirical study of social work competency attainment is limited. There is also a paucity of conceptual frameworks that help explain the development of competence throughout social workers' careers. According to Lucas ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref143">56</reflink>]), practitioners are supposed to move through levels of competence as they acquire and develop new skills and experiences. It is, however, very challenging to observe competence development and delineate the standards at various stages, contexts, scopes, and specialty areas. Part of the challenge is related to a lack of available data. One of the most valuable actions for the social work profession would be creating a database of licensed social workers. Comprehensive data could help answer questions about social work competence and the social work workforce more broadly. Similar to the national nursing database (NCSBN, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref144">63</reflink>]), a national social work database could fuel explorations of competence, consumer protections, and workforce dynamics. Furthermore, if such a database enables longitudinal studies on practitioners' CE, competence development, and employment dynamics, it will help facilitate the development of empirical evidence as well as conceptual frameworks of a continuum of competence throughout their careers.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-28">Implications and conclusion</hd> <p>This article provides a conceptual model of competence, where the stages are distinct yet obviously interrelated. Each stage has its own strengths and challenges, as well as distinct interest groups, stakeholders, and professional entities. Yet, at every stage, additional empirical research is needed. At the moment, there is a crisis of legitimacy in Stage 2 competence that the profession needs to attend to immediately as it relates directly to professional ethics. Moreover, we need to think about continuing competence, as this is ultimately where resources are needed.</p> <p>The competence assessment process is fraught with many challenges, including (a) a lack of clarity and standardization in the definition and measure of competence; (b) confusion about, as well as conflicts between, competence used in the education and training processes as compared to that used in the licensure process; (c) lack of evidence that connects social work practitioners' competence to consumer protection and service qualities; (d) role of licensure and regulatory practices in ensuring practitioners' competence; and (e) questions of equity and racial justice. Efforts are needed to evaluate these challenges systematically and comprehensively through conceptual and empirical research. Attaining, maintaining, ensuring, and advancing competence is a joint responsibility among individual practitioners, educators, regulators, insurers, and employers. Social work educators, state licensing boards, the ASWB, CSWE, and NASW, along with other professional stakeholders, should work together to improve the current assessment models and practices at each stage of competence development to ensure competent practice.</p> <hd id="AN0185784150-29">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0185784150-30"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref11" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine. (2022). Standards of accreditation. https://accredmed.org/standards/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref81" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Albright, D. L., &amp; Thyer, B. A. (2010). A test of the validity of the LCSW examination: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Social Work Research, 34 (4), 229 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/34.4.229</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref12" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychological Association. (2022). Standards of accreditation for health service psychology and accreditation operating procedures. https://irp.cdnwebsite.com/a14f9462/files/uploaded/standards-of-accreditation.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref23" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychological Association (2024). APA Accreditation. https://accreditation.apa.org/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref74" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Apgar, D. (2019). The great divide between social work educational policy and licensure examinations: Differing approaches to identifying competency that are challenging the profession. Journal of Social Work Education, 57 (3), 519 – 533. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1671273</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref73" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Apgar, D., &amp; Luquet, W. (2021). The great divide between social work educational policy and licensure approaches to identifying competency that are challenging the profession. Journal of Social Work Education, 57 (3), 519 – 533. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1671273</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref131" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Apgar, D., &amp; Luquet, W. (2023). Linking social work licensing exam content to educational competencies: Poor reliability challenges the path to licensure. Research on Social Work Practice, 33 (1), 66 – 75. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315221116123</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref101" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Arbuthnot, K. (2011). Filling in the blanks: Standardized testing and the black-white achievement gap. Information Age Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref123" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Archer, J., Lynn, N., Coombes, L., Roberts, M., Gale, T., Price, T., &amp; Regan de Bere, S. (2016). The impact of large scale licensing examinations in highly developed countries: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education 16, (212), 2 – 111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0729-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2017). 2017 analysis of the practice of social work: Final report. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2017-Tech-Report.pdf">www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2017-Tech-Report.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2018). Model Social Work Practice Act. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Model%5flaw.pdf">www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Model%5flaw.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022a). Measuring social work competence. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/exam/measuring-social-work-competence/">www.aswb.org/exam/measuring-social-work-competence/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022b). Compare license requirements. <ulink href="http://aswbsocialworkregulations.org/jurisdictionLevelsReport.jsp">http://aswbsocialworkregulations.org/jurisdictionLevelsReport.jsp</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022c). Association of Social Work Boards. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org">www.aswb.org</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022d). States and provinces that accept ACE. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/licenses/ace-approved-continuing-education/states-and-provinces-that-accept-ace/">www.aswb.org/licenses/ace-approved-continuing-education/states-and-provinces-that-accept-ace/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022e). 2022 ASWB exam pass rate analysis: Final report. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022-ASWB-Exam-Pass-Rate-Analysis.pdf">www.aswb.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022-ASWB-Exam-Pass-Rate-Analysis.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of Social Work Boards. (2022f). Measuring competence fairly. https://<ulink href="http://www.aswb.org/exam/measuring-social-work-competence/measuring-competence-fairly/">www.aswb.org/exam/measuring-social-work-competence/measuring-competence-fairly/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards. (2022). Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards. https://<ulink href="http://www.asppb.net">www.asppb.net</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bogo, M., Rawlings, M., Katz, E., &amp; Logie, C. (2014). Using simulation in assessment and teaching: OSCE adapted for social work. Council on Social Work Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Katz, E., Logie, C., &amp; Mylopoulos, M. (2011). Developing a tool forassessing students' reflections on their practice. Social Work Education, 30 (2), 186 – 194. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2011.540392</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boland-Prom, K. (2009). Results from a National Study of Social Workers sanctioned by state licensing boards. Social Work, 54 (4), 351 – 360. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/54.4.351</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boland-Prom, K., &amp; Alvarez, M. E. (2014). School social workers sanctioned by state departments of education and state licensing boards. Children &amp; Schools, 36 (3), 135 – 144. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdu012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boland-Prom, K., Johnson, J., &amp; Gunaganti, G. S. (2015). Sanctioning patterns of social worklicensing boards, 2000–2009. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 25 (2), 126 – 136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2014.947464</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bouette-Queen, N. (2003). Identifying barriers to obtaining social work licensure. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/docview/305327209?pq-origsite=gscholar&amp;fromopenview=true">www.proquest.com/docview/305327209?pq-origsite=gscholar&amp;fromopenview=true</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Canadian Council of Social Work Regulators. (2012). Entry-level competency profile for the social work profession in Canada. <ulink href="http://www.ccswr-ccorts.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Competency-Profile-FINAL-Eng-PG-1-51.pdf">http://www.ccswr-ccorts.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Competency-Profile-FINAL-Eng-PG-1-51.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Castex, G., Senreich, E., Phillips, N. K., Miller, C. M., &amp; Mazza, C. (2019). Microaggressions and racial privilege within the social work profession: The social work licensing examinations. Journal of Ethnic &amp; Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 28 (2), 211 – 228. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313204.2018.1555498</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Christenson, B., Delong-Hamilton, T., Panos, P., Krase, K., Buchan, V., Farrel, D., Harris-Jackson, T., Gerritsen-McKane, R., &amp; Rodenhiser, R. (2015). Evaluating social work education outcomes: The SWEAP field practicum placement assessment instrument (FPPAI). Field Educator, 5 (1), 1 – 13.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Commission of Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE). (2024). Commission of Collegiate Nursing Education. https://nursing.uworld.com/educators/accreditation/ccne/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Congress, E. (2012). Guest editorial continuing education: Lifelong learning for social work practitioners and educators. Journal of Social Work Education, 48 (3), 397 – 401. https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2012.201200085</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Council on Social Work Education. (2022). 2022 educational policy and accreditation standards. https://<ulink href="http://www.cswe.org/accreditation/policies-process/2022epas/">www.cswe.org/accreditation/policies-process/2022epas/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cox, D. R., &amp; Grus, C. L. (2019). From continuing education to continuing competence. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 50 (2), 113 – 119. https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000232</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Coyle, J. P., &amp; Carter, I. (2011). Can continuing education curricula effectively teach professionals? A case for using a curriculum assessment tool for initial and ongoing evaluation. Professional Development: International Journal of Continuing Social Work, 14 (1), 15 – 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315211055986</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis-Becker, S., &amp; Buckendahl, C. (2017). Credentialing: A continuum of measurement theories, policies, and practices. In Testing in the professions: Credentialing policies and practices (pp. 1 – 20). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315751672-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DeCarlo, M. (2022). Racial bias and ASWB exams: A failure of data equity. Research on Social Work Practice, 32 (3), 255 – 258. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315211055986</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Di Leonardi, B. C., Stobinski, J. X., &amp; Welsh, S. (2020). From competence to continuing competency. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 51 (1), 15 – 24. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20191217-05</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Donaldson, L., Hill, K., Ferguson, S., Fogel, S., &amp; Erickson, C. (2014). Contemporary social work licensure: Implications for macro Social Work practice and education. Social Work, 59 (1), 52 – 61. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swt045</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Drechsler, K., Hessenauer, S., &amp; Jaber-Wilson, L. (2020). Engage in diversity and difference in practice competency: Exploring the explicit curriculum and outcome measures of graduate social work programs. Journal of Social Work Education, 56 (2), 341 – 353. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656571</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Drisko, J. W. (2014). Competencies and their assessment. Journal of Social Work Education, 50 (3), 414 – 426. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2014.917927</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Edwards, R. L., &amp; Green, R. K. (1983). Mandatory continuing education: Time for reevaluation. Social Work, 28 (1), 43 – 48. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/28.1.43</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gianino, M., Ruth, B., &amp; Geron, S. (2016). Social work continuing education: A statewide case study. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 36 (4), 342 – 362. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2016.1206053">http://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2016.1206053</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldhaber, D., &amp; Hansen, M. (2010). Race, gender, and teacher testing: How informative a tool is teacher licensure testing? American Educational Research Journal, 47 (1), 218 – 251. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209348970</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grise-Owens, E., Owens, L. W., &amp; Miller, J. J. (2016). Recasting licensing in social work: Something more for professionalism. Journal of Social Work Education, 52 (1), 126 – 133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1174641</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grodsky, E., Warren, J. R., &amp; Felts, E. (2008). Testing and social stratification in American education. Annual Review of Sociology, 34 (1), 385 – 404. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134711</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grossman, J. (1998). Continuing competence in the health professions. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52 (9), 709 – 715. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.52.9.709</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hagler, D. (2018). Licensure and professional certification renewal requirements: 2017 survey results. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49 (1), 51. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20180116-01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jensen, T. M., Brigham, R. B., &amp; Rosenfeld, L. J. (2019). A psychometric analysis of field evaluation instruments designed to measure students' generalist-level social work competencies. Journal of Social Work Education, 55 (3), 537 – 550. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1567416</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, J. (2022). Racial disparities in social workers' licensing rates. Research on Social Work Practice, 32 (4), 374 – 387. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315211066907</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kleiner, M. (2006). Licensing occupations: Ensuring quality or restricting competition? W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koeske, G., Lichtenwalter, S., &amp; Koeske, R. (2005). Social workers' current and desired involvement in various practice activities. Administration in Social Work, 29 (2), 63 – 84. https://doi.org/10.1300/J147v29n02_05</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kurzman, P. A. (2016). Social work continuing education: Current issues and future direction. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 36 (4), 332 – 341. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2016.1214041</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leigh, I. W., Smith, I. L., Bebeau, M. J., Lichtenberg, J. W., Nelson, P. D., Portnoy, S., Rubin, N. J., &amp; Kaslow, N. J. (2007). Competency assessment models. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38 (5), 463 – 473. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.5.463</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lemann, N. (2000). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy. Farrar, Straus &amp; Giroux.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lightfoot, E., Nienow, M., Moua, K., Coulurn, G., &amp; Petri, A. (2016). Insights on professional identification and licensure workers. Journal of Community Practice, 24 (2), 123 – 146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2016.1165328</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lightfoot, E., Nienow, M., Moua, K. N. L., Colburn, G., &amp; Petri, A. (2016). Insights on Professional Identification and Licensure from Community Practice Social Workers. Journal of community practice, 24 (2), 123 – 146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2016.1165328</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Long, D. (2018). Policy Update: Leveraging relicensure policies to advance deeper learning, 25 (2). National Association of State Boards of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED591853.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lucas, A. N. (2014). Promoting continuing competence and confidence in nurses through high-fidelity simulation-based learning. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 45 (8), 360 – 365. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20140716-02</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Magiste, E. J. (2020). Prevalence rates of substantiated and adjudicated ethics violations. Journal of Social Work, 20 (6), 751 – 774. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017319837521</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marinopoulos, S. S., Dorman, T., Ratanawongsa, N., Wilson, L. M., Ashar, B. H., Magaziner, J. L., Miller, R. G., Thomas, P. A., Prokopowicz, G. P., Qayyum, R., &amp; Bass, E. B. (2007). Effectiveness of continuing medical education. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment, No. 149, 1–69. https://europepmc.org/article/NBK/nbk38259#free-full-text</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marson, S. M., DeAngelis, D., &amp; Mittal, N. (2010). The Association of Social Work Boards' licensure examinations: A review of reliability and validity processes. Research on Social Work Practice, 20 (1), 87 – 99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509347858</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than for "intelligence." American Psychologist, 28 (1), 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034092</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morrow, D. F. (2022). Social work licensure and regulation in the United States: Current trends and recommendations for the future. Research on Social Work Practice, 33 (1), 8 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315221114175</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Council for Teacher Quality. (2019, February). A fair chance: Simple steps to strengthen and diversify the teacher workforce. https://<ulink href="http://www.nctq.org/publications/a-fair-chance">www.nctq.org/publications/a-fair-chance</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (2022). National Nursing Database. https://<ulink href="http://www.ncsbn.org/national-nursing-database.htm">www.ncsbn.org/national-nursing-database.htm</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Education Association. (2022). The racist beginnings of standardized testing. https://<ulink href="http://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/racist-beginnings-standardized-testing">www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/racist-beginnings-standardized-testing</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Owens, S. (2021, September). How does ASWB guard against bias on the social work licensing exam. The New Social Worker. https://<ulink href="http://www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/education&amp;#8211;credentials/aswb-guard-against-bias-social-work-licensing-exams/">www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/education&amp;#8211;credentials/aswb-guard-against-bias-social-work-licensing-exams/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parrish, D. E., &amp; Rubin, A. (2011). An effective model for continuing education training in evidence-based practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 21 (1), 77 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509359187</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Petchauer, E., Bowe, A. G., &amp; Wilson, J. (2018). Winter is coming: Forecasting the impact of edTPA on Black teachers and teachers of color. The Urban Review, 50 (2), 323 – 343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-018-0453-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Randall, E. J., &amp; Thyer, B. A. (1994). A preliminary test of the validity of the LCSW examination. Clinical Social Work Journal, 22 (2), 223 – 227. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02190476</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruth, B., Gianino, M., &amp; Geron, S. (2014). Missing Link Project: Final report. Boston University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Santagata, R., &amp; Sandholtz, J. H. (2019). Preservice teachers' Mathematics teaching competence: Comparing performance on two measures. Journal of Teacher Education, 70 (5), 472 – 484. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117753575</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sellers, W., &amp; Neff, D. (2019). Assessment processes in social work education: A review of current methods. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 39 (3), 212 – 225. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2019.1610544</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Senreich, E., &amp; Dale, T. (2021). Racial and age rates among a sample of urban MSW graduates. Social Work, 66 (1), 19 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swaa045</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, C. A., Cohen-Callow, A., Dia, D. A., Bliss, D. L., Gantt, A., Cornelius, L. J., &amp; Harrington, D. (2006). Staying current in a changing profession: Evaluating perceived change resulting from continued professional education. Journal of Social Work Education, 42 (3), 465 – 482. https://doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2006.042310002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Social Work Education Assessment Project. (2022). Social work assessment project. https://<ulink href="http://www.sweapinstruments.org">www.sweapinstruments.org</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sollars, E. D., &amp; Xenakis, N. (2021). Simulation-based continuing education in health care social work: A case study of clinical training innovation. Clinical Social Work Journal, 49 (2), 162 – 171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-021-00806-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spector, N., Silvestre, J., Alexander, M., Martin, B., Hooper, J. I., Squires, A., &amp; Ojemeni, M. (2020). NCSBN regulatory guidelines and evidence-based quality indicators for nursing education programs. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 11 (2), 1 – 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2155-8256(20)30075-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tajima, E. A., Song, C., Meyers, M. K., &amp; Maglalang, J. M. (2022). Measuring social work competencies: Comparing field instructor, classroom instructor, and student self-assessment competency ratings. Journal of Social Work Education, 58 (1), 46 – 62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2020.1817819</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thyer, B. A. (2011). LCSW examination pass rates: Implications for social work education. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39 (3), 296 – 300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-009-0253-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thyer, B., &amp; Biggerstaff, M. (1989). Professional social work credentials and legal regulation: A review of critical issues and annotated bibliography. Charles C. Thomas Publisher.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thyer, B., &amp; Pignotti, M. (2016). The problem of pseudoscience in social work continuing education. Journal of Social Work Education, 52 (2), 136 – 146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1151279</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tracey, P. M. (2018). Assessing readiness of clinical social workers: Using the American Board of Examiners' conceptual model. University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy. https://hdl.handle.net/11299/199005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United States Medical Licensing Examination. (2022). United States medical licensing exam. https://<ulink href="http://www.usmle.org">www.usmle.org</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ward, S. F. (2021, June). New ABA data parses out bar exam pass rates by race and ethnicity. ABA Journal. https://<ulink href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/new-aba-data-parses-out-bar-exam-pass-rates-by-ethnicity">www.abajournal.com/news/article/new-aba-data-parses-out-bar-exam-pass-rates-by-ethnicity</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White House. (2015). Occupational licensing: A framework for policymakers. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/licensing_report_final_nonembargo.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yeo, H. L., Dolan, P. T., Mao, J., &amp; Sosa, J. A. (2020). Association of demographic and program factors with American board of surgery qualifying and certifying examinations pass rates. JAMA Surgery, 155 (1), 22 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4081</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, M., Toepper, H. A., Pant, C., Lautenbach, C., &amp; Kuhn, C. (2018). Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education cross-national comparisons and perspectives (1st ed.). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74338-7</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Laura Curran; Joy Jeounghee Kim and Michael Myungkook Joo</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Laura Curran is Dean and Professor at the University of Connecticut School of Social Work.</p> <p>Joy Jeounghee Kim is Associate Professor at the School of Social Work, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.</p> <p>Michael Myungkook Joo is Associate Professor at the School of Social Work, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref116"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref128"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref129"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref130"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref137"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref142"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1507207 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Promoting Competence: Multistage Conceptualization, Empirical Evidence, and Current Controversies on Licensure to Inform a Future Research Agenda – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Laura+Curran%22">Laura Curran</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8877-397X">0000-0001-8877-397X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Joy+Jeounghee+Kim%22">Joy Jeounghee Kim</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9305-7142">0000-0001-9305-7142</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Michael+Myungkook+Joo%22">Michael Myungkook Joo</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6736-930X">0000-0002-6736-930X</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Social+Work+Education%22"><i>Journal of Social Work Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 61(2):173-188. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 16 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Work%22">Social Work</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Certification%22">Certification</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Employment+Qualifications%22">Employment Qualifications</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Job+Skills%22">Job Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Competence%22">Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22State+Licensing+Boards%22">State Licensing Boards</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Credentials%22">Credentials</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Racism%22">Racism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caseworkers%22">Caseworkers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation%22">Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Minimum+Competencies%22">Minimum Competencies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Standardized+Tests%22">Standardized Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Validity%22">Test Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Reliability%22">Test Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Safety%22">Safety</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/10437797.2024.2420091 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1043-7797<br />2163-5811 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This article examines the role of social work licensure in the promotion, assessment, and oversight of professional competence in social work practice. We ground our discussion of licensure and competence within a broader conceptualization of professional competence. The article (a) presents conceptual and assessment models of a multistage competence, (b) considers the extant empirical evidence on the assessment of competence at each stage, (c) discusses the role of state regulatory and licensing bodies in credentialing and upholding entry-level and continuing competency in social work practice, and (d) presents recommendations for future empirical research to inform best practices. The article engages with contemporary debates around licensure, including evidence of structural racism in the licensure process. The unique challenges associated with articulating, assessing, and regulating competence in a broad-based, values-driven profession practiced in complex and diverse settings are considered throughout. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2026 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1507207 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1507207 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/10437797.2024.2420091 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 16 StartPage: 173 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Social Work Type: general – SubjectFull: Certification Type: general – SubjectFull: Employment Qualifications Type: general – SubjectFull: Job Skills Type: general – SubjectFull: Competence Type: general – SubjectFull: State Licensing Boards Type: general – SubjectFull: Credentials Type: general – SubjectFull: Racism Type: general – SubjectFull: Caseworkers Type: general – SubjectFull: Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Minimum Competencies Type: general – SubjectFull: Standardized Tests Type: general – SubjectFull: Test Validity Type: general – SubjectFull: Test Reliability Type: general – SubjectFull: Safety Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Promoting Competence: Multistage Conceptualization, Empirical Evidence, and Current Controversies on Licensure to Inform a Future Research Agenda Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Laura Curran – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Joy Jeounghee Kim – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Michael Myungkook Joo IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1043-7797 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 2163-5811 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 61 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Social Work Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
