We have heard a lot of concerns about changes to the examination requirement for DC social work licensure. We want to address concerns here. If you have more questions, please feel free to reach out to us!

​

If you prefer a summary, here is a quicker two-page policy brief. Also, if you would like to read external links, here is a Linktree with a variety of sources of information about the social work licensing exams.

​

Do you want to get rid of social work licensure?

No. Passing a licensing exam and holding a license are different. We would like to eliminate biased exams. Exams ≠ Licensure

​

​Won't this bill be detrimental to the public?

There is no evidence that there would be detrimental consequences to anyone by eliminating biased exams. The social work licensing exams have never been correlated with safety, competence, or public protection. Many states already do not have LSWA and/or LGSW level exams, with no evidence that these professionals are any less safe. There are currently many practicing social workers who were exempted (“grandfathered”) from taking the exam when it was new, but there is no evidence that they are less safe or competent.

​

By eliminating an artificial barrier to licensure, we will have a more diverse body of social workers, and this will be a huge benefit for both social workers and the public. We will have more social workers of the global majority, more bilingual social workers, more older social workers with more life experience, and more Deaf social workers. This would be an incredibly positive step for the profession and the public, and it will result in clients seeking out social workers who reflect the diverse communities we serve.

​

Other professions have licensing exams, shouldn't we?

Most similar professions have only one exam, while social work has up to four. Once they have completed the exam and supervised hours, they are then independently licensed. DC does not allow social workers to do any human services work whatsoever until they pass an exam that has been proven to be biased. Even lawyers only have one bar exam, and many doctors only take one post-graduate standardized exam. Having more exams than other licensed professions is not what gives our profession value. It is our knowledge, skills, creativity, and ability to relate to a diverse range of people that gives our profession value.
 

Won't these changes make our profession low-status and watered down?

There was a real history of social work not being taken seriously as a profession. This still exists to some degree, but it will not be changed by eliminating exams at the supervised practice level. Additionally, there has never been consensus about the necessity of these exams. The National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW) released a position statement in 1983 that opposed not just testing, but licensure overall. They stated, “…Licensing of social work is deceptive as it purports to protect the public and insure quality service, when in fact it merely serves to falsely legitimize professional status and assure qualification for third party reimbursement.”

​

If our definition of legitimacy keeps out talented BIPOC, older, non-native English speaking, and Deaf social workers, then our definition of legitimacy needs to change.

​

Social work clients have a lot of needs. Won't exam removal put them at risk?

Getting rid of this exam does not water down the licensure process. There is no evidence that ASWB exams are correlated with competence or public protection. Additionally, social work requires competence in many skills such as empathy, conflict resolution, and de-escalation which are not readily measured by a 150-question multiple choice exam. This exam has veto power over all other qualifications and skills a social worker has. Many fantastic social workers are completely unable to work solely due to discriminatory exams that have never been proven to measure social work skills, while many of us know harmful social workers who have passed the licensing exams. Other qualifications, such as graduation from a CSWE-accredited school and a criminal background check, are enough to allow social workers to start supervised practice.
 

Won't this demoralize and offend social workers who have already passed the exam?

There are also many professional social workers who are demoralized and offended that ASWB, an organization that has demonstrated it flagrantly violates the social justice and integrity components of our Code of Ethics, continues to hold outsized power over the social work profession. (Many of them have signed our petition!) There are many wonderful BSWs and MSWs unable to work because of biased exams that discriminate against BIPOC, older, Deaf, and non-native English-speaking social workers. Their demoralization is of greater importance than social workers who are already licensed and, if employed by the DC or Federal Government, frequently paid the top 10% of salaries for DC social workers.

​

Social workers unable to pass the ASWB exam have a right to be offended that ASWB has had 40 years to eliminate bias but has not. Nor has ASWB taken this opportunity to examine their own test process. They are currently accepting research proposals, but they only allow research that is based on “upstream factors,” not psychometric measurement concerns. Of note, their measurement techniques are alarming to several researchers and do not conform to current National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME) standards.

​

How can you point to these exams as the cause of the shortage? There are other reasons such as lack of respect, burnout, and high cost of living.

Obviously, the exam requirement is not the only reason for the social work shortage. But the exam requirement is a major contributing factor. DC alone would have an additional 474 social workers if every demographic passed at the same rate as white people. Situations such as burnout only compound as remaining social workers encounter overwork because of pressures from understaffing. This number is an undercount, as it does not include the many social workers who intentionally avoid licensure solely because of pass rate disparities (once known colloquially, now known with data). Removing LSWA and LGSW exams would be an incredibly positive step towards alleviating the social work shortage.

​

Why weren't any public meetings held before proposing this major change?

This isn't true. We attended DC Board of Social Work meetings to try to have a larger open discussion. Advocates came to both the September and October 2022 board meetings to discuss our concerns about the ASWB exams. We received a written response on November 15, placing the issue back in our hands and the hands of the ASWB, rather than the DC Board of Social Work taking any responsibility regarding the impact of these exams on this city. As members of the ASWB, the DC Board of Social Work is clearly demonstrating their bias. We were additionally told, “...At this time we will not be accepting any testimonies or conversations regarding the ASWB exams…”, effectively cutting off the issue for further discussion (except for the March 2023 meeting, where ASWB was given approximately an hour of of the public portion for a presentation defending their exams). Clearly, legislation was needed to address this important issue.

​

Shouldn't we give the ASWB a chance to fix their exam? If they don't, then DC could make its own exams. 

If the ASWB had the desire to fix their exams in the past 40 years, they would have already. In fact, no mental health licensing exams are correlated with actual measurement of competence. This suggestion would take years or even decades to implement and would therefore continue to harm DC social workers and residents for no benefit.

​

This is such a big change, couldn't we do something smaller like provisional licenses for a year?

This suggestion only demonstrates lack of confidence in ASWB tests. If they truly measured competence, no one would propose that social workers practice without passing it. At best, the exams are expensive hoops to jump through, and at worst, keep competent social workers from helping residents of our city. Additionally, this idea would certainly result in social workers, doing their jobs well, being fired if they cannot pass the exam. This has already happened to many BSWs and MSWs in DC, predominantly BIPOC social workers, when DC tightened its definition of unlicensed social work.

​

Shouldn't we find other ways to reduce barriers, such as scholarships for people wanting to get MSWs?

Yes! We are excited that the Pathways to Behavioral Health Degrees Act of 2023 was passed into law. However, statistically, about 50% of these graduates will find themselves unable to practice in DC due to the barrier of a biased examination.

​

But if we remove exams, DC won't be able to join the Social Work Licensure Compact!

This is false. Per Compact rules, states are allowed to have their own licensure process for their own state (known as a single state license). The Compact license (known as a multi-state license) will have its own standardized process which is allowed to be distinct from the single state licenses. The Compact is not yet in effect and will only take effect once seven states have passed it. You can find out more about the Compact here.

​