Considerations for Continuing Education Requirements

By Kerianne Johnstin Guth, MSW

Depending on state of residence (or practice) and practice specialty, training program, or mentorship, a social worker’s approach to and integration of professional development varies greatly. For some, state licensure requirements dictate and/or support development, refinement, and maintenance of particular knowledge and skills (e.g., ethics and boundaries or mandated reporting). For others, employer-based-training programs provide enough development opportunities to demonstrate competence for licensure renewal. Others still maintain clinical certifications with specific competency expectations, subsequently fulfilling continuing education (CE) obligations for license renewal.

Variability in Professional Development Requirements
The Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB) is the nonprofit organization composed of social work regulatory boards and colleges across the United States, its territories, and Canada. Last year, the ASWB’s education conference explored the nuanced differences between continuing competency and CE. According to Jennifer Henkel, LCSW, ASWB director of member services, continuing professional competence was defined as “the ongoing ability of a licensee to learn, integrate, and apply the knowledge, skill, and judgment to practice according to generally accepted industry standards and professional ethical standards in a designated role and setting.”

According to Henkel, “There is currently a huge variation of postgrad requirements, especially CE requirements. As ASWB members work toward greater practice mobility for licensees seeking licensure in additional jurisdictions, greater consistency in CE requirements would be a natural extension of this initiative. ASWB is proud of the Mobility Resolution and Strategy that was adopted by our members—all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and all 10 Canadian provinces— during the 2017 delegate assembly.

“The resolution and strategy are premised on a concerted effort by member boards to harmonize licensure eligibility criteria across all ASWB member boards so that equivalently licensed social workers can obtain licenses necessary to lawfully practice in other jurisdictions,” Henkel continues. “This strategy could also be modified and utilized in the future to generate a consensus on core elements of professional competence and CE requirements for license renewal and maintenance.”

In a review of CE requirements across the United States, the elements vary widely: amount of hours, timeframe for completion, and required topics (such as ethics, addiction, or mandated reporting). Some states such as New York dictates one hour of CE per month of license registration (typically 36 unless unique circumstances apply). The topics are flexible, from traditional classroom learning, authoring a book or paper relevant to social work practice, or giving a presentation. In nearby New Jersey, social workers must obtain 20 (bachelor’s level certified social worker), 30 (master’s level licensed social worker) to 40 (licensed clinical social worker) CE credits biannually with specifications for ethics and cultural competence. States vary in the approval of carry-over for hours earned in excess of the state requirements. In Alaska, licensed social workers must complete 45 hours biannually, with hours required in substance use disorders, Alaskan native cross-cultural education, and professional ethics.

Variability in Education Program Effectiveness
Henkel also highlights the gap in literature and research in the field that could validate, encourage, or support an evidence-based practice for states and the regulating bodies. “We [ASWB] are aware that research is currently occurring regarding CE and social work, but there is little published.” With increased emphasis on evidence-based practice in the field of social work, the evaluation of CE offerings, teaching methodologies, and technology platforms is minimal. Most available literature on continuing education in social work appeared to reach a high in the 1970s and ’80s across social work publications. A resurgence started at the end of 2016, with “Social Work Continuing Education: Current Issues and Future Direction” by Paul Kurzman, PhD, MSW, suggesting a discrepancy between the philosophical social work principle of encouraging lifelong learning and the transactional (and varying) CE mandates for license maintenance.

Conscientious Consumption of CE Programs
In response to the variable requirements for acceptable teaching methods across the states, NASW and ASWB offer a number of resources to support social workers to meet the requirements set by their state and gain access to subject matter experts in the field. Through in-person events, web-based modules, approved course providers, and affiliations with other professional medical and human services organizations, social workers engage in professional development opportunities in timely topics in the field with minimal barriers. Graduate social work education programs also make an investment into professional development opportunities for their alumni, faculty, and broader social work communities. The structure, frequency, accessibility, and affordability of these opportunities is mixed, with some schools dedicating entire departments to the cultivation, advertising, and management of a reliable menu of professional development courses and certifications. Others offer credit-bearing courses and events for field placement partners and faculty but not to the general community. The University of Michigan School of Social Work and Bryan Mawr Graduate School of Social Work and Social Research consistently offer certificates in clinical and macro practice skills. The Icahn School of Medicine and Graduate School at Mount Sinai Social Work CE program offers CE credits to hospital employees to ensure maintenance with state requirements.

For some social workers, lifelong learning is easily integrated and achieved within their state’s structure of CE. For others, it is through pursuit of new or ongoing technical training in clinical models of care such as dialectical behavioral therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, play therapy, or Gestalt therapy. These often result in certifications that require a much more specific set of professional development requirements that typically apply to the more general social work licensure.

It’s clear that professional development through continuing education is a shared priority for regulatory bodies and professional organizations. As ASWB highlighted at their 2017 education conference, however, CE is different than continuing competency. As CE credits become more accessible through online platforms, social workers must be careful to recognize teachings and information presented at odds with accepted best practices and evidence-based models of practice. Social workers should also consider pursuing certifications that serve dual purpose for CE mandates and technical skill development and competency through rigorously accredited training institutes, colleges and universities, and service providers to ensure the information presented is worth the cost of credits and time spent engaged in professional development activities. More research and discussion is needed to protect the integrity of licensure, neither complicating title protection with needlessly stringent professional development mandates, nor diluting the educational and learning process with inaccurate or ineffective training programs.

— Kerianne Johnstin Guth, MSW, is administrative director of addiction medicine services at Cooper University Health Care in Camden, NJ.