A Renewed Commitment for Leadership in School Social Work Practice

Abstract

Leadership in the educational setting is a key factor in the success of school social workers. Given the dynamic change that school systems and communities are experiencing, leadership for school social workers means increased awareness and advocacy for children’s educational needs. The start of the 21st century is marked by the proliferation of charter schools, market-based reforms, growing educational inequality, fiscal austerity measures, and a shifting demographic landscape. These and other factors such as low health care, social services, and mental health access are shaping the policy and practice environment for school-based professionals. To meet the demands of the contemporary practice environment, school social workers will need to think more strategically about their commitment to leadership and gain resolve about what leadership means in such a climate (Hopson & Lawson, 2011). Today, school systems face many complex and deep-rooted problems “that supersede the traditional boundaries of schools and require addressing the problems within the context of the school and the larger community” (Bemak, 2000, p. 324). For example, the limitation of state and local property taxes reductions, as written in the recent tax reform law, means a reduction in tax revenues, and, thus, lower funding for social welfare programs, including public education. This means that already underfunded schools will have an even tougher time gaining necessary resources. Lower tax revenues will also erode the acquisition of necessary resources to middle-class school systems that may likewise have low resources. There is a subtle shift within the United States to market-based reforms characterized by school privatization models based on school voucher programs and for-profit charter schools. Approximately 6 percent of school-age children and youths attend charter schools. Proponents of market-based reform efforts call for greater deregulation of state education systems. As a result, the 2017 tax reform bill allows “parents to use up to $10,000 from their tax-free 529 college savings account to help pay for private or religious schools for any grade” (“What You Need to Know,” 2018, p. 1). This will lead to the proliferation of for-profit charter schools and private schools taking needed dollars away from traditional public schools. Parenthetically, although I see nothing wrong with school choice measures, my concern is for low-income families with children who cannot compete with more affluent families in the marketplace of educational options. Leadership in the educational setting is an ongoing challenge for school social workers, mainly because they are in a host setting—“arenas in which social workers practice that are defined and dominated by people who are not social workers” (Dane & Simon, 1991, p. 208). Identified challenges for school social workers in the host setting include role ambiguity, marginalization, value discrepancies, and the devaluation of women as social workers (see Dane & Simon, 1991). Leadership is needed by school social workers in the host setting to negotiate power positions, engage in advocacy, mobilize resources, and generate interdisciplinary collaboration. Given their ecological approach to practice, school social workers must work in school systems along with other school-based professionals and surrounding communities to collaborate in the development of strategies and methods to promote a quality educational experience for children and youths in an era of fiscal austerity. For social work education programs that provide training and education on school-based practice, leadership and advocacy should become a salient part of preparation for the practice setting. Course objectives should include skills and strategies for practice in the school as a host setting, work within school communities, and how to engage in interdisciplinary practice (Bronstein, 2003). Moreover, how to cut through barriers to evidence-based practice is a necessary skill for school social workers, who often find themselves in school systems where resources to conduct evidence-based interventions are lacking. Of course, there are challenges and tasks that school social workers cannot tackle alone. Traditional “issues such as poverty, violence, poor academic achievement, substance abuse, and physical and sexual abuse require a multifaceted response by many professionals rather than the limited narrow perspective of only one professional discipline” (Bemak, 2000, p. 324). Along with rising inequality among income groups, public school systems continue to witness disparities among racial and ethnic groups in educational outcomes and the continuation of gross disproportionality in disciplinary outcomes and placements. Among minority youths, 39 percent of African Americans and 33 percent of Hispanic Americans attend schools in high-poverty areas. This compares with just 14 percent for Asian Americans and white Americans (American Psychological Association [APA], 2017). About 13 percent of school-age children attending public schools have mental health diagnoses. Whereas African American children and youths make up 16 percent of the K–12 public school population, they are over 40 percent of those diagnosed with intellectual and emotional disabilities (Losen, Hodson, Keith, Morrison, & Belway, 2015). Reducing the disproportionate placement of special education students in restrictive disciplinary settings is of the upmost importance. A comprehensive approach including teacher training, cultural sensitivity, culturally appropriate assessment, and prereferral use of evidence-based approaches form the most effective method of reducing disproportionality in special education (APA, Presidential Task Force on Educational Disparities, 2012; Nowicki, 2016). These problems in school culture including the development of zero tolerance policies, the disproportionate referral of racial and ethnic minority youths to juvenile justice, and tough-on-crime laws have resulted in the now infamous school-to-prison pipeline. What can school social workers do in collaboration with other school-based professionals to break this cycle? Advocacy for nonpunitive measures as a response to disciplinary problems must include work with school teachers and administrators and state legislators in planning strategies for reducing this problem within local school settings. The removal of students from school for disciplinary problems is by and large at the discretion of school administrators. Thus, leadership in this area means “educating teachers and administrators about the potential harm associated with conventional disciplinary practices; educating school personnel about effective, nonpunitive approaches; and creating a public campaign to generate popular support for the reform of iatrogenic school disciplinary practices” (Cameron, 2006, p. 219). Moreover, school social workers must use innovative and evidence-informed approaches in creating a positive school environment so that punitive approaches to school discipline are not the first option. “Creating a positive school climate requires data-informed decision making, such that data about student needs and organizational factors are used in improvement planning to create the conditions for academic success” (Hopson & Lawson, 2011, p. 106). Finally, interprofessional collaboration must be undertaken by major organizations representing school social work practice. The School Social Work Association of America, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and others must work to combat education inequality and trends to reduce resources to public school systems. Currently, these organizations collaborate to lobby the U.S. Congress to ensure the needs for their services in school settings. Similar efforts are needed at the local level to empower families and communities to be stewards of their own destiny in terms of the quality of education for children and youths. Part of capacity building in the advocacy process must include educating, organizing, and mobilizing local communities, businesses, and interest groups in the politics of education reform. When social workers are successful in schools it means that children and youths are having successful educational experiences. School social workers have the knowledge base to make a difference as leaders in schools. They must channel their knowledge of the school systems and compassion for children’s well-being into advocacy and action for change. It is increasingly important that school-based professionals move away from their professional silos to interprofessional collaboration to tackle the many problems that impede quality education outcomes for the nation’s most vulnerable families. Long-standing problems as well as emerging social welfare challenges call for renewed focus, advocacy, and leadership by school-based professionals. Outdated approaches that do not tackle the challenges facing school systems throughout the nation must give way to methods that facilitate greater interprofessional collaboration in schools with data-driven decision making and goal-oriented outcomes. There is no doubt that the stakes are high at this moment in history. School social workers must respond with commitment to social work professional values, strength of resolve, leadership in the host setting, and action-oriented purpose toward achieving healthy developmental and educational outcomes for school-age children and youths.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.