Degree or examination: What is the foundation of the social work workforce in China?

Abstract

The current Chinese social work licensure program does not mandatorily require formal social work education. This compromised policy is contradictory to the mission of formal social work education and the trajectory of professionalization in other Western countries. This study examined whether social work graduates differ from those who do not have formal social work education in terms of competency, commitment, and turnover intention. Results described the struggles of social work graduates in their experiences in the field. The diminishing role of formal social education may affect the professional identity of social workers in social work development in China.

Keywords

China formal social work education licensure professionalization social work workforce

Introduction

Social work was reintroduced in mainland China as a discipline and profession in the 1980s when various social problems were emerging with the economic reform. It has been involved in the development of a social service system with strong government support because of its professional commitment to addressing social problems. The profession has obtained an opportunity to grow with the development of the social service system in China. Professionalization has been one of the missions of social work development (Wang, 2006).

After Chinese policymakers and social work scholars learned from the infrastructure of the United States, United Kingdom, and Hong Kong, they consensually agreed that professional regulations, such as licensure and certification, are important in order to achieve professionalization in China (Li, 2008; Peng, 2009). Licensure and certification are used in different countries to describe a comprehensive system that defines and regulates practice and establishes title protection for social workers (DeAngelis and Monahan, 2012). Licensure policy is important because it is relevant to one of the most critical issues of professionalization: who to include in the professional social work workforce and how to recruit them.

Since that time, there have been impressive achievements of social work professionalization development in China. The Chinese Communist Party and a number of central government departments provided a series of statements supporting social work professional development (Xinhua News, 2006). The ‘Plan for Long-term Social Work Workforce Development 2011–2020’ (Ministry of Civil Affairs, 2012) states that the government plans to train over a million professional social workers. The ‘Temporary Instruction for Assessing Social Work Professional Levels’ was implemented in 2006 (Ministry of Civil Affairs, 2006). This national standard examination is practically a licensure program. Program policies cover eligibility requirements, regulatory and registration organization, professional responsibilities, competency requirements, and continuous education requirements.

The Chinese social work licensure program has its unique characteristics. First, the examination is not organized by social work professional organizations but by government departments, namely, the Ministry of Civil Affairs and the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security. Second, a social work degree is not required for application, and the minimum education requirement is a high school degree or vocational education. The lack of a social work degree in higher education can be compensated for by a social work-related work experience.¹ Third, this licensure program is not the only way to attain government-acknowledged professional status. The Ministry of Civil Affairs announced that the strategies to recruit professional social workers include formal education, on-the-job training, and examination. Officials from the Ministry of Civil Affairs announced a plan ‘to train a group of social workers by college-level and graduate-level formal education, to promote a group of social workers by on-job training, and transform a group of social workers by licensure examination’. Practitioners in any field of social services are encouraged to attend the social work training² and take the social work professional-level examination (Xinhua News, 2016).

The characteristics of the Chinese social work licensure program are indeed unique because the professionalization of social work in most other countries is established on the foundation of formal education. Functionalist theories of professionalism highlight the importance of formal education (Tsang and Yan, 2001; Yip, 2007b). Possession of formal and specialized knowledge gives an identity, autonomy, authority, and the negotiating power to a profession (Freidson, 1988). For example, the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) in the United States utilizes Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) for Baccalaureate and Master’s social work programs to ensure that the 10 core competencies that cover social work knowledge, values, and skills are incorporated in the program mission and goals, implicit and explicit curriculum, field education, and assessment of student learning outcome (CSWE, 2015). Social work programs in the United States are required to make continuous improvement, thereby ensuring that students are prepared for professional practice. Therefore, a Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) or Master of Social Work (MSW) degree is required for licensure in the United States (DeAngelis and Monahan, 2012) based on the argument that only accredited social work education programs can provide practitioners with the knowledge and skills needed in providing professional social work services (Watkins and Holmes, 2012). Similarly, the British social work regulatory system only grants legal social work license to those who are social work graduates (Ward, 2004).

Power theory is an alternative theory that can help in comprehending the characteristics of the Chinese social work licensure program. According to this theory, the process of professionalization is the complex balance of various social forces (Abbott, 1988), which includes the state, academia, and the profession in China. Gray (2008) used the title ‘Who Speaks for Whom?’ to specify the importance of the different forces, as well as their interests, in the development of social work professionalization in China.

Chinese social work scholars have acknowledged that government support is crucial in current and future social work development (Wang and Chen, 2007; Yuen-Tsang and Wang, 2002). Consequently, the leading role of the government and its goal and agenda for the profession have been accepted, whereas social work education and professional organizations are less active in the endeavor to develop the profession (Gao and Yan, 2015). The government is interested in creating a massive social workforce. The significant and increasing need for social workers in addressing the various growing social problems is magnified by the population size of China. For example, Li et al. (2011) noted that approximately 200 million people face challenges in their daily lives. The ‘Plan for Long-term Social Work Workforce Development 2011–20’ predicts that the number of professional social workers will total 1.45 million by 2020 (Ministry of Civil Affairs, 2012). By March 2016, only a total of 206,358 practitioners passed the social work professional-level examination (Xinhua News, 2016). The unprecedented goal necessitates the modification of the eligibility criteria for licensure and recruitment from all potential groups. Additionally, the Chinese government has been incorporating the social work profession into the existing social service system. The government encourages practitioners who work in the social service system to become social workers by taking the licensure exam. Social services already existed prior to the reintroduction of social work in China. The Ministries of Civil Affairs, the National Women’s League, the National Labor Union, the Communist Youth Corps, and semi-governmental committees of urban and rural residents have been responsible for providing social services for decades. The employers of these organizations are practically ‘social workers’ (Wang, 2006; Xia and Guo, 2002); thus, they should be eligible for social work workforce despite their educational backgrounds.

Chinese social work scholars have highlighted the professional nature of social work as a discipline and a profession, stating that it is different from philanthropy and other governmental social services in terms of knowledge, fields of practice, and unique values (Liu, 2004). Nevertheless, the development of the social work profession in China has been a large government-led project that undermines formal social work training and the exclusiveness of the title of a social worker. Thus far, limited empirical evidence is available to discuss the present status of the social work profession. Some scholars ponder the future of the social work workforce given the diminished role of formal education in the licensure program (Gao and Yan, 2015; Lei, 2012; Yin, 2012). Can similar attributes be expected from practitioners who are not formally trained compared with social work graduates? Is it necessary to play down the role of formal education in the professionalization policy? Are the on-the-job training and examination adequate to prepare practitioners for providing professional social work services? Can social work graduates and social workers from other disciplines be unified? The answers to these questions concern the foundation of the social work workforce. To contribute to the discussion, the present study examined the effect of formal social work education and licensure program in creating a social work workforce. The research questions are as follows:

What percentage of social workers are formally trained social work graduates and What percentage of social workers have passed the licensure examination in the social work workforce?

Do social workers with formal social work education differ in professional attributes?

Do social workers differ in professional attributes by licensure status?

Are there significant interaction effects between education and licensure status? If yes, for those without formal social work training, does passing the licensure exam level their difference with counterparts who are social work graduates?

Methods

In 2014, the Department of Social Work, East China University of Science and Technology, and the Social Work and Social Policy Research Center jointly initiated a project entitled ‘China General Survey on Professional Social Workers’. This project aimed at building a nationwide longitudinal database to collect information on the Chinese social work workforce exploring a range of issues in the social work profession, including employment trends, professional development, and work-related stress and problems. The researchers of this project reached out to more than 140 social work and social service agencies across the country. The employers of these agencies were first asked whether they signed employment contracts for social worker positions and were requested to provide the specific years when they signed these contracts. Employers who were qualified for these criteria were asked to voluntarily fill out a paper or an electronic copy of the survey.

Sample

This project completed its first wave of data collection in October 2015. Seven social work agencies were selected for this study. These agencies are relatively large, well developed with a minimum history of 10 years, and representative of a good professional development level in China. Four of the agencies in Shanghai are closely affiliated with the government, and their services include a juvenile service, community correctional service, and substance rehabilitation. Meanwhile, the three selected agencies in Guangdong are grass-roots social work agencies, which are primarily funded by the government to provide comprehensive services in the community centers in Guangzhou and Shenzhen. A total of 2108 respondents were included as samples for this study.

Measures

One of the challenges of this study was to identify the reference in measuring the professional attributes of Chinese social workers. National official documents that mandate professional values, ethics, principles, and competencies are lacking, and the Western code of ethics and competency requirements are not necessarily applicable.

The discussion regarding professionalism started in the United States during the 1970s. Before the publishing of National Association of Social Workers (NASW) code of ethics and CSWE EPAS, Dyer (1977) believed that professional social workers should at least demonstrate willingness and competency to provide services. Job satisfaction and career mobility aspirations may demonstrate one’s attitude toward social work as a profession. When evaluating the work outcomes, researchers often select retention, attitude toward the profession and work, competency and knowledge, and performance assessment to evaluate social workers (Rubin and Parrish, 2012). This study examined and compared the competency, commitment, and turnover intention of social workers with formal training and social workers with other educational backgrounds.

Competency

The Maslach Burnout Inventory–General Survey (MBI-GS), which was developed by Schaufeli et al. (1996), comprises three subscales: emotional exhaustion, cynicism, and personal accomplishment. Li and Shi (2003) tested the psychometric property of the Chinese version of MBI-GS (CMBI-GS) and utilized it to assess the emotional exhaustion of social workers in the Chinese context (Geng et al., 2011). The third subscale was used to measure the competency of social workers in this study. A positive correlation is assumed between professional knowledge and skills and self-perceived accomplishment of work. This subscale has six items, which were answered using a six-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = ‘never like this’ to 6 = ‘always’. The sample item states, ‘I can efficiently solve work-related problems’. The scores of these six items were added. A higher score indicates better self-perceived accomplishment and thus represents competency of social work practice. The Cronbach alpha of this subscale is 0.93, which indicates excellent internal consistency.

Commitment

This study utilized the subscale cynicism from CMBI-GS and the self-design social work identity scale to assess the commitment of social workers to the profession. The cynicism subscale has four items, which were answered using a six-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = ‘never like this’ to 6 = ‘always’. The sample item states, ‘I doubt the significance of my work’. The sum of these four items indicates how cynical social workers are toward the profession.

The researchers of this study designed a six-item scale to assess the acceptance of social workers of their professional identity. The sample item states, ‘If given the opportunity, I will choose to be a social worker again’. Responses were recorded on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ to 7 = ‘strongly agree’. The sum of the seven items indicates how social workers identify themselves with the profession. These two measures show good internal consistency with the Cronbach alpha values of 0.90 and 0.87, respectively. The variables cynicism and identity have a moderately negative and significant correlation (Pearson correlation = −0.47, p < 0.01). To some extent, this correlation indicates the validity of utilizing these two measures in examining the construct of commitment.

Turnover intention

Turnover intention is measured by a 1- and 3-year turnover intention. Respondents were asked, ‘Do you currently consider leaving the social work profession?’ and ‘Do you consider leaving the profession in three years?’ These two items were responded to on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = ‘I don’t want to leave’ to 5 = ‘I want to leave very much’. A high score indicates a strong inclination to leave the profession.

Social work education

This variable is dichotomous. It indicates whether one has had any formal social work education in an associated degree, college, or graduate education level.

Licensure status

This construct is measured by a dichotomous variable that indicates whether one has passed the social work professional-level examination at either junior social worker level or social worker level.

Data analysis

Descriptive and frequency analyses are utilized to examine the social work educational background and licensure status of the respondents in the sample. Factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to examine the significance of the interaction effect between these two variables.

One-way ANOVA results presented the differences in competency, commitment, and turnover intention between the two groups of social workers with different social work educational backgrounds. Another series of one-way ANOVAs was conducted to test whether those who have passed the social work professional-level examination differ from those who have not passed this exam in terms of competency, commitment, and turnover intention.

Results

Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the social work workforce in this sample. A typical social worker is a young and married Han female with urban household registration status. Although women constitute the majority of the sample, the percentage of female social workers (68.8%) is lower than that in other countries. For example, 81% of the licensed social workers in the United States are women (NASW, 2016). Han people constitute the majority of the sample because it is the predominant ethnicity in China. The seven agencies included in this study are located in the two largest metropolitan cities of China, hence the household registration characteristic of the sample may not represent other regions of China.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of respondents.

	N	Mean (SD)	Percentage
Gender	2099
Male			31.2
Female			68.8
Age	1920	30.1 (7.6)
Household registration	2090
Urban			84.2
Rural			15.8
Marital status	2010
Single			35.5
Married			63.2
Other			1.3
Ethnicity	2094
Han			98.1
Minority			1.9

Table 2 presents the detailed educational and licensure information of respondents in this sample. Formal social work trainings are provided by 303 BSW programs, 62 MSW programs, and approximately 70 associate social work degree programs across the country (Pan, 2013). Of the sample in this study, more than 75% of respondents have college or higher level education. Among those with an associate degree education, less than 20% of the respondents majored in social work and only 24.7% college-educated respondents are social work graduates. A total of 20 respondents reported that they hold a Master’s degree, of which 10 have MSW degrees. Regardless of educational level, social work graduates do not comprise the majority of the workforce. Among those who have reported their educational background, only about 30% of social workers have social work degrees. In terms of licensure status, more than 60% of the respondents in this sample are certified as junior social workers or social workers.

Table 2.

Educational background and licensure status of respondents.

	n	Percentage
Highest degree	2052
High school and below		1.0
Associate degree		22.4
Bachelor’s degree		75.7
Master’s degree		1.0
Not reported		2.7
Social work associate degree	459
Yes		17.0
No		78.6
Not reported		4.4
Social work Bachelor’s degree	1553
Yes		24.7
No		72.1
Not reported		3.2
Social work Master’s degree	20
Yes		50.0
No		40.0
Not reported		10.0
Social work degree	2083
Yes		29.6
No		70.4
Licensed junior social worker	1866
Yes		46.0
No		42.5
Not reported		11.5
Licensed social worker	1866
Yes		30.6
No		58.0
Not reported		11.4
Social work license	2044
Yes		60.2
No		36.8
Not reported		3.0

Table 3 shows that social workers in this sample have a relatively high level of self-perceived competency. The mean average of the competency variable is 23.5. In terms of commitment, the results are consistent between the two variables selected for this construct. The mean of variable cynicism is only 9.1, showing that the cynical attitude of social workers toward the profession is low, whereas the acceptance of the social work professional identity (mean = 31.2) is toward the high end in the range. Employment stability is not likely a considerable problematic issue in the Chinese social work workforce because the values of 1- and 3- year turnover intention are both 2.4, which indicates that the social workers do not have a significantly strong inclination to leave the profession.

Table 3.

Description of competency, commitment, and turnover intention.

	n	Mean (SD)	Range
Competency	2072	23.5 (5.5)	6–36
Commitment
Cynicism	2076	9.1 (4.0)	4–24
Identity	2057	31.2 (6.2)	7–42
Turnover intention
1-year	2089	2.4 (1.0)	1–5
3-year	2078	2.4 (1.0)	1–5

A series of one-way ANOVAs were conducted to examine the main effects of education and licensure on competency, commitment, and turnover intention. The results indicate that social work graduates are not superior to their counterparts from other disciplines in practicing competency (F = 1.03, p = 0.21), although the mean score of social work graduates is slightly higher. When comparing the difference on commitment, the results seem contradictory. In terms of cynicism, social work graduates show a more cynical attitude toward the profession than their counterparts without a social work degree (F = 22.21, p < 0.01). In terms of the acceptance of professional identity, the two groups of social workers have no significant difference (F = 0.32, p = 0.57). The results also indicate that social work graduates have a stronger inclination than their counterparts with other educational backgrounds to leave the professional in a 1-year period (F = 14.33, p < 0.01) and 3-year period (F = 10.74, p < 0.01).

Social workers who have passed the licensure exam have significantly weaker competency in their work than their unlicensed counterparts (F = 4.21, p < 0.05). Licensed and unlicensed social workers reveal different attitudes toward the profession; the former have a significantly more cynical attitude than the latter (F = 30.90, p < 0.01). However, their acceptance of the social worker identity is equivalent (F = 0.12, p = 0.74). Meanwhile, licensed social workers have a stronger inclination than those who have not passed the licensure exam in both the 1-year period (F = 7.03, p < 0.01) and 3-year period (F = 5.79, p < 0.01) (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Mean values (M) and standard deviations (SD) of competency, commitment, and turnover intention by education and licensure.

	Variable		Groups	M	SD	F
Competency		Education	Yes	23.69	5.50	1.03
		Education	No	23.42	5.54
		Licensure	Yes	23.28	5.54	4.21*
		Licensure	No	23.80	5.54
		Education × licensure				0.98
Commitment	Cynicism	Education	Yes	9.70	3.97	22.21**
		Education	No	8.83	3.90
		Licensure	Yes	9.46	4.06	30.91**
		Licensure	No	8.46	3.69
		Education × licensure				0.58
	Identity	Education	Yes	31.30	5.54	0.32
		Education	No	31.13	6.40
		Licensure	Yes	31.20	6.08	0.12
		Licensure	No	31.11	6.26
		Education × licensure				0.24
Turnover intention	1-year	Education	Yes	2.50	1.07	14.33**
		Education	No	2.32	1.01
		Licensure	Yes	2.43	1.03	7.03**
		Licensure	No	2.30	1.01
		Education × licensure				0.39
	3-year	Education	Yes	2.50	1.03	10.74**
		Education	No	2.33	1.02
		Licensure	Yes	2.44	1.06	5.79*
		Licensure	No	2.32	1.03
		Education × licensure				0.19

p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

The similar effects of educational background and licensure status may be attributed to the high pass rates of the social work professional-level exam among social work graduates. Among the 615 social workers with formal training, more than 75% have passed the licensure exam. Meanwhile, the passing rate among those without formal training is only 56%.

Nevertheless, the roles of education and the licensure exam in professional development do not seem important because social work graduates are not more competent or committed to the profession but are more cynical than the social work practitioners who have not had formal social work education. Education and licensure exam seem to have negative effects on turnover intention. Formally educated and licensed social workers are more likely to leave the profession in both 1- and 3-year periods than their counterparts.

Factorial ANOVA was performed to determine the significance of the interaction effect between education and licensure on competency, commitment, and turnover intention. However, the analyses yield no significant results. The results indicate that licensure policy does not seem to be helpful for those who have not had formal social work education in unifying with the social work graduates in terms of competency, commitment, and turnover intention.

Discussion

Using the data collected from the China General Survey on Professional Social Workers, the present study added empirical evidence to the discussion concerning the professional development of social work in China. Specifically, this study examined the contributions of formal social work education and the Chinese social work licensure program in creating a social work workforce.

The government and social work academia agreed that a massive workforce is important for social work development in China. The profession recruited people with higher education; however, social work graduates are not particularly attracted to the profession. The data from this study and the Ministry of Civil Affairs show that social work graduates constitute the minority in the workforce (Liu, 2009). This study also reveals that social work graduates are more likely to consider leaving the profession even when they have already joined the profession. Meanwhile, research shows that choosing not to be a social worker is common among social work graduates (Zeng et al., 2014). When people from other educational backgrounds have been recruited, social work graduates seem to be self-excluded from the profession. In terms of competency and commitment, the results show that social work graduates are not more competent and do not identify more with the profession than their counterparts from other educational backgrounds. Moreover, social work graduates expressed a more cynical attitude toward the profession.

The low level of competency and commitment among social work graduates could partly be attributed to the quality of formal social work education. A number of studies have covered various issues of social work education in China, such as the lack of formal social work training among faculty members, the hasty expansion of social work education programs, difficulties in the application of Western social work knowledge, field education issues, and difficulties in recruiting committed students due to high education admission policy (Chan and Chan, 2005; Li et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2013; Tsang and Yan, 2001; Tsui and Yan, 2010; Yip, 2007b; Yuen-Tsang and Wang, 2002).

Another possible explanation for the differences between social work graduates and their counterparts without formal training might be the unclear definition of professional competency standards and the code of ethics and values for the social work profession in China. The Chinese social work licensure exam program is remarkably ambiguous in terms of what it intends to assess. Competency requirements in the ‘Temporary Instruction for Assessing Social Work Professional Levels’ exam are oversimplified statements. The Ministry of Education (2004) prescribed 11 required courses for the social work education program in 2004. These courses are similar to those offered in social work programs in the United States or the UK, such as the introduction to social work, human behavior and the social environment, and practicing with individuals, groups, and communities; however, this curriculum is not competence based. Social work scholars have a long-standing discussion on the application of Western social work values and ethics to social work education in China (Hutchings and Taylor, 2007). In addition, whether the Chinese social work licensure examination is consistent with formal social work education is unknown. These two groups of social workers may utilize the different standards to evaluate their competencies and seek professional identities.

Furthermore, the problem may stem from the external environment. Social work graduates struggle to apply their professional training to their jobs in the current context of practice. Lei and Huang (2017) found that although critical thinking and research, the commitment to promoting social change and development, and the principle of social justice and human rights are important competencies acknowledged by the international social work community, these competencies are not valued by Chinese expert educators and practitioners of the profession. In comparison with their counterparts without formal training, social work students are more likely to have been exposed to social work training that is influenced by Western competency and values. As a result, formally trained social workers experience difficulties in adjusting to the work environment and are even faced with conflict at work (An and Chapman, 2015; Leung, 2012; Yan et al., 2012; Yip, 2007a). They accept the professional identity but are more cynical about their work than their counterparts without formal training. These attitudes may reflect critical thinking and critiques toward the profession. Social work practitioners from other educational backgrounds may seem to be more experienced and more competent (Wang, 2006) because they are less familiar with social work competencies, values, and ethics acknowledged in the international social work community, and are more compliant with the current context of Chinese social work practice.

In addition, the licensure program alone may not be able to facilitate social work professionalization. The interaction effect of educational background and licensure status is insignificant, which indicates that for those without any formal educational background in social work, passing the licensure exam does not help them unify with formally trained social workers. Social work, as a discipline and profession, has unique ethics, values, knowledge, and skills that are required in intensive training and gradual cultivation. The lack of shared training experience and knowledge may be the cause of the difference between the two types of social workers in terms of competence, identity, and turnover intention.

Policymakers, social work professional organizations, and academia should be aware of the possible consequences on the future of the social work workforce in China. The problem created by the differences between the two groups of social workers is that formally trained social workers constitute the minority and are marginalized in the workforce. The Chinese social work profession may continue to suffer from identity crisis when presented to the public as one profession because of the differences. To address this problem, a clearly defined professional competency standard is vital for social work as a discipline and profession. Such a standard may help strengthen the quality of social work educational programs. Second, formal social work education and a licensure program should be a congruent system. People from different backgrounds should be evaluated at the same standard when they intend to enter the profession. Moreover, Zeng et al. (2016) found that low entrance threshold deterred social work graduates from the profession because they felt that their formal education was undervalued. To prevent social work graduates from being marginalized in the profession, social work academia should advocate for more protection of them as a reward for their investment in education, instead of removing the entrance threshold for the profession only for the sake of enlarging the workforce.

Social work development in China faces these challenging tasks. Social work academia has been struggling with the question of whether the competency standard derived from Western culture should be or can be applied in Chinese political, social, and cultural contexts. Conversely, these challenges can be viewed as an opportunity for the different forces in the social work community, such as social work academia and the growing social work and social service organizations, to establish their institutional space in China under a strong government influence through negotiations (Gao and Yan, 2015).

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. The items that were used to measure competence and identity may be controversial. As previously mentioned, this study only assessed the self-perceived competence and professional identity of social workers because of the lack of clearly defined standards of social work competency. Another limitation of this study is the representation of the sample. Seven social work agencies were selected in this study because of their impressive reputation and achievement within the social work community. However, the Chinese social work workforce is enormous and complex. This study did not examine the small and newly founded agencies or the social work workforce in areas other than Shanghai and Guangdong. Finally, this study did not to intend to establish a causal relationship between the dependent (i.e. competency, commitment, and turnover intention) and independent variables (i.e. social work education background and licensure status); rather, the problems with both formal social work education and the social work practice context were discussed to explain the research result. Furthermore, this study only intended to describe the difference between those who have formal social work education and those with no formal social work education, as well as the differences between licensure and unlicensed social workers.

Conclusion

One of the social work pioneers, Mary Richmond, advocated for formal social work education because she believed that it showcases what social work is and that professional social workers are different from philanthropy workers and government officials (Leighninger, 2000). Her vision set the foundation for the social work workforce in the United States. In the history of professionalization in the United States, social workers in the private and public sectors spent decades working toward becoming unified by a comprehensive and cohesive education, which is believed necessary for the survival of social work (Kendall, 2002). To strengthen the social workforce in China, the social work community should address the internal and external threats to the profession. Building a congruent competency-based education system and licensure program may be a step toward a profession with autonomy, independence, and solidarity.

Nevertheless, social work development in China is not static. In fact, Taiwan had a similar professionalization trajectory in the 1990s. Practitioners without formal social work education were temporarily allowed to take a certification examination under the condition that they completed the required 20-credit courses that were often offered by special training programs for such practitioners at the time (Chou et al., 2006; Lin and Wang, 2010). Removing the entrance threshold may be a transitory stage in professionalization in Mainland China. This research is one of the few empirical studies that examined one specific social work professionalization policy in China in order to provide a preview of the workforce and some of the potential problems related to the policy. The researchers of this study call for more investigations on the consequences of current professionalization policy in China.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author biographies

Xiao Li is Lecturer in the Department of Social Work, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.

Xiao Yu is doctoral candidate in the Department of Social Work, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.

Shouchui Zeng is Professor in the Department of Social Work, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.

Xuesong He is Dean and Professor of the School of Social and Public Administration, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.

References

Abbott

(1988) The Systems of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago, IL; London: The University of Chicago Press.

Q.L.

Chapman

M.V.

(2014) ‘The Early Professional Experience of a New Social Worker in China’, Journal of Social Work Education 50(2): 322–33.

Chan

K.L.

Chan

C.L.W.

(2005) ‘Chinese Culture, Social Work Education and Research’, International Social Work 48(4): 381.

Chou

Y.C.

Haj-Yahia

M.M.

Wang

F.T.Y.

L.Y.

(2006) ‘Social Work in Taiwan: A Historical and Critical Review’, International Social Work 49(6): 767.

Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) (2015) ‘Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards for Baccalaureate and Master’s Social Work Programs’. Available online at: https://www.cswe.org/getattachment/Accreditation/Standards-and-Policies/2015-EPAS/2015EPASandGlossary.pdf.aspx

DeAngelis

Monahan

M.J.

(2012) ‘Professional Credentials and Professional Regulations’, in Dulmus

Sowers

K.M.

(eds) The Profession of Social Work: Guided by History, Led by Evidence, pp. 91–104. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Dyer

P.M.

(1977) ‘How Professional Is the BSW Worker?’, Social Work 22(6): 487.

Freidson

(1988) Professional Powers. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Gao

J.A.G.

Yan

M.C.

(2015) ‘Social Work in the Making: The State and Social Work Development in China’, International Journal of Social Welfare 24(1): 93–101.

10.

Geng

L.N.

S.S.

Zhou

W.J.

(2011) ‘The Relationships among Emotional Exhaustion, Emotional Intelligence, and Occupational Identity of Social Workers in China’, Social Behavior and Personality 39(3): 309–19.

11.

Gray

(2008) ‘Some Considerations on the Debate on Social Work in China: Who Speaks for Whom?’, International Journal of Social Welfare 17(4): 400–6.

12.

Hutchings

Taylor

(2007) ‘Defining the Profession? Exploring an International Definition of Social Work in the China Context’, International Journal of Social Welfare 16: 382–90.

13.

Kendall

K.A.

(2002) Council on Social Work Education: Its Antecedents and First Twenty Years. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

14.

Lei

(2012) ‘Professionalization or De-Professionalization?’, China Social Work Research 11: 25–40.

15.

Lei

Huang

W.Y.

(2017) ‘Pragmatic Professionalism: Definition of Professional Competence and Its Responsibility for Social Workers in Comprehensive Family Service, Guangzhou’, Society 1(37): 211–41 (in Chinese).

16.

Leighninger

(2000) Creating a New Profession: The Beginning of Social Work Education in the United States. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

17.

Leung

T.T.F.

(2012) ‘The Work Sites as Ground of Contest: Professionalisation of Social Work in China’, British Journal of Social Work 42(2): 335–52.

18.

C.P.

Shi

(2003) ‘The Influence of Distributive Justice and Procedural Justice on Job Burnout’, Acta Psychologica Sinica 35(5): 677–84.

19.

Y.S.

(2008) ‘The Promotion Strategy of Professionalization in China’, Social Science Research 5: 109–14 (in Chinese).

20.

Y.S.

Han

W.R.

Huang

J.Z.

(2011) ‘The Development of Social Work Education in China’, Social Sciences 5: 82–90 (in Chinese).

21.

Lin

W.I.

Wang

(2010) ‘What Does Professionalization Mean? Tracing the Trajectory of Social Work Education in Taiwan’, Social Work Education 29(8): 869–81.

22.

Liu

(2009) ‘Social Work Development in China: Current Status, Problems, and Resolutions’, Changshai Social Work College Journal 16(1): 14–25.

23.

Liu

H.L.

(2004) ‘The Concept and Important Terms of Professional Social Workers’, Journal of East China University of Science and Technology (Social Science) 2: 47–50 (in Chinese).

24.

Liu

Sun

Anderson

S.G.

(2013) ‘Challenges in Social Work Field Education in China: Lessons from the Western Experience’, Social Work Education 32(2): 179–96.

25.

Ministry of Civil Affairs (2006) ‘Temporary Instruction of Assessing Social Work Professional Level’.Available online at: http://www.mohrss.gov.cn/gkml/xxgk/201407/t20140717_136341.htm

26.

Ministry of Civil Affairs (2012) ‘The Plan for Long-Term Social Work Workforce Development (2011–2020)’. Available online at: http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/zwgk/jhgh/201204/20120400302325.shtml (accessed 4 September 2017).

27.

Ministry of Education (2004) Basic Requirement for Social Work Main Courses. Beijing: Higher Education Press.

28.

National Association of Social Workers (NASW) (2016) ‘Assuring the Sufficiency of a Frontline Workforce’. Available online at: http://workforce.socialworkers.org/studies/nasw_06_execsummary.pdf

29.

Pan

(2013) ‘The Dilemma of Applying Social Work Knowledge into Use: The Issue of Social Work Education and Employment’, China Social Welfare 7: 2–6 (in Chinese).

30.

Peng

S.M.

(2009) ‘A Decade of Professionalization Research in Mainland China’, Social Work 1: 4–8 (in Chinese).

31.

Rubin

Parrish

D.E.

(2012) ‘Comparing Social Worker and Non-Social Worker Outcomes: A Research Review’, Social Work 57(4): 309–20.

32.

Schaufeli

W.B.

Leiter

M.P.

Maslach

Jackson

S.E.

(1996) ‘Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey’, in Maslach

Jackson

S.E.

Leiter

M.P.

(eds) The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Test Manual, pp. 22–6. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

33.

Tsang

A.K.T.

Yan

M.C.

(2001) ‘Chinese Corpus, Western Application – The Chinese Strategy of Engagement with Western Social Work Discourse’, International Social Work 44(4): 433.

34.

Tsui

M.-s.

Yan

M. C.

(2010) ‘Developing social work in developing countries: Experiences in the Asia Pacific region’, International Social Work 53(3): 307–310.

35.

Wang

S.B.

(2006) ‘Social Work Professionalization in System Transformation’, Beijing University of Science and Technology Journal (Social Science) 1: 1–5 (in Chinese).

36.

Wang

S.B.

Chen

W.K.

(2007) ‘China’s New Orientation of Social Work Development’, Xuexi yu Shijian (Learning and Practice) 3007(3): 5–6 (in Chinese).

37.

Ward

(2004) ‘Review of Law for Social Workers, 8th edn, by H. Braine and H. Carr, 2003’, British Journal of Social Work 34(5): 761–2.

38.

Watkins

J.M.

Holmes

(2012) ‘Educating for Social Work’, in Dulums

C.N.

Sowers

K.M.

(eds) The Profession of Social Work: Guided by History, Led by Evidence, pp. 35–50. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Son.

39.

Xia

X.L.

Guo

(2002) ‘Historical Development Characteristics of Social Work in Today’s China’, International Journal of Social Welfare 11(3): 254–62.

40.

Xinhua News (2006) ‘Chinese Communist Party Central Committee Decisions about Some Major Issues of Building Socialist Harmonious Society’. Available online at: http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2006-10/18/content_5218639.htm

41.

Xinhua News (2016) ‘Ministry of Civil Affairs: Train Nearly One Million Professional Social Workers in Five Years’. Available online at: http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2016-03/14/c_128798986.htm

42.

Yan

M.C.

Gao

J.G.

Lam

C.M.

(2012) ‘The Dawn is Too Distant: The Experience of 28 Social Work Graduates Entering the Social Work Field in China’, Social Work Education 32(4): 538–51.

43.

Yin

M.Z.

(2012) ‘Professionalization, Science and Indigenization: Three Myths in a Decade of Social Work Development in China’, Social Science 1: 63–71.

44.

Yip

K.S.

(2007a) ‘Professionalization of Social Work Practice in the People’s Republic of China: A Tri-Tensional Analysis’, Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development 17(2): 56–69.

45.

Yip

K.S.

(2007b) ‘Tensions and Dilemmas of Social Work Education in China’, International Social Work 50(1): 93.

46.

Yuen-Tsang

A.W.K.

Wang

S.B.

(2002) ‘Tensions Confronting the Development of Social Work Education in China – Challenges and Opportunities’, International Social Work 45(3): 375.

47.

Zeng

S.C.

Cheung

Leung

X.S.

(2016) ‘Voices from Social Work Graduates in China: Reasons for Not Choosing Social Work as a Career’, Social Work 61(1): 69–78.

48.

Zeng

S.C.

Huang

(2014) ‘Bachelor Social Work Graduate Employment Research: A Critical Review’, East University of Science and Technology Journal (Social Science) 29(6): 45–52 (in Chinese).