Children and Schools: A Journal of National Association of Social Workers

68 Pages·2014·4.747 MB·English

July 2014
Volume 36, Number 3
Pages 129-192
A JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
School Social Workers Sanctioned
The “Learning Disabilities to
Juvenile Detention” Pipeline
Restorative Discipline
PRIOR 10
Marygrove College Library
8425 West McNichols Road
MIX
Detroit, Ml 48221
Paper from
responsible sources
FSC
FSC® C012947 NASW PRESS
www.fsc.org
PARALLELS BETWEEN WRITING
BIOGRAPHIES AND CLINICAL PRACTICE’
IMPACT. INFLUENCE. VALUE.
ESTHER URDANG
P
arallels between and Clinical
Practice: Impact. Influence. Value offers clinician:
an in-depth understanding of the commonalitie
between the psychological and intellectual processes
often take place beneath the surface, both biographers
positions and selection and evaluation of evidence. ..
M
In this book, lengthy life course portraits of six
individuals are presented, vividly illustrating many ■
key clinical concepts, such as the impact of the past,
the development of attachments, the trauma of loss,
and resilience. Examples include Rudyard Kipling's
experience in a foster home, and the impact of
blindness and separation on the writer Ved Mehta. This book addresses
a need expressed by many practitioners and educators to reintegrate key clinical concepts into
practice, such as understanding experiential worlds, applying psychodynamic knowledge, and
developing self-aware empathic relationships with clients.
Parallels between Writing Biographies and Clinical Practice is a resource intended for students,
teachers, and practitioners in social work, and those in the human services and medical
professions. It is also intended for a general audience, to heighten critical understanding and
enjoyment in the reading of biographies.
ISBN: 978-0-87101-450-4. 2014. Item #4504. 304 pages. $36.99. *tN ASW
1-800-227-3590 • www.naswpress.org
NASW PRESS Notional Association of Social Workers
CODE APWB14
#N AS W July 2014
Volume 36, Number 3
National Association of Social Workers
Pages 129-192
CW &
A JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
http:/ / wwui.nasivpress.org
Table of Contents
EDITORIAL
131 Shifting from Zero Tolerance to Restorative Justice in Schools
Martell E Teas/ey
ARTICLES
135 School Social Workers Sanctioned by State Departments of Education and State
Licensing Boards
Kim Boland-Prom and Michelle E. Alvare^
147 The "Learning Disabilities to Juvenile Detention" Pipeline: A Case Study
Christopher A. Mallett
157 Restorative Discipline: From Getting Even to Getting Well
Judy Hostetler Mullet
165 Examining Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to School Social Work Practice with
Homeless Children
James P. Canfield
175 Mental Health Services in Special Education: An Analysis of Quality of Care
Catherine DeCarlo Santiago, Sheryl H. Kataoka, Steven R. Forness, and Jeanne Miranda
PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS
185 Absenteeism and Truancy Issues: Are Mentoring Programs Funded by the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention the Answer?
EaTra Tracy Rogers
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Martell L.Teasley, PhD, University of Texas at San Antonio
ASSOCIATE EDITOR NASW PRESS
Michelle E. Alvarez, PhD, Minnesota State University, Mankato
CHILDREN & SCHOOLS EDITORS
PRESIDENT 2007-2011 Melissa Jonson Reid
Darrell P. Wheeler, PhD, MPH, ACSW 2003-2006 Wilma Peebles-Wilkins
1998—2002 Cynthia G. Franklin
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 1994—1997 Edith M. Freeman
Angelo McClain, PhD, LICSW 1989-1993 Paula Allen-Meares
1985-1989 Robert T. Constable
EDITORIAL BOARD 1981—1985 Lela B. Costin*
Rowena Fong, University of Texas at Austin 1978-1981 Richard J. Anderson
Von E. Nebbitt Sr., University of Illinois at Chicago * Deceased
Cudore L. Snell, Howard University, Washington, DC
EDITOR, RESOURCES FOR PRACTICE
Tory L. Cox, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
EDITOR, PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS
Patricia A. Pricher, Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation, Evansville, IN
CONSULTING EDITORS
Heidi Adams Rueda, University of Texas at San Antonio; Sandra Altshuler, Eastern Washington University, Cheney; Dawn Anderson-Butcher, Ohio State
University, Columbus; Ron A. Astor, University of Southern California, Hos Angeles; Annahita Ball, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge; Stephanie
Cosner Berzin, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA; Gary L. Bowen, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Natasha K. Bowen, University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill; Laura Bronstein, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY; Tracy Carpenter-Aeby, East Carolina University, Greenville; William
E. Carr, NJ Association of Criminal Justice Educators, Montclair; Amy Chanmugam, University of Texas at San Antonio; Mary Ann Channing, Lincoln
Public Schools, Lincoln, RI; Nadia C. Coleman, Cherry Creek Schools, Denver; Jandel Mary Crutchfield, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge; Ellen W.
deLara, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, and Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; David Dupper, University of Tennessee, Knoxville; Theresa]. Early, Ohio
State University, Columbus; Maryah S. Fram, University of South Carolina, Columbia; Cynthia G. Franklin, University of Texas at Austin; Kendra J.
Garrett, University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, MN; Kenneth J. Gaughan, Hillsborough County Public Schools, Tampa, FL; Joseph R. Gianesin, Springfield
College, Springfield, MA; Joy Paston Greenberg, Lehman College/City University of New York, Bronx; Jendia F. Grissett, Faulkner University, Montgomery,
AL; Janet M. Haynes, University of Minnesota, Duluth; Shu-Lan Hung, Eastern Michigan University, Ann Arbor; Jacob Hutchens, Aldea Children &
Family Services, Napa, CA; Aidyn Iachini, Ohio State University, Columbus; Catheleen Jordan, University of Texas at Arlington; Michael S. Kelly, Loyola
University, Chicago; Johnny S. Kim, University of Denver; Kathryn S. Krase, Ramapo College of New Jersey, Mahwah; Craig Winston LeCroy, Arizona
State University, Tucson; Mo Yee Lee, Ohio State University, Columbus; Brenda Coble Lindsey, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Michael A.
Lindsey, University of Maryland, Baltimore; Christopher A. Mallett, Cleveland State University; Mark A. Mattaini, University of Illinois at Chicago; Mary
Ann Canning McComiskey, Lincoln Public Schools, Lincoln, RI; Cassandra McKay, University of Illinois at Chicago; Christina R: Miller, University of
Oklahoma, Norman; Amber Moodie-Dyer, Ohio State University, Columbus; Nicole Nicotera, University of Denver; Angela M. Nonaka, University of
Texas, Austin; Jack Nowicki, Texas Network of Youth Services, Austin; Linda Openshaw, Texas A&M University-Commerce; Kate Phillippo, Loyola State
University Chicago; Patricia A. Pricher, University of Southern Indiana, Evansville; Octavio Ramirez, Oakwood University, Huntsville, AL; Lawrence B.
Rosenfeld, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Christine Anlauf Sabatino, Catholic University of America, Washington, DC; Cudore L. Snell,
Howard University, Washington, DC; Renee Spencer, Boston University, Calvin L. Streeter, University of Texas at Austin; Kevin Tan, University of Chicago;
Aaron M. Thompson, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Kimberly Zammitt, Minnesota State University, Mankato
NASW PRESS STAFF
Cheryl Y. Bradley, Publisher; Julie Gutin, Managing Editor; Sarah Lowman, Senior Editor; Sharon Fletcher, Marketing Manager; Kiera White, Marketing
Coordinator; Bill Cathey, Production and Media Specialist; Tracey Hawkins, Circulation Coordinator; Helen C. Williams, Circulation Coordinator; Lisa
Brown, Administrative Assistant
Children & Schools (ISSN 1532-8759), the successor to Social Work in Education, established in 1978, publishes articles that provide knowledge for school social workers and other
social work practitioners who work with children and families in the schools and communities. The journal addresses practice issues faced by social workers in educational organiza¬
tions and community agencies whose practice focuses on helping children and improving the well-being of children and the conditions in schools. The editorial board welcomes arti¬
cles on innovation in practice, research, and policy analysis. The board invites practitioners to share their practical experience in scholarly articles. Statements of feet and opinion in
the articles in Children & Schools are those of the authors and contributors, not of NASW Press or Oxford University Press, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of
NASW or Oxford University Press. Neither NASW Press nor Oxford University Press makes any representation, express or implied, regarding the accuracy of the material in this
journal and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions that may be made. The reader should make her or his own evaluation as to the appropriate-
ness or otherwise of any experimental technique described.
In the interest of accurate and unbiased communication, NASW subscribes to a belief in the importance of avoiding language that might imply sexual, racial, ethnic, or other kinds
of discrimination, stereotyping, or bias. NASW is committed to the fair and equal treatment of individuals and groups, and material submitted should not promote stereotypes or
discriminatory attitudes and assumptions about people.
Advertising rates are available on request. Publication of an advertisement does not constitute an endorsement or approval of any products or services advertised, any point of view,
standard, or opinion presented therein. NASW is not responsible for any claims made in an advertisement appearing in its publications. To advertise, please contact Linda Hann:
[email protected]. Tel: [phone] (please call during UK working hours only).
Published quarterly in January, April, July, and October by the National Association of Social Workers, 750 First Street, NE, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002-4241.
Print subscription rates.■ NASW members, $63 for 1 year; NASW student members, $42 for 1 year; nonmembers: individuals, $107 for 1 year; libraries/instituuons, $168 for 1 year.
For a subscription, please contact Oxford Journals at [email protected] or 1 [phone].
Children & Schools is indexed/abstracted in caredata, CINAHL®, ERIC/Cass, PsycINFO, Quality Review Bulletin, Social Work Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts (SAVSocial Plannim
Policy, and Development Abstracts (SOPODA).
National Headquarters and Publishing Office. National Association of Social Workers, 750 First Street, NE, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002-4241. Telephone: [phone]
800-638-8799, TTD 202-336-8396. http://www.naswpress.org
Periodical class mail postage paid at Washington, DC, and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to Children & Schools, Journals Customer Service
Department, Oxford University Press, 2001 Evans Rd, Cary, NC 27513-2009.
Copyright © 2014 by the National Association of Social Workers, Inc. Produced for NASW Press by Oxford Journals, a division of Oxford University Press. Printed in the United
States of America.
EDITORIAL
Shifting from Zero Tolerance to Restorative
Justice in Schools
Martell L. Teasley
I
n the movement to maximize and enhance the replacing. A 10-year study of zero tolerance policies
quality of the learning environment, zero tol¬ by the American Psychological Association con¬
erance policies as a form of getting tough on cluded that the use of exclusionary policies “did
school discipline became the mantra of school sys¬ not improve school safety” (Gonzalez, 2012). In a
tems countrywide. Gaining widespread implemen¬ statewide investigation of the Texas public school
tations throughout the United States in the 1990s system, tracking seventh- through twelfth-graders,
and accelerating with the implementation of No it was found that nearly 6 out of 10 students had
Child Left Behind policies, zero tolerance policies been suspended or expelled from middle or high
mandated harsh penalties in the form of school school (Fabelo et ah, 2011). Typical of findings
suspension, expulsions, alternative schooling, and from research studies in this area (Fabelo et ah,
juvenile justice referrals for a wide variety of prob¬ 2011; Howarth, 2008; Skiba et ah, 2003), the rate
lematic student behaviors (Fabelo et ah, 2011; was 75 percent for African American students and
Gonzalez, 2012; Skiba et ah, 2003). “Even kinder- 83 percent for black male students, as compared
gartners have been suspended for minor offenses, with 74 percent for Hispanic and 59 percent for
such as bringing paper clips, toy guns, and cough white male students, with a similar pattern for
drops to school” (Sumner, Silverman, & Frampton, female students within the three groups (Fabelo
n.d., p. 9). et ah, 2011). Also consistent with the research liter¬
ature in this area (Edmonds-Cady & Hock, 2008;
THE PROBLEM WITH ZERO TOLERANCE Morgan, Salomon, Plotkin, & Cohen, 2014; Skiba
Many schools continue to have mandatory guide¬ et ah, 2003), the research team from the Public Pol¬
lines for dealing with a host of school behavioral icy Research Institute at Texas A&M University
problems that affect school climate and academ¬ found that three'out of four students with registered
ic performance (Gonzalez, 2012). Even with the disabilities were suspended or expelled at least
movement toward evidence-based methods and once during the study period. Given that over
schoolwide intervention plans by related school half of the nearly 1 million students (N= 928,940)
services personnel, the disproportional suspension, in the study had four or more suspension violations
expulsion, and referral to juvenile justice continues. over the eight years of tracking, the research team
“The frequent reliance on suspension does not questioned the effectiveness of the state’s mandatory
yield the benefits proponents often claim it does, suspension guidelines, having found nothing to
neither for deterrence nor academic achievement” support improvements in students’ behavior after
(Skiba et al., 2003, p. 1). In fact, zero tolerance pol¬ entry into mandatory school discipline programs
icies have been the catalyst for the school-to-prison for school conduct code violations (Fabelo et ah,
pipeline, still occurring in many major metropoli¬ 2011).
tan school districts throughout the United States Studies suggest that zero tolerance policies have
(Fabelo et ah, 2011; Gonzalez, 2012; Skiba et ah, had multiple negative effects on student behaviors
2003). and are said to increase the likelihood that students
Researchers continue to question the need for will engage in future disciplinary problems, includ¬
zero tolerance policies and now charge that the ing school disengagement, noncompliance, tardi¬
“cure all” for school disciplinary problems needs ness, absence, truancy, and disrespect for authority
doi: 10.1093/cs/cdu016 © 2014 National Association of Social Workers 131
figures in school (Gonzalez, 2012; Skiba et al., exclusion” (Sumner et al., n.d., p. 4). Youths not
2003). Punitive school discipline problems not only only are held responsible for their infractions, but
deprive youths of education opportunities, but also, also are part of the decision to restore and repair dam¬
according to the evidence, increase the likelihood ages rendered. Restorative justice is viewed as a
of future disciplinary problems and, ultimately, method of building on existing relationships with
youth contact with the criminal justice system youths through peer mediation or youth courts
(Gonzalez, 2012). Minority youths, particularly (Gonzalez, 2012).
African American and Hispanic youths, have borne Given that the emphasis is on teaching youths
the brunt of disproportionate school disciplinary greater responsibility and accountability for the
measures since the implementation of zero toler¬ consequences of their behaviors, a different concep¬
ance policies (Howarth, 2008; Skiba et al., 2003). tual mind-set is required in the development of
This pattern continues today. For example, in a alternatives to punitive arrangements and exclusion
recent report, The School Discipline Consensus Report from the school environment (Gonzalez, 2012;
by the Council of State Governments Justice Cen¬ Sumner et al., n.d.). For sure, systematic change
ter (Morgan et al., 2014), it was found that “a dis¬ will be needed to implement restorative justice
proportionately large percentage of disciplined measures. Implementation techniques require that
students are youth of color, students with disabili¬ school-based personnel, including educators, staff,
ties, and youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bi¬ and related service professionals, undergo training
sexual, or transgender (LBGT)” (p. 10). Advocacy sessions and skills development for the purpose of
organizations across the nation are calling for understanding restorative justice practices (Sumner
change after witnessing the harmful effects of zero et al., n.d). Community-based relationship building
tolerance policies on the educational outcomes of and inclusion are key to the implementation and
children and youths (Sumner et al., n.d.). The success of restorative justice methods. Therefore,
movement is toward less punitive measures and an understanding of community culture, norms,
less of an algorithmic approach to school discipline. and values is important in developing programmatic
content. This means that town forums and school-
WHAT IS RESTORATIVE JUSTICE? based meetings with parents and other interested
Moving away from the derived problems that community stakeholders should take place. Research
research on zero tolerance policies has identified, by the Institute for Restorative Justice and P^estora-
there is a growing movement toward the use of tive Dialogue conducted in San Antonio, Texas,
less-punitive methods based on restorative justice determined that there has to be a goodness-of-fit
approaches. “Restorative justice is an alternative to between a given community and the implementa¬
retributive zero-tolerance policies that mandate sus¬ tion of measure as part of a restorative justice practice
pension or expulsion of students from school for a (Armour, 2013).
wide variety of misbehaviors including possession
of alcohol or cigarettes, fighting, dress code viola¬ THE CALL FOR RESEARCH
tions, and cursing” (Sumner et al., n.d.,p. 2). Restor¬ As part of a growing international movement,
ative justice is based on the development of a value set restorative justice programs have grown exponen¬
that includes building and strengthening relation¬ tially in the past five years within the United States,
ships, showing respect, and taking responsibility. with approximately 12 states implementing restor¬
School-based personnel will have to buy into re¬ ative practices (Armour, 2013; Gonzalez, 2012).
storative justice methods, which means a redrawing However, there is limited research on school-based
of status-quo approaches for children and youths restorative justice programs. Armour’s (2013) evalu¬
who display problem behaviors in the school setting ation of preliminary research findings suggests that
(Gonzalez, 2012). All parties involved need to be “restorative justice can have a significant impact
part of the decision to repair the damage and hold on redirecting the school-to-prison pipeline” (p. 14).
students accountable. “A major appeal for using a The assessment of research findings in various states
restorative approach to discipline as an alternative found that expulsions, misconduct, and violent
to zero-tolerance policies is the emphasis on respect, acts decreased; school engagement and academic
accountability, repair of harm, and restoration of achievement increased; and teacher turnover was
the community rather than on punishment and reduced (Armour, 2013). Findings from the Institute
132 Children & Schools Volume 36, Number 3 July 2014
for Restorative Justice and Restorative Dialogue REFERENCES
revealed an 84 percent drop “in the use of off campus Armour, M. (2013). Ed White Middle School restorative disci¬
pline evaluation: Implementation and impact, 2012/2013,
suspension and a 30 percent drop in the use of in
sixth grade. Retrieved from the University of Texas at
school suspension lasting 1—3 days for student mis¬ Austin, Institute for Restorative Justice and Restorative
Dialogue Web site: http://www.utexas.edu/research/
conduct” (Armour, 2013, p. 6). In addition, there
cswr/ij i/pdf/Ed-White-Evaluation-2012-2013.pdf
was a reduction in “all suspension rates including Edmonds-Cady, C., & Hock, R. (2008). Children in crisis:
overnight suspensions and placement in the Alterna¬ Special education status and other stressors in the lives
of children removed from school by expulsion. School
tive Program” (Armour, 2013, p. 6).
Social WorkJournal, 32(2). Retrieved from http://www.
publications.villanova.edu/Concept/2004/Effective_
Discipline.pdf
CONCLUSION
Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D.,
The need for less-punitive methods in the reduction Marchbanks, M. P., & Booth, E. A. (2011). Breaking
schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates
of problem behaviors in schools and mandated inter¬
to students’ success and juvenile involvement. Retrieved
vention is catching momentum, with a growing from the Justice Center, Council of State Governments
number of advocacy organizations and member¬ Web site: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/
uploads/2012/08/Breaking_Schools_Rules_Report_
ship associations calling for “more effective and fair
Final.pdf
approaches to school discipline” (Fabelo et al., 2011, Gonsoulin, S., Zablocki, M„ & Leone, P. E. (2012). Safe
schools, staff development, and the school-to-prison
p. 15). School social workers and other related ser¬
pipeline. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35,
vices personnel need to be informed and advocate 309-319.
for change in school districts where zero tolerance is Gonzalez, T. (2012). Keeping kids in schools: Restorative
justice, punitive discipline, and the school to prison
still enforced. Many related services personnel are
pipeline. Journal of Law and Education, 41(2), 281-235.
already participating in restorative justice programs Howarth, R. (2008, March). Examining minority enrollment
and out of school suspension rates of Massachusetts public
through the use of positive behavioral interventions
school districts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
and supports. Related services personnel should the Education Research Association, New York.
Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/
work in collaboration to document findings from
data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/
the use of restorative justice methods to include 3d/8c/ff.pdf
development of single-subject designs and the use Morgan, E., Salomon, N., Plotkin, M., & Cohen, R. (2014).
The school discipline consensus report: Strategies for the field to
of case studies. The findings must be generated
keep students engaged in school and out of the juvenile justice
and distributed to school administrations, other system. Retrieved from the Justice Center, Council of
State Governments Web site: http://csgjusticecenter
decision makers, and policymakers. School-based
.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/The_School_
related services personnel should review the find¬ Discipline_Consensus_Report.pdf
ings of recent studies on restorative justice cited in Skiba, R., Simmons, A., Staudinger, L., Rausch, M., Dow,
G., & Feggins, L. R. (2003, May 16—17). Consistent
this editorial, and their compelling case for the
removal: Contributions of school discipline to the school-prison
use of restorative justice measures as a counter to pipeline. Paper presented at the School-to-Prison
Pipehne Conference, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from
zero tolerance policies in schools.
http://www.vag.asn.au/Resources/Documents/
Nationally, change is needed at the policy-making Consistent%20Remo val. p df
Sumner, M. D., Silverman, C. J., & Frampton, M. L. (n.d.).
level. Child welfare experts, corrections officials,
School-based restorative justice as an alternative to zero-
juvenile justice systems and the courts, educators, tolerance policies: Lessons from West Oakland. Retrieved
and other professionals and paraprofessionals who from the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social
Justice, University of California, Berkeley, School of
work with children and youths should all be part
Law, Web site: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/
of the network-building process in developing 1 l-2010_School-based_Restorative_Justice_As_an_
Altemative_to_Zero-Tolerance_Policies.pdf
community- and school-based restorative justice
programs (Fabelo et al., 2011; Gonsoulin, Zablocki,
Martell L. Teasley, PhD, is professor and chair, Department
& Leone, 2012). Important in this endeavor is that
of Social Work, College of Public Policy, University of Texas at
educators, parents, students, and other community- San Antonio, 501 West Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard, San
based entities address factors contributing to the dis- Antonio, TX 78207; e-mail: [email protected].
proportionality of school suspension and expulsion
for minority public school youths. Creating strong Advance Access Publication June 30, 2014
school and community relations is important in
establishing a plan of action for dealing with problem
behaviors and subsequent intervention (Gonsoulin
et al, 2012). E
Teasley / Shifting from Zero Tolerance to Restorative Justice in Schools 133
HALAEVALU F. OFAHENGAUE VAKALAHI and MERIPA TAIAI GODINET
T
ransnational Pacific Islander Americans and Social
Work: Dancing to the Beat of a Different Drum serves
as a voice for Pacific Islander American commu¬
nities that have long been subdued in the hope that it will
assist in dispelling misunderstandings, misconceptions,
and misrepresentations of Pacific Islander Americans.
A first of its kind, this book attempts to bring Pacific
Islander Americans to the forefront of transnational
conversations, particularly in the profession of social
work. It contains accounts of real-life experiences
of transnational Pacific Islander Americans and
issues such as colonization, immigration, and
dual/multiple identities.
To highlight both the unique and shared experiences,
editors Vakalahi and Godinet invited native authors
from several Pacific Island groups to tell their stories. Included are
authors from groups with the highest density in the United States, such as Native Hawaiians,
Samoans, and Chamorros and native authors about whom little information is available, such as
Chuukese and Yapese.
Transnational Pacific Islander Americans and Social Work specifically covers immigrant groups in
the Pacific Islands that are invisible and yet growing exponentially in the United States. More and
more Pacific Islander Americans, due to adjustment difficulties, are faced with challenges that
bring them to the attention of social and health services. This book fills gaps in the literature by-
providing practitioners with information on the historical background, cultural knowledge, and
practices of various Pacific Islander groups that will help improve services for these populations.
ISBN: 978-0-87101-449-8. 2014. Item #4498. 184 pages. $34.99. <tN ASW
NASW PRESS 1-800-227-3590 • www.naswpress.org Notional Association ot Sociol Workers
CODE ATPI14
School Social Workers Sanctioned by
State Departments of Education and
State Licensing Boards
Kim Boland-Prom and Michelle E. Alvarez
This article presents the results of a study on the unprofessional conduct of school social
workers who have been sanctioned by state regulatory boards (boards of education and
licensing boards). The data represent information from 14 states and the District of Columbia.
Results indicate that school social workers are rarely sanctioned at the state level. State licens¬
ing boards sanctioned more social workers who practice in school settings than did state
departments ot education. When state departments of education reported sanctioning social
workers, the cases were most frequently related to child pornography and dual sexual rela¬
tionships. State licensing boards were more likely to sanction school social workers in less
serious cases, with dispositions that included suspensions, probation, supervision, and written
reprimands. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings and
suggestions for further research.
KEY WORDS: ethics; regulation; school social workers; state boards of education; state licensing boards
A
few years ago a school social worker was who were sanctioned by state boards of education
found to have sent inappropriate text mes¬ or state licensing boards. Examining the cases helps
sages to girls who attended the high school to expand the literature in the field, which has
where he worked. He was placed on administrative implications for education, training, supervision,
leave before resigning from his position and sen¬ and practice.
tenced through the criminal courts to a year of pro¬
bation and mandated counseling. This man was a LITERATURE REVIEW
former recipient of a state-level prize and had School social workers are faced with ethical dilem¬
recently presented on the topic of ethics for a state mas while working in schools, which are host
school social work organization. The state social settings. School social workers who are members
work licensing body asked him to stop practicing of NASW abide by the NASW Code of Ethics
social work and he agreed. The board posted on their (2008) and Standards for School Social Work Services
Web site that he agreed to stop practicing as a social (2012), which protect clients, set the standards
worker, and no additional action would be taken as for practice, and provide tools for risk management
long as he complied with the agreement. In his state, (Freud & Krug, 2002; Reamer, 2003). In states that
social workers must hold a social work license to require state social work licensure, professional
maintain a school social work license. A search on and ethical conduct is defined in state law. The
the state’s department of education Web site indicates following section discusses research findings on
that this person holds a school social work license for social workers, in various practice settings, who
an additional two years, and there is no indication that have been sanctioned by their professionals’ educa¬
it has been revoked or that he has been the subject of tion regulators or state licensing board. It is followed
disciplinary action. A case such as this demonstrates by a discussion of unprofessional conduct of teach¬
dual (social work board and department of education) ers and sanctioning patterns in schools.
licensure and how being regulated by two different
boards may result in two different investigations and UNPROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR OF SANCTIONED
sanctioning procedures. SOCIAL WORKERS AND TEACHERS
This article reports on a descriptive study of the Although there are no previous studies regarding
unprofessional behaviors of school social workers sanctions against school social workers, there are
doi: 10.1093/cs/cdu012 © 2014 National Association of Social Workers 135
studies of sanctions against social workers in general. some states have enacted a lifetime ban from teach¬
Strom-Gottfried (1999, 2000) and Boland-Prom ing for personnel convicted of crimes against chil¬
(2009) found that most complaints against social dren, including the crime of promoting obscenity
workers were in the area of dual relationships, (Hanna, 2008).
which included sexual relationships. Boland-Prom
SANCTIONING OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL
(2009) also indicated that other complaints included
Three avenues are available for making complaints
conflicts of interest, termination of services and dis¬
and sanctioning school social workers and other
honesty, and fraud or misrepresentations.
certified school personnel: (1) district-level person¬
nel actions, (2) state-level boards of education that
Dual Relationships
certify school personnel, and (3) state licensing
A dual relationship may involve multiple professional
boards that regulate social workers. When school-
relationships (for example, providing school social
employed social workers are involved, unprofes¬
work services at school and mental health services
sional conduct is often “handled” within the school
outside of school to a child) or overlapping profes¬
building or at the district level. Unless the unprofes¬
sional services with personal relationships (for exam¬
sional conduct results in criminal charges, the issue
ple, dating the parent of a child receiving services).
may not gain attention of the state licensing board
Overlapping or unintended dual relationships can
or state department of education. Underwood and
easily occur when social workers live and work in
Kopels (2004), who studied parent complaints
the same community. For example, often school
against school personnel, noted the following:
social workers do not have the option of referring a
student to another social worker when a student’s
There is no systematic way to track the number
parent is a friend, family member, or fellow parish¬
ioner. If a school social worker’s child attends the of complaints that parents have made, even
same school, the situation has high potential for when they choose to pursue the issues through
dual relationships being developed, and dual relation¬ the administrative or court process. Negotiations,
ships are frequently the basis for ethics complaints settlements, and withdrawn cases are inherent in
(Strom-Gottfried, 1999, 2000) or state sanctions the judicial or quasi-judicial process.. . . This
(Boland-Prom, 2009; Daley & Doughty, 2007). situation is compounded by the fact that com¬
plaints regarding the education of children with
Sexual Misconduct disabilities are kept by state or federal agencies,
Sexual misconduct is one of the most frequent rea¬ but the decisions do not have to be reported to
sons social workers (Boland-Prom, 2009) and other a database with public access (p. 24).
professionals are sanctioned. No published articles
addressing this issue in school social work were
One method of “handling” reports of miscon¬
found, but documentation in the field of education
duct is to transfer personnel to another school or
is available. The Associated Press database provides a
to allow them to resign. Loopholes then allow these
wealth of information on sexual misconduct by
educators to be hired by another school district,
professionals in schools. An Associated Press inves¬
which is often called “passing the trash” (Tanner,
tigation that included information from 50 states
2008b). This same handling of complaints against
found that between 2001 and 2005, 2,570 educa¬
school personnel is applied to school social workers
tors had their teaching licenses revoked, denied,
in some circumstances as they are part of a system,
surrendered, or sanctioned for allegations of sexual
the school district. There are two types of state reg¬
misconduct (Flanna, 2008;Tanner, 2008b). Tanner
ulatory boards that can handle complaints against
(2008a) noted that “when faced with evidence of
school social workers; the following sections
abuse, administrators sometimes fail to let others
describe complaint processes through state licensing
know about it, and legal loopholes let some offend¬
boards and departments of education.
ers stay in the classroom” (para. 4). The prevalence
of administrators not reporting abuse by school per¬ THE REGULATORY BOARDS INVOLVED IN
sonnel has led to new laws in some states that allow SANCTIONING SCHOOL SOCIAL WORKERS
for charges to be brought against administrators The NASW Standards for School Social Work Services
who do not report abuse (Tanner, 2008a). Further, (2012) states that “school social workers shall meet
136 Children & Schools Volume 36, Number 3 July 2014