College of Education and Human Development

School of Social Work

News

Is the Social Work Licensing Exam Biased? Research Points to Systemic Inequity

In the Summer 2025 special issue of Advances in Social Work, guest editors Goutham M. Menon, Maria E. Torres, Joan M. Blakey, and Jayashree Nimmagadda presented 15 full-length papers documenting aspects of bias in social work licensure exams and processes.

SSW DIrector and Professor Joan Blakey became involved with the special issue through her work on the Bias in Licensing Taskforce with the National Association of Deans and Directors. 

"As a taskforce member, I have been deeply engaged with the growing body of evidence showing that the current licensure system produces inequitable outcomes—particularly for Black, Brown, Indigenous, and linguistically diverse social workers," Blakey said. "When the opportunity arose to help curate a volume dedicated to interrogating licensure through a justice-centered lens, I saw it as a natural extension of my work."

Blakey sees this work as this as an opportunity for social workers to use their skills to examine their own profession: "Our responsibility—as educators, researchers, and leaders—is to examine whether our systems truly align with social work’s core values. This special issue presented a unique opportunity to convene rigorous scholarship, elevate long-silenced practitioner voices, and push the field toward solutions that promote equity rather than replicate structural barriers."

A comprehensive discussion of bias in social work licensing

Publishing these articles as a single, unified volume is important for three reasons, Blakey explained:

  • It captures the full ecosystem of the licensure problem.
    Licensure is not just about an exam. It is about test construction, psychometrics, educational pathways, finances, racialized patterns of failure, state policy, and the lived experiences of test takers. Individually, the papers highlight slices of the problem. Together, they reveal the systemic nature of inequity embedded in the current credentialing structure.
  • It advances a coherent, justice-oriented narrative.
    When these articles stand side by side—ranging from policy analyses to critiques of ASWB research practices to firsthand accounts from exam takers—they collectively challenge the assumption that the existing system ensures public protection. Instead, the volume shows that the system itself needs protection from inequitable practices. Publishing them together strengthens the call for reform and positions the volume as a watershed moment in the profession.
  • It creates a comprehensive resource for educators, regulators, and policymakers.
    A standalone article can be overlooked or dismissed. A full special issue provides a roadmap that states, schools, and professional organizations can use to inform policy change, redesign licensure pathways, and align credentialing with the values of equity, access, and justice.

A blueprint for state or national reform

Blakey explained that the findings across the volume suggest that the most effective reform for social work licensing would be to reimagine licensure beyond a single high-stakes exam and move toward multi-method, competency-based pathways that allow social workers to demonstrate their skills in ways that are valid, equitable, and culturally responsive.

These reforms could include:

  • Implementing multiple pathways to licensure, such as supervised practice portfolios, structured evaluations, clinical narratives, OSCE-style simulations, and other assessments that capture the relational, contextual, and applied competencies central to social work practice.
  • Developing state and national standards that explicitly integrate equity and psychometric best practices. Findings show that the current exams violate core testing principles. Building assessments that reflect real practice—not abstract knowledge divorced from context—is essential.
  • Addressing structural barriers related to cost, access to test preparation, language, disability accommodations, and the financial penalties associated with repeated failures.

Ultimately, the most effective reform is a shift in mindset: recognizing that competence cannot be fully measured by a single standardized test and that justice-oriented licensure models must be rooted in the diverse ways that social workers learn, practice, and serve communities.

Interested in reading the special issue? Here are the articles: