See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/250260081

The Development of a National School Social Work Practice Model

Article  in  Children & schools · November 2012

DOI: 10.1093/cs/cds025

CITATIONS READS
12 2,512

9 authors, including:

Andy J. Frey Michelle E Alvarez

University of Louisville Southern New Hampshire University
106 PUBLICATIONS   825 CITATIONS    50 PUBLICATIONS   266 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

David Dupper James Raines

University of Tennessee California State University, Monterey Bay
43 PUBLICATIONS   837 CITATIONS    50 PUBLICATIONS   212 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

School Social Work: An evidence-informed framework for practice View project

Child Care View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andy J. Frey on 14 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Children & Schools Advance Access published October 3, 2012

EDITORIAL

The Development of a National School Social

Work Practice Model
Andy J. Frey, Michelle E. Alvarez, Christine Anlauf Sabatino, Brenda Coble Lindsey,
Dave R. Dupper, James C. Raines, Frederick Streeck, Anne McInerney and Molly P. Norris

S
chool social workers have been providing Council for Social Work Education jointly
services to remove barriers to learning that develop an advocacy effort for school social
impede children’s ability to access and workers.
benefit from education for over a century (Con- Several developments in education make it an
stable, 2009). Yet the ability of school social work ideal time to develop a national model of school
professions to articulate and fulfill a common social work to guide education, advocacy, and
mission has remained elusive; there is a critical practice efforts. First, prevalence rates of students
need for a model of school social work to assist who are not deriving maximum benefits from
advocacy, practice, and research efforts related to schooling have increased (Evans, Weist, & Serpell,
the promotion, practice, and evaluation of school 2007; Powell, Fixsen, Dunlap, Smith, & Fox,
social work. This editorial provides a rationale for 2007), due in part to the rising number of students
the creation of a national school social work experiencing more—and more complex—risk
model, followed by an initial conceptualization of conditions at the individual, school, family, and
a model and recent and future steps to refine the community level. Second, recent modifications to
model using an iterative process. arguably the two most influential federal policies
shaping support services, No Child Left Behind
RATIONALE Act of 2001 (P.L. 107–110) and the Individuals
Dupper (2003) has suggested that in the absence with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of
of clearly articulated role and capabilities, school 2004 (P.L. 108–446) (IDEIA), have altered the
social workers are vulnerable to being underap- landscape of support services. Although many
preciated and poorly understood by school per- changes in these policies affect student supports,
sonnel and policymakers. In a similar manner, language in both promoting the adoption of
Garrett (2006) and Goren (2002) have urged evidence-based strategies and emphasizing the
school social workers to improve their visibility, critical role of parents in children’s educational
viability, and value. Others (for example, Altshu- experiences is particularly important for the pro-
ler & Webb, 2009; Constable, 2009; Franklin & vision of school social work services. In addition,
Harris, 2007; Tower, 2000) have pointed to the IDEIA places a premium on primary prevention
need for more clearly defined role expectations, by altering substantially the screening and identi-
educational requirements, professional competen- fication procedures for children with disabilities.
cies, and certification standards among school psy- Specifically, IDEIA permits school districts to use
chologists and school counselors as evidence of a process that determines whether a child re-
our discipline’s lack of coherence. School coun- sponds to scientific, research-based intervention
selors and school psychologists have recently for- as a part of evaluation procedures. The method
warded national models to unite their prospective can replace identification, using the discrepancy
professions and to guide education, advocacy, and between ability and achievement to identify stu-
practice efforts. Altshuler and Webb (2009) rec- dents with learning difficulties. This approach,
ommend that NASW, the School Social Work referred to as “response to intervention” (RtI),
Association of America (SSWAA), and the has been applied to academic and behavioral

doi: 10.1093/cs/cds025 © 2012 National Association of Social Workers 1

supports in special and regular education. Batsche consumers of school social work services regard-
et al. (2005) defined RtI as the practice of provid- ing excellence in professional school social work.
ing effective instruction and interventions based We believe that a useful practice model will delin-
on students’ needs and regularly monitoring stu- eate the types of services that might reasonably be
dents’ progress to guide decisions about changes expected from certified/licensed school social
in instruction or goals. The RtI model suggests workers and, therefore, should assist with school
that more intensive interventions should be con- social work education and advocacy. In addition,
sidered for individual students on the basis of the model is intended to inform the profession
their response (or lack of response) to less inten- and the public about professional school social
sive, high-quality interventions. Third, although work services and, hopefully, unite school social
calls for school social workers to intervene at workers regarding their roles, skills, and com-
multiple levels are not new (see Allen-Meares, petencies. The initial conceptualization of this
1994), recent calls for same appear to have in- model was created in the context of several revi-
creased in volume and intensity (Frey & Dupper, sions and subsequent conference calls. In addition,
2005; Frey, Lingo, & Nelson, 2008; Kelly, feedback on preliminary drafts of the model was
Raines, Stone, & Frey, 2010). The need to solicited at the Society for Social Work Research
assume different roles is supported by interven- conference in November 2011, the Volusia
tion research evidence promoting integrated, County School Social Work Training in February
sustainable intervention efforts that emphasize 2012, and the SSWAA conference in March
primary prevention; early screening and inter- 2012. This model addresses services provided
vention; and comprehensive approaches (Kelly within a school, and it is not intended to encom-
et al, 2010). In June 2011, we began developing pass all areas of school social work practice or
a national school social work practice model school social workers’ responsibilities to the pro-
to provide direction to school social workers, fession and society. Following a description of the
students, and faculty in school social work; ad- model, further steps in the iterative development
ministrators of school social work services; and process are described.

Figure 1. Practice Model for Comprehensive and Integrated School Social Work Services.

2 Children & Schools

INITIAL CONCEPTUALIZATION allows for revisions to be made with minimal
As Figure 1 shows, our proposed practice model effort.
for comprehensive and integrated school social
work services is grounded in four key constructs CONCLUSION
and three practice features that obtain within and School social workers must be adept at addressing
across school, home, and community settings to barriers to learning by providing a coherent
support student academic and behavioral school framework of services that fits their unique skills
performance. The key constructs in this model are and perspective, can be articulated to those in-
as follows: social justice perspective, ecological ap- and outside of the social work profession, can be
proach, ethical–legal practice, and data-informed evaluated, and is effective. We believe the draft
practice. The three practice features are to provide presented here is a good starting point for the de-
educationally relevant mental health services, velopment of such a model. You can help to
promote healthy contexts for learning, and lever- develop this national model of school social work
age resources. that clearly delineates the type of services that might
Notably, the model has been created from, and reasonably be expected from certified/licensed
is designed to be used in conjunction with, other school social workers. To provide feedback, please
nationally endorsed social work documents, such e-mail Andy J. Frey at ajfrey01@louisville.edu.
as NASW’s Standards for School Social Work Practice Help us unite school social workers regarding our
(2012) and Code of Ethics (2008), and the roles, knowledge, skills, and competencies so that
SSWAA’s Ethical Guidelines series (see http://www. we can strengthen our profession!
sswaa.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr
=102) as well as Danielson’s (2007) Enhancing Pro- REFERENCES
fessional Practice: A Framework for Teaching, a widely Allen-Meares, P. (1994). Social work services in schools: A
national study of entry level tasks. Social Work, 39,
accepted framework for evaluating teachers. This 560–565.
model is also based, in part, on conceptualizations Altshuler, S. J., & Webb, J. R. (2009). School social work:
Increasing the legitimacy of the profession. Children &
of service delivery forwarded in Realizing the Schools, 31, 207–218.
Promise of the Whole-School Approach to Children’s Batsche, G. M., Elliott, J., Graden, J. L., Grimes, J., Kova-
Mental Health: A Practical Guide for Schools (see http:// leski, J. F., & Prasse, D. (2005). Response to interven-
tion: Policy considerations and implementation.
www.promoteprevent.org/webfm_send/2102). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Direc-
tors of Special Education.
Constable, R. (2009). The role of the school social
worker. In Massat, C. R., Constable, R., McDonald,
ITERATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS S., & Flynn, J. P. (Eds.), School social work: Practice,
policy, and research (7th ed., pp. 3–29). Chicago:
This model will continue to be refined with the Lyceum Books.
context of an iterative process over the next 12 Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A frame-
months. This editorial is the most recent attempt work for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
to solicit feedback on the proposed model. We Dupper, D. R. (2003). School social work: Skills and interven-
are interested in your feedback and invite you to tions for effective practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
submit comments to Andy J. Frey. In addition, Evans, S., Weist, M., & Serpell, Z. (2007). Advances in
from July 2012 through January 2013, we will school-based mental health interventions. Kingston, NJ:
post an executive summary of the model online Civic Research Institute.
Franklin, C., & Harris, M. B. (2007). The delivery of
and solicit comments from school social work school social work services. In Allen-Meares, P. (Ed.),
practitioners, academics, and administrators, as Social work services in schools (5th ed., pp. 317–360).
Boston: Pearson Education.
well as from representatives from NASW, the Na- Frey, A. J., & Dupper, D. R. (2005). A broader conceptual
tional Association of School Psychologists, the approach to clinical practice for the 21st century.
Children & Schools, 27, 33–44.
National Association of School Counselors, the Frey, A. J., Lingo, A., & Nelson, C. M. (2008). Positive
National Association of School Boards, and re- behavior support: A call for leadership. Children &
gional school social work councils. The feedback Schools, 30, 5–14.
Garrett, K. J. (2006). Making the case for school social
from this process will be used to revise the model. work. Children & Schools, 28, 115–121.
Although a venue for dissemination has not yet Goren, S. G. (2002). The wonderland of school social
work in the schools, or how Alice learned to cope.
been finalized, we are committed to publishing In Constable, R., McDonald, S., & Flynn, J. P.
the model in a manner that maximizes access and (Eds.), School social work: Practice, policy, and research

Frey et al. / The Development of a National School Social Work Practice Model 3
 perspectives (5th ed., pp. 53–60). Chicago: Lyceum
Books.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
of 2004, P.L. 108–446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).
Kelly, M. S., Raines, J. C., Stone, S., & Frey, A. (2010).
School social work: An evidence-informed framework for
practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of
ethics of the National Association of Social Workers.
Washington, DC: Author.
National Association of Social Workers. (2012). Standards
for school social work services. Washington, DC: Author.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 115
Stat. 1425 (2002).
Powell, D., Fixsen, D., Dunlap, G., Smith, B., & Fox, L.
(2007). A synthesis of knowledge relevant to path-
ways of service delivery for young children with or at
risk of challenging behavior. Journal of Early Interven-
tion, 29, 81–106.
Tower, K. (2000). Image crisis: A study of attitudes about
school social workers. Social Work in Education, 22,
83–94.

Andy J. Frey, PhD, MSW, is professor and coordinator of

the school social work specialization, Kent School of Social
Work, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY. Michelle
E. Alvarez, EdD, MSW, is assistant professor, Department
of Social Work, Minnesota State University, Mankato.
Christine Anlauf Sabatino, PhD, LICSW, C-SSW, is
associate professor, National Catholic School of Social Service,
and director, Center on the Advancement of Children, Youth,
and Families, Catholic University of America, Washington,
DC. Brenda Coble Lindsey, EdD, MSW, is clinical asso-
ciate professor and director of the BSW program, School of
Social Work, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
David R. Dupper, PhD, MSW, is professor, College of
Social Work, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. James
C. Raines, PhD, MSSW, is professor and chair, Health,
Human Services and Public Policy Department, California
State University, Monterey Bay. Frederick Streeck, MSW,
ACSW, is executive director, School Social Work Association
of America, Sumner, WA. Anne McInerney, MSW,
LICSW, is a school social worker, St. Paul Public Schools,
St. Paul, MN. Molly P. Norris, LICSW, is lead school
social worker, Mankato Public Schools, Mankato, MN. The
development of the national model for school social work prac-
tice was supported in part by Minnesota State University,
Mankato, through a 2011 Strategic Planning Grant awarded
to Michelle E. Alvarez. In addition, the authors acknowledge
the many social workers who have reviewed and provided feed-
back on the model to date, in particular Martell Teasley and
Dawn Anderson-Butcher, for their insights on and contribu-
tions to the social justice perspective and leverage resource sec-
tions, respectively.

4 Children & Schools

View publication stats