Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Faculty Perceptions of Gatekeeping and Student Suitability in the Context of Traditional and Online Social Work Programs

  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gatekeeping and the process of assessing student suitability for social work education is increasingly being impacted by the rapid growth of online programs. It remains unclear if suitability concerns within social work programs are operationalized differently between traditional and online/hybrid programs. This quantitative study used previously established student suitability constructs of social consciousness, ethical suitability, practice suitability, and personal suitability to examine attitudes of social work educators and administrators regarding gatekeeping in their respective online/hybrid and traditional social work programs. The study utilized a multivariate multilevel regression analysis to investigate the effect of participant background characteristics regarding perceived emphasis on gatekeeping within participant’s own programs. Findings showed a large discrepancy between what was important to participants and what was perceived to be emphasized in their respective programs regarding suitability and gatekeeping. This study suggests that social work faculty and administrators need to pay particular attention to uneven gatekeeping practices related to technological and pedagogical shifts in the evolving social work education landscape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(Dimensions adapted from Tam et al. 2013)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barlow, C., & Coleman, H. (2003). Suitability for practice guidelines for students: A survey of Canadian social work programmes. Social Work Education, 22(2), 151–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brear, P., Dorrian, J., & Luscri, G. (2008). Preparing our future counselling professionals: Gatekeeping and the implications for research. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 8(2), 93–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, S. (2008). Open and distance learning in qualifying social work education in Britian and the USA: Celebrating diversity and difference? Social Work Education, 27(4), 422–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council on Social Work Education. (2006). Annual report 2005–2006. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council on Social Work Education. (2014). Accreditation. Retrieved June 5, 2014, from https://www.cswe.org/Accreditation.aspx

  • Council on Social Work Education. (2018). 2017–2018 Annual report. Alexandria, VA: Council on Social Work Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle, J., Carter, I., & Leslie, D. (2011). BSW program admission policies: Is there empirical support for what we do? Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 31(5), 538–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd Ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freddolino, P., & Sutherland, C. (2000). Assessing the comparability of classroom environments in graduate social work education delivered via interactive instructional television. Journal of Social Work Education, 36(1), 115–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, P. (1994). Screening mechanisms in BSW programs. Journal of Social Work Education, 30(1), 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, P., & Macy, H. (2000). Introduction: The arena of gatekeeping. In P. Gibbs & E. Blakely (Eds.), Gatekeeping in BSW programs (pp. 3–21). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gillingham, P. (2009). Ghosts in the machine: Student participation and grade attainment in a web-assisted social work course. Social Work Education, 28(4), 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillis, H., & Lewis, J. (2004). Field education in social work addressing the issue of psychiatric disability in social work interns: The need for a problem-solving framework. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(3), 391–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GlenMaye, L. F., & Bolin, B. (2007). Students with psychiatric disabilities: An exploratory study of program practices. Journal of Social Work Education, 43(1), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GlenMaye, L., & Oakes, M. (2002). Assessing suitability of MSW applicants through objective scoring of personal statements. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1), 67–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grady, M. D. (2009). Gatekeeping: Perspectives from both sides of the fence. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 79(1), 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helper, J., & Noble, J. (1990). Improving social work education: Taking responsibility at the door. Social Work, 35(2), 126–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hylton, M. E., Manit, J., & Messick-Svare, G. (2017). Gatekeeping and competency-based education: Developing behaviorally specific remediation policies. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 37(3), 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kindle, P., & Colby, I. (2008). School selection preferences of public and private university MSW students: A retrospective study. Journal of Social Work Education, 44(3), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, A. (2002). E-learning in social work education: Emerging pedagogical and policy issues. Retrieved 2011, from New Scholarship in the Human Services: https://fsw.ucalgary.ca/currents_prod_v1/articles/knowles_1_nl.htm.

  • Koerin, B., & Miller, J. (1995). Gatekeeping policies: Terminating students for nonacademic reasons. Journal of Social Work Education, 31(2), 247–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreuger, L., & Stretch, J. (2000). How hypermodern technology in social work bites back. Journal of Social Work Education, 36(1), 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leedy, G., & Smith, J. (2005). Felony convictions and program admissions: Theoretical perspectives to guide decision-making. Retrieved September 17, 2011, from Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics: https://www.socialworker.com/jswve/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=16.

  • Magen, R. H., & Emerman, J. (2000). Should convicted felons be denied admission to a social work education program? Yes! Journal of Social Work Education, 36(3), 401–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L., & Urwin, C. (1990). Quality control in social work: The gatekeeping role in social work education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 4(1), 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L., & Urwin, C. (1991). Gatekeeping: A model for screening baccalaureate students for field education. Journal of Social Work Education, 27(1), 8–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Social Workers. (2014). Code of Ethics Overview. Retrieved from NASW, https://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/default.asp.

  • Petracchi, H. (2000). Distance education: What do our students tell us? Research on Social Work Practice, 10(3), 362–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reamer, F. (1998). The evolution of social work ethics. Social Work, 43(6), 488–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, M., & Bright, E. (2007). Gatekeeping in the academy: Lessons for Canadian social work educators from Young v. Bella. Canadian Social Work Review, 24(2), 167–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. (2003). A practical framework for evaluating online distance education programs. The Internet and Higher Education, 6, 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, H., & Hamilton, M. (2019a). USC considers deep cuts at social work school after revelations of gaping deficit. The Los Angeles Times.

  • Ryan, H., & Hamilton, M. (2019b). Online degrees made USC the world’s biggest social work school. Then things went terribly wrong. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-usc-social-work-20190606-story.html.

  • Ryan, M., Habibis, D., & Craft, C. (1998). Towards better gatekeeping: Discussion of the findings of a survey of gatekeeping mechanisms in Australian bachelor of social work programs. Australian Social Work, 51, 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siebert, D., Siebert, C., & Spaulding-Givens, J. (2006). Teaching clinical social work skills primarily online: An evaluation. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(2), 325–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, E., Jennings, J., Conklin, J., & Napoletano Flynn, S. (1998). Distance learning in social work education: Results and implications of a national survey. Journal of Social Work Education, 34(1), 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sowbel, L. R. (2012). Gatekeeping: Why shouldn't we be ambivalent? Journal of Social Work Education, 48(1), 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sowbel, L., & Miller, S. E. (2015). Gatekeeping in graduate social work education: Should personality traits be considered? Social Work Education, 34(1), 110–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swank, J. M., & Smith-Adcock, S. (2014). Gatekeeping during admissions: A survey of counselor education programs. Counselor Education & Supervision, 53, 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tam, D. M., Twigg, R., Boey, K.-W., & Kwok, S.-M. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis on the professional suitability scale for social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 23, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urwin, C., Van Soest, D., & Kretzschmar, J. (2006). Key principles for developing gatekeeping standards for working with students with problems. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 26(1/2), 163–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, R., Vakalahi, H., Pierce, D., Pittman-Munke, P., & Frantz Atkins, L. (2009). Distance education programs in social work: Current and emerging trends. Journal of Social Work Education, 45(2), 263–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilke, D., & Vinton, L. (2006). Evaluation of the first web-based advanced standing MSW program. Journal of Social Work Education, 42(3), 607–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Younes, M. N. (1998). The gatekeeping dilemma in undertraduate social work programs: Collision of ideal and reality. International Social Work, 41, 145–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Work, Eastern Washington University, 102 Senior Hall, Cheney, WA, 99004, USA

    Beth Halaas

  2. Michael D. Eisner College of Education, California State University, Northridge, ED 3103 18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge, CA, 91330, USA

    Jinyi Li & John M. Reveles

Authors
  1. Beth Halaas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jinyi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John M. Reveles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beth Halaas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Halaas, B., Li, J. & Reveles, J.M. Faculty Perceptions of Gatekeeping and Student Suitability in the Context of Traditional and Online Social Work Programs. Interchange 51, 409–428 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-020-09392-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-020-09392-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation