In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Maximizing Access to Teresa V. Mason and Licensure for Deaf and Hard Judith L. Mounty of Hearing Social Workers Early studies on the testing of individuals from diverse ethnic groups reported that “minority group children suffer intellectual deficits when compared with their ‘more advantaged’ peers” (Cole & Bruner, 1971, p. 868). One might suggest that today’s testing procedures are more refined, better developed, and more rigorously studied. While that suggestion may be true, evidence suggests a continuation of differential testing patterns among individuals from various cultural and ethnic groups (McDowell, 1992). This chapter addresses the use of standardized tests, specifically for social work licensure, with those candidates who are deaf and hard of hearing. GENERAL USE OF STANDARDIZED TESTS In the social sciences, standardized testing is used in the United States for a number of reasons. Test scores in the United States are the vehicles for access to most educational and employment opportunities (McDowell, 1992; Olmedo, 1981). Test scores are used as guidelines for academic placements, college admissions, and course grades. In clinical studies, researchers use standardized instruments to conduct studies that help broaden the knowledge base and improve upon existing technologies by measuring individual or group differences. Social scientists use reliable and valid measures to conduct research about clinical disorders, treatment approaches, and medication effectiveness (Olmedo, 1981). Policy decisions are sometimes based upon the results of studies using standardized instruments. Overall, professionals in the social sciences area view standardized tests as helpful tools for accomplishing productive, scholarly goals. However, we can identify situations where standardized instruments normed for majority members are unable to fulfill their function. Most mainstream test instruments are targeted by English-speaking test makers for English-speaking test-takers. Candidates from diverse cultural, ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds may perform differently on standardized tests that are normed for members of the majority culture. Thus, the data gleaned from these tests may not accurately reflect measurement goals and the true mastery demonstrated by candidates. In a study cited by Oquendo (1996), researchers found that Spanish-speaking patients were seen as less psychotic when evaluated in English compared with being evaluated in Spanish. Similarly, the results of a study by Dikert (1988) showed that staff members at inpatient mental health programs for the deaf have more positive attitudes toward deaf patients than staff members serving the general (hearing) population. 1 4 9 150 Teresa V. Mason and Judith L. Mounty Inaccurate results from such tests may distort the reality of the individuals taking those tests and may have potentially harmful implications. In summary, standardized tests are widely used in the United States. Test scores are often the keys to many opportunities, such as employment and education. Research findings suggest that many standardized tests are culturally and linguistically biased in favor of the majority culture and language. Members with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds may have difficulty with such tests. This difficulty may inadvertently compound an already disadvantageous situation and lead to further oppression of and discrimination against marginalized groups. SOCIAL WORK LICENSURE As in other fields, the profession of social work has used licensing examinations to protect the public from harm caused by incompetent professionals (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education, 1985; 1999; Association of Social Work Boards, 2001). The Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB) was established in 1979 to regulate the profession of social work. At that time, only 23 states and Puerto Rico had laws regulating the profession. Since then, the rest of the states have adopted similar legislation. The organization’s membership now includes 52 jurisdictions, including Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, and several Canadian provinces. The organization also educates its members, students in the field, and other interested parties on social work regulations. All ASWB members use a set of examinations developed by and maintained by ASWB. The existence of a central entity allows boards to learn from one another and work together to further their goal of protecting the public through professional regulation . This entity can also help its members explore and seek solutions to problems and challenges (ASWB, 1999; 2001; 2002). The ASWB mission statement reads: “The mission of the Association of Social Work Boards is to assist social work regulatory bodies in carrying out their legislated mandates, and to encourage jurisdictional efforts to protect a diverse public served by social workers who are regulated through common values , ethics, and practice standards. The Association will help to foster public and professional understanding of...

Share