Purpose: A critical aspect of social work research involves technology transfer/translation activities, ensuring that research results are disseminated and utilized in practice. MSW education is one significant translation enterprise. In the field of alcohol research, this translation process is particularly important because social workers are very often the first source of contact for individuals experiencing alcohol use problems, though they often receive inadequate empirically-based training in alcohol use disorders (Amodeo, 2000; Barsky & Coleman, 2001; Gassman, Demone, & Albilal, 2001; Hall, Amodeo, Shaffer, & Vander Bilt, 2000; Straussner, 2001; Tam, Schmidt, & Weisner, 1996). These training and transfer inadequacies can often be traced to deficiencies in the training, attitudes, and experiences of social work educators, or over-reliance on elective specialty courses (Alaszewski & Harrison, 1992; Peyton, Chaddick & Gorsuch, 1980; Rhodes & Johnson, 1996; Schlesinger & Barg,1986; Sun, 2001). Methods: This pilot study describes baseline (pretest) results from surveys of the first 53 MSW educators (faculty=40%, field instructors=42%, doctoral/ad hocs=18%; teaching across HBSE, field, practice, policy, research, etc.) participating in educator training on the new NIAAA social work alcohol use disorders curriculum. Respondents rated their past training, their comfort level, and their current teaching content in each of 21 alcohol content areas (e.g., epidemiology, etiology, screening, assessment, treatment, prevention, vulnerable populations, etc.), as well as completing demographic/history questions, and some attitudinal items, including a Semantic Differential test. Results: First, descriptive data are presented demonstrating that these educators have relatively little training or experience about alcohol or other drugs (for example, 42% of respondents reported having no practice experience in AODA; the mean extent of the respondents' current practice in this area was 30%). Second, respondents' scores on their own training, comfort, and current teaching content are reported as they relate to 21 alcohol content areas. Results indicate low levels of self-reported training in any of the alcohol content areas (M ranges .97-1.93, where 0=none, 1=very little, 2=some, 3=a lot); low levels of comfort (M ranges .93-2.04); and, low levels of current teaching (M ranges .92-2.02). Self-reported comfort and teaching about alcohol content are significantly correlated in all content areas. Respondents' attitudes toward working with clients who experience alcohol use disorders were compared to their attitudes toward teaching students about alcohol used disorders (as measured by Semantic Differentials). While both activities are viewed as being relatively positive, teaching is viewed more positively than social work practice with these clients, where paired t(47)=-4.42, p=.000; teaching is viewed as more active than practice, where paired-t(41)= -3.02, p<.01; and both teaching and practice were viewed as approximately equal in terms of power (t not significant). Finally, 90% of respondents believe that alcohol content should be taught through a combination of specialized courses and integration across the curriculum, not by either approach alone. Implications are discussed for: (1) research dissemination and translation through the medium of social work education; (2) broadly defining “social work educator” in research about BSW/MSW education processes; (3) specific alcohol use disorders curriculum content areas.