Preparing Social Workers to Run for Office and Careers in Political Settings

Background and purpose

            The NASW Code of Ethics and policy statement on electoral politics describe the need for social workers to advocate for change. The strongest predictors of social workers’ political participation are their perceptions of their own political efficacy: their ability to influence the political process and views of the accessibility of that process.  Existing studies of social workers elected to office show an introduction to the political world that builds this political efficacy increases their involvement.

            This presentation will describe ways research on political social work were used to inform a unique educational experience to train social work professionals and students for leadership positions on political campaigns and for elected office.  Currently in its 19th year, this two-day program trained more than 550 participants from around the country by describing the inner workings of political campaigns and providing opportunities for skill development to prepare for leadership roles in campaigns and runs for office. Participants increase their political efficacy through increased understanding of the electoral system and strengthening of skills and confidence in their ability to affect the system.

Methods

Data comes from a pre- and post-test of two trainings in 2015 (n=65).  Most participants were social work students (60%) or held an MSW degree (32%).  Participants ranged in age from 21 to 65; median age was 31.  Most participants were female (77%), white (69%), and heterosexual (82%).  The majority resided in Connecticut (42%), Maine (32%), and New York (15%).  Political efficacy scales derived from the American National Election Survey (ANES) that has been used since 1952 were used to measure internal efficacy and external political efficacy.  A modified political participation scale based on Rome and Hoechstetter’s 2010 survey of the political participation of professional social workers was used to establish a baseline for the training attendees.  The post-test reexamined efficacy plans for future participation.

Results

Improvements were observed in overall political efficacy (t=-4.730, p=.000), internal efficacy (t=-3.654, p=.001), and external efficacy (t=-4.162, p=.000).  The planned political activity scale (8-items) increased from 6 planned activities to 6.5 (t=-2.044, p=.048).  Following training #1, 66% of participants considered running for local office (up from 34%), 46% for state office (up from 20%), and 17% for federal office (up from 1%).  Increases were also seen in plans to volunteer on political campaigns (from 79% to 92%, t=-2.364, p=.023) and join interest groups, civic organizations, or political parties (from 85% to 97%, t=-2.364, p=.023). Data from training #2 was just collected and will be included in the final presentation.

Implications

The findings suggest participants developed greater confidence in our political system, their ability to affect change within the system, and a desire to become more politically engaged.  Future studies could examine attendees of previous trainings to determine if planned changes translate into actual behavior changes, and explore whether the training can be used in a variety of geographical and political environments. This presentation will describe the ways this training can be used to improve social work education and as a catalyst for systematic change.