Macro Social Work Education, and Practice over 1980-2024: A Systematic Review

Background: Macro social work has become increasingly vital as the social work profession turns to systemic solutions to confront the ongoing consequences of neoliberalism and rising global inequality (Abramovitz & Sherraden, 2016; Rothman & Mizrahi, 2014). Yet despite research calling for more robust macro education and practice, macro social work continues to face significant obstacles. One major obstacle is insufficient investment in macro social work (Mehrotra et al., 2018; Netting et al., 2016; Starr et al., 1999). At a macroscopic level, macro social work still lacks a comprehensive review that synthesizes available evidence on the needs and experiences of macro practitioners, students, and educators. Such a synthesis is essential in translating knowledge into actionable strategies for macro education and practice—and to securing the recognition, resources, and institutional support needed to expand macro social work’s impact within and beyond the profession.

Methods: We respond to the gap in the literature by systematically reviewing four decades of empirical research on macro social work education and practice, centering the perspectives of macro social work practitioners, educators, and students. Using a systematic literature review with a sequential mixed methods (quant→Qual) study design, we employ a multistage process aligned with PRISMA (2020) guidelines to identify 78 peer-reviewed, English-language empirical studies published between 1980 and 2024. Data analysis involved reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), collaborative coding and category refinement (Thomas, 2006), and analytic trustworthiness using established qualitative rigor criteria (Deterding & Waters, 2021).

Results: Findings testify to the growth of macro practice from the perspective of social work educators, students, and alumni. Yet this growth is accompanied by significant challenges in how macro practice is viewed and experienced. Quantitatively, our findings indicate an increase since 2010 in the U.S and global articles that document challenges in the comprehension and communication of macro social work professional roles and competencies, both within the social work field and among the broader public. Qualitatively, we find that lack of clarity and alignment around macro competencies and roles has limited employment opportunities, created role confusion, hindered collaboration, and posed barriers to workforce entry, retention, and well-being and professional commitment. Moreover, efforts to integrate macro content and competencies into social work education have been hindered by differing interpretations of macro practice, its competencies, and students’ learning preferences and professional development needs.

Conclusions and Implications: Based on our findings, we suggest that that the lack of clarity and alignment surrounding macro practice roles and competencies limit professional opportunities for macro educators, scholar-researchers, and practitioners. In response to these challenges, we propose a stepwise and collaborative approach that is intended to invest institutional, human, and intellectual resources in macro social work education and practice. We encourage greater attention to leveraging human service market insights to align competencies with workforce demands, and establishing signature training programs in key social work educational and human service institutions to strengthen professional preparation. The overall goal is for social work educational programs to contribute to a well-prepared social work and human service workforce through expanded professional opportunities.