it seems evident that the organizations which have been discontinued are many fewer than the new organizations which have appeared. Stability of social work personnel.—The social work force is not a stable one. Various studies of turnover show a surprisingly high rate of replacement. The study of turnover in ninety-three agencies in Chicago and other mid-western cities made by W. W. Burke in 1924 revealed 286 separations out of a total of 1,064 social work positions, giving an annual turnover rate of 27 per cent for this group of agencies. Other studies have shown higher average rates of turnover, and we know of rates in certain organizations well above 50 per cent. Many social workers leave their jobs to accept better jobs in social work, but others leave the field entirely and must be replaced by new recruits. Some give up social work on account of age or illness, many to marry, and a rather large proportion leave social work for other kinds of work. Mr. Burke found that 14 per cent of those leaving the ninety-three mid-western agencies in 1924 left to enter other occupations than social work, and 10 per cent, to marry. This means at least 7 per cent of the total force of 1,064 persons in these agencies definitely abandoning the field within the course of one year. We need more information on the extent to which this is taking place. THE REMUNERATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS There are doubtless various reasons for the high turnover rate of social work personnel and for the significant extent to which persons who have prepared for it leave this field. An important reason is found in the financial return for this type of service. There is not space here to present detailed evidence on the point. We have assembled enough data, however, to convince us that the rank and file social worker is not well paid as compared with persons engaged in several other callings which demand no more, and probably less, in respect to maturity, education, and technical training. The accompanying diagram (Chart I) is from the study of the trend of salaries in 132 organizations already referred to. It shows by means of spots the distribution of the salaries of the so-called "staff" positions (that is, professional positions below the grade of supervisor) as reported to us for the years 191325. The two thin lines running through the diagram are "quartile" lines. They inclose a zone containing 50 per cent of the cases in each year. The heavy line running through this zone represents the movement of the average salary for "staff" positions. This line starts in 1913 at a salary of $70 per month, or $840 a year, and ends in 1925, at $126 per month, or $1,517 a year. In 1913 this salary compared favorably with an elementary school teacher's salary. In 1925 it is definitely lower, as is shown in Table III. In this table all figures relate to cities of over 100,000 population. The figures for teachers are for school years ending in the year specified, and do not include New York City. The Compass, February, 1925. MOVEMENT OF "STAFF" SALARIES IN SOCIAL WORK IN CITIES OF MORE Monthly THAN 100,000 POPULATION, 1913-25 Salary $250 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 * Each dot records the salary of a reported staff position. Between the two thin lines are half of the cases. The middle line traces the trend of the median salary. Fewer organizations are represented at the beginning than at the end of the period, so that conclusions concerning increase of personnel cannot be drawn from this diagram. Space does not permit reproduction of the full series of charts relating to the trend of social work salaries for different grades of position in cities of different size and to the relation of social work salaries to the increase in cost of living which were presented with this paper. Some of these charts were reproduced in an article in the Survey of February 15, 1926.1 Table IV summarizes some of these data. From "Public School Salaries in 1924-25," National Education Associa tion Research Bulletin (January-March, 1925), p. 15. Concerning the effect of technical education it seems evident that in this profession, as in others, there is room at the top, and that the best qualified will in the long run be best paid. In view of the active demand for social workers it would be natural to suppose that the well-trained graduate of a school of social work should be placed readily at a salary well above the average for staff workers. This is probably the case where the training fits for certain special types of social work. Our analysis of the salary data assembled by the American Association of Social Workers in 1922 seemed to show, however, that experience in social work is more important as a factor in determining salary increases than education. The status of education for social work, however, like the work itself, has been changing somewhat rapidly, and a current study of the influence of education might well show a different result. A report on salary standards drawn up by a committee of the Baltimore chapter of the American Association of Social Workers and published in the Compass for May, 1926, bears on this point. It specifies "a basic beginning salary of $1,500 a year. . . . to be paid to an adequately trained, inexperienced staff worker," adequate training being specified as connoting "successful This article has been republished by the Russell Sage Foundation as a pamphlet, entitled Social Work Salaries. completion of four years' work in an accredited college or university, followed by a full two-year course in a school for social work." A schedule of increases over the basic salary for completion of successive years of satisfactory service is suggested. This schedule provides for the technically trained college and school of social work graduate, after five years of actual social work experience, an annual salary of from $1,704 to $2,040. TABLE IV MEDIAN ANNUAL SALARIES IN SOCIAL WORK ORGANIZATIONS, BY SIZE OF Large cities are here cities of over 300,000 population; medium cities, from 100,000 to 300,000; small cities, less than 100,000. I am told that the salary standards specified in the Baltimore committee's report have been criticized by several social work executives as too high. This suggests that we should reconsider the requirements for education and training generally recommended, though not so generally observed, for the rank and file positions in the light of the salaries that can be paid. If an organization can turn over half, or even a quarter, of its personnel in the space of a year and still do effective social work, it seems logical to question whether the practice of social work in its lower positions does, after all, require the amount of training that is now being recommended, and whether this is a calling which we should invite large numbers of able and ambitious college men and women to enter. My own feeling is that the salaries will be increased. I think we need better social work more than we need more social work. SUMMARY First, the number of positions calling for trained social workers is large, the number in the United States being roughly estimated at 25,000. Second, more than half of the social work positions are in the larger cities. Probably fewer than 20 per cent are in places of less than 25,000 population, though 64 per cent of the population is in these places. Third, social work organizations are increasing in number, and existing organizations are increasing in size. This increase is continuing at the present time. Fourth, the social work force is exceptionally unstable, high turnover rates being the rule. Fifth, an important and probably the determining factor in instability of force is the salary scale. Salaries in social work compare unfavorably with those in teaching and are incommensurate with the extent of education and training called for. EDUCATING THE FIELD OUTSIDE OF METROPOLITAN Garret P. Wyckoff, Professor of Sociology and Director of Training The ponderous title assigned for this discussion indicates that it is supposed to supplement the preceding paper by revealing to some extent the processes by which the existing limited demand for trained social workers out in the sticks has come about and by suggesting how that demand may be increased. It also appears to imply that the need of the creation of a demand for trained social workers is especially great outside of the metropolitan centers. In the development of professional social work during the last quarter of a century there appear the two contrasted methods usual in such constructive movements: one, the extensive, pioneering work; the other, the more intensive, professionalizing process. Some advocates of one or the other of these methods have not always understood or appreciated the other side and have failed to remember that the two kinds of work are essentially complementary. My first suggestion is that, whatever may be true of metropolitan centers, our field outside is not yet prepared to discard the first of these methods of creating a demand for trained social workers, namely, the extensive, pioneering, educative method. In the great majority of our rural communities-towns, counties, small cities, middle-size cities, and states at large-we still need the creation of an understanding of, and a desire for, constructive social work as a prerequisite to the introduction of the trained social worker. Too large a proportion of our people have not yet even a flash of the social work idea. It is not safe to put over the trained worker on people who have not some appreciation of the value of the work. If this observation is correct we shall need a continuation of the efforts of socially minded teachers, preachers, lecturers, writers, and all others who are helping the minds of the people into the habit of thinking about the relations of human beings with each other. Possibly professional social workers should show a greater sympathy with such discussions, inadequate though some of them may be, and even take a more active part in their promo |