MOVEMENT OF "STAFF" SALARIES IN SOCIAL WORK IN CITIES OF MORE Monthly Salary $250 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 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 Association 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 tion and directing. Out of a more general public interest in this field of thought may come greater future toleration and support of the trained social worker. My second suggestion takes me quite to the other side of the subject. I believe that, whatever may be true of metropolitan centers, the field outside is going to demand, not merely trained social workers, but educated social workers. To supply this field with workers who are merely trained will defeat our purpose. We shall make headway more safely and, in the long run, more rapidly, if we supply it with workers of good natural ability, educated sufficiently to take a leading part in the general life of the community and to think independently about their own professional problems in the new environment in which they must work. The trained worker who tries to apply metropolitan methods to outside communities without using constructive personal thought is very apt to fail and thereby to delay the movement to place social work on a true professional basis. I believe strongly in the most thorough training based on an adequate educational foundation. I believe also that for most kinds of social work this training can best be given in metropolitan centers where varied clinical opportunities are available. Under such an arrangement it becomes the responsibility of the training school in the metropolitan center to select for training, at least for the field outside, only persons with adequate natural ability and good general education. With this in mind, after six years of preparation for the step, we have placed our training work at Tulane University strictly upon a graduate basis, requiring a Bachelor's degree from a recognized college for registration in any course, and have also reserved specifically the right to deny admission to anyone who, in the opinion of the faculty, does not seem likely to become a successful professional social worker. An additional responsibility of the training school in the city is the recognition of the fact that the best of those it trains are needed for the outside field, where workers must think for themselves instead of consulting, and must also take a leading part in the work of social organization. To the extent that the city training school is interested in the promotion of social work as a profession, instead of merely serving local interests, it will recommend for positions outside only from the best half of its graduates, and will keep the poorer half at home where they may receive additional supervision. One of the most influential factors in introducing the trained social worker throughout the country as a whole is the national social work agency. The policies of these agencies have differed considerably. Some have made it their practice to take local recruits and give them training by graded and progressive steps both at their homes and at training centers. Other national agencies have preferred to train all their workers at central training schools and even to shift workers frequently, so that loyalty to the central organization should not become subordinate to local attachments. Some agencies encourage training that is broad and fundamental and will lead to confidence in one's own capacity to think about the problems that will arise in the field. Other agencies appear to wish to train merely the memory, and to discourage any initiative in their |