California is the only state which still retains an oral exam for social work licensure.

All of the states which previously required oral examinations have eliminated
them as being subjective, arbitrary, and not a valid means of assessing social
work competency.

The BBS admits that its examiner pairs fail to agree between themselves 18
percent of the time, proving the subjectivity of the oral exam.

Assembly Member Susan Davis, MSW, recently passed a "mock" oral exam.
The fact that Assembly Member Davis, who possesses none of the prerequisites
to sit for the oral exam (3200 supervised hours and passage of the AASSWB
written exam), passed the oral when over 60 percent of qualified social workers
do not, demonstrates that the oral exam is not a valid measure of social work
competency.

Current qualifications (without the oral exam) are sufficient to ensure social work
competency.

Graduation from an accredited MSW program

Completion of 1600 pre-graduate supervised internship hours

Completion of 3200 post-graduate supervised hours

Passage of the nationally-recognized AASSWB written examination

These qualifications meet or exceed those required for licensure in the 49 other
states

Unlike physicians, nurses, lawyers, dentists, etc., social workers are able to
provide services prior to licensure. In other words, we are already doing the job
-- oftentimes for many years.

Physicians, nurses, lawyers, dentists are not required to pass an oral
examination for state licensure.

The oral examination does not provide a greater level of protection to California
consumers nor does it ensure that California is the "safest" state for social work services.

According to the AASSWB (American Association of State Social Work Boards)
1996 statistics, 81 percent of the other states (including the District of Columbia
and Virgin Islands) have lower disciplinary rates than California.

Over 80 percent of the social workers currently licensed in California (LCSWs)
have not taken the current oral exam nor does the BBS require passage of the
current oral exam as a condition for licensure renewal of these individuals.

The BBS cannot "fix" the oral exam.

The oral exam cannot be "fixed." So long as human beings are involved in the process as
examiners, the process remains inherently subjective and arbitrary.

Oral examiners have a vested interest in failing applicants who are potential
professional competitors.

SB-288 is non-partisan.

SB-288 passed in the full State Senate with a vote of 31-3.

After hearing testimony from both sides, on March 17, 1998, the Joint Legislative Sunset
Review Committee voted 5-1 to eliminate the social work oral exam by January 1, 1999.

Elimination of the oral exam for social workers only.

We support elimination of the oral exam for MFCCs and Psychologists, but legislation has not
yet been introduced to do so.

Should SB-288 pass, it is highly likely that legislation will be introduced next year to eliminate
the oral exam for MFCCs as an advocacy group has already been organized and is working
toward that goal (The Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of MFCCs).

Other states require oral exams for MFCCs and Psychologists, but not social workers. State
NASW chapters report no adverse effects on social workers practicing in those states.

NASW-CA opposition to SB-288.

NASW-CA has opposed SB-288 since its introduction on February 7, 1997 without
consultation or polling of its membership.

NASW-CA opposed SB-288 even when MFCCs were included in the legislation.

Signifcant numbers of California social workers are not NASW members.

Many NASW members support SB-288.

The oral exam provides a significant source of revenue for NASW-CA through its oral exam
preparation courses.