The profession of social work: comparing Germany and Singapore

ABSTRACT

Using a comparative approach the professional characteristics of social work in Germany and Singapore were analysed. The literature about the profession in both countries was reviewed according to eight criteria suggested by Weiss-Gal and Welbourne (The professionalisation of social work: A cross-national exploration. International Journal of Social Welfare, 17, 281–290, 2008): (1) public recognition, (2) monopoly over social care, (3) professional autonomy, (4) specific knowledge base, (5) educational system, (6) social work organisations, (7) code of ethics, and (8) status and prestige. Our analysis yielded similarities and differences in social work as a profession between the two countries. Common to Germany and Singapore is the existence of a body of knowledge, the professional training of social workers in higher education, the establishment of professional organisations, and the adoption of a code of ethics. The full definition of being a profession with respect to professional monopoly and autonomy is not reached by either one of the two countries. While extended education since the Bologna reform may lead to enhanced public recognition in Germany, relatively low salaries indicate a low status and prestige of the profession. In Singapore, the government just recently intentionally increased social workers’ remuneration to improve public recognition and to tackle social problems more effectively.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Mit einem vergleichenden Ansatz wurden die beruflichen Merkmale der Sozialen Arbeit in Deutschland und Singapur analysiert. Hierzu wurde die berufsbezogene Literatur in beiden Ländern nach acht von Weiss-Gal und Welbourne (Die Professionalisierung der Sozialen Arbeit: Eine länderübergreifende Untersuchung, 2008) vorgeschlagenen Kriterien überprüft: (1) öffentliche Anerkennung, (2) Monopol über die Sozialfürsorge, (3) berufliche Autonomie, (4) spezifisches Grundlagenwissen, (5) Ausbildungssystem, (6) Organisationen der Sozialen Arbeit, (7) Ethikkodex und (8) Status und Prestige. Unsere Analyse ergab sowohl Ähnlichkeiten als auch Unterschiede. Gemeinsam ist Deutschland und Singapur das Vorhandensein von Grundlagenwissen, die Sozialarbeiter*innen an Hochschulen, die Gründung von Berufsverbänden und das Bekenntnis zu einem Ethikkodex. Eine vollständige Berufsdefinition wird hinsichtlich des beruflichen Monopols und der Autonomie von keinem der beiden Länder erreicht. Während die Weiterentwicklung des Studiengangs seit der Bologna-Reform möglicherweise zu einer erhöhten öffentlichen Anerkennung in Deutschland geführt hat, deuten relativ niedrige Gehälter auf einen niedrigen Status und ein geringes Prestige des Berufs hin. In Singapur hat die Regierung erst kürzlich die Vergütung von Sozialarbeiter*innen mit der Absicht angehoben, die öffentliche Anerkennung zu erhöhen und soziale Probleme effektiver anzugehen.

KEYWORDS:

• Profession of social work
• social work education
• cross-national
• Germany
• Singapore

SCHLÜSSELWORTE:

• Beruf Soziale Arbeit
• Ausbildung Soziale Arbeit
• länderübergreifend
• Deutschland
• Singapur

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 A discussion of current welfare state models is beyond the scope of this paper and is described by Arts and Gelissen (2006). Wilensky and Lebeaux (1958) as cited in Park (2008) characterise Korea’s welfare state system as a residual model ‘in which the provision of social welfare is predominantly the responsibility of the family and the private market economy’ (p. 9). In an institutional model ‘the state assumes a larger role, while at the same time offering a broader range of services that are not restricted to a small proportion of the population’ (p. 1).

2 A description of how people from Asian and European countries think differently based on collectivistic and individualistic values is provided by Nisbett et al. (2001) and Nisbett (2003).

3 Social work education in Europe has made much progress as a result of the Bologna Declaration from 1999, when the ministers of 29 European countries signed a document aiming at the harmonisation of the European Higher Education systems (Campanini, 2020).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Annette Ullrich

Annette Ullrich, Ph.D., Social Worker, is a Professor in the Department of Social Work at the Duale Hochschule Baden Württemberg (DHBW). She received her Ph.D. in Special Education and Child Development from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Her areas of research include stress and coping, challenging behaviours, learning and pedagogy.

Andrea D. Schwanzer

Andrea D. Schwanzer, Ph.D., Psychologist, is a Professor for Psychology and Counselling in the Department of Social Work at the Hannover University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Germany. Her research interests are stress and burnout prevention in educational settings, counselling self-concept development and measurement and occupational health.

Richard G. Lambert

Richard G. Lambert, Ph.D., Ed.S. is a Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership in the Cato College of Education at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and the Director of the Center for Educational Measurement and Evaluation. His research interests include formative assessment for young children, applied statistics, and teacher stress and coping.

Boon Kheng Seng

Boon Kheng Seng, Ph.D. is a Professor of Social Work and Head of the Social Work Programme at the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS). Her research interests are in the areas of mental health, caregiving and dementia.

Cansu Atlay

Dr. rer. soc. Cansu Atlay, is a research consultant in the Department of Social Work at the Duale Hochschule Baden Württemberg (DHBW). Her research focuses on social disparities in the education and health sectors.