This article draws on a study of New Zealand social workers’ experiences of continuing professional education (CPE) during the first two years following the advent of limited statutory registration. A qualitative study demonstrates strong links between social workers’ educational aspirations and beliefs about the status of the profession. Social workers in the study perceived continuing education in part as a tool to achieve greater professional standing for social work in contested spaces. At a time when registration legislation is likely to be strengthened, this article contributes to the somewhat neglected scholarship of continuing education in an increasingly regulated social work profession.
BeckettC. (2003) ‘The Language of Siege: Military Metaphors in the Spoken Language of Social Work’, British Journal of Social Work33(5): 625–39.
2.
BeddoeE. (2010) ‘Building Professional Capital: New Zealand Social Workers and Continuing Education’, unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia.
3.
BeddoeL. (2011a) ‘Investing in the Future: Social Workers Talk about Research’, British Journal of Social Work41(3): 557–75.
4.
BeddoeL. (2011b) ‘Health Social Work: Professional Identity and Knowledge’, Qualitative Social Work, doi:10.1177/1473325011415455.
5.
BeddoeL.HenricksonM. (2005) ‘Continuing Professional Social Work Education in Aotearoa New Zealand’, Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development15(2): 75–90.
6.
BrewerC.LaitJ. (1980) Can Social Work Survive?London: Temple Smith.
7.
CharmazK. (2000) ‘Grounded Theory: Objectivist and Constructivist Methods’, in DenzinN.LincolnY. (eds) The Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, pp. 509–35. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
8.
DickensJ. (2012) ‘The Definition of Social Work in the United Kingdom, 2000–2010’, International Journal of Social Welfare21(1): 34–43.
9.
FlexnerA. (1915) ‘Is Social Work a Profession?’, Research on Social Work Practice11(2): 152–65.
10.
GreenL.C. (2006) ‘Pariah Profession, Debased Discipline? An Analysis of Social Work’s Low Academic Status and the Possibilities for Change’, Social Work Education25(3): 245–64.
11.
JonesC. (1983) State Social Work and the Working Class. London: Macmillan.
12.
JordanB. (2004) ‘Emancipatory Social Work? Opportunity or Oxymoron’, British Journal of Social Work34(1): 5–19.
13.
LakoffG. (1993) ‘The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor’, in OrtonyA. (ed.) Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edn, pp. 202–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
NoordegraafM. (2011) ‘Risky Business: How Professionals and Professional Fields (Must) Deal with Organizational Issues’, Organization Studies32(10): 1349–71.
15.
O’BrienM. (2005) ‘A Just Profession or Just a Profession’, Social Work Review17(1): 13–22.
16.
O’BrienM. (2009) ‘Social Work and the Practice of Social Justice: An Initial Overview’, Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work21(1–2): 3–10.
17.
O’NeillO. (2002) A Question of Trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
OrmeJ.RennieG. (2006) ‘The Role of Registration in Ensuring Ethical Practice’, International Social Work49(3): 333–44.
19.
Roach AnleuS.L. (1992) ‘The Professionalisation of Social Work? A Case Study of Three Organisational Settings’, Sociology26(1): 23–43.
20.
Social Workers Registration Board (2012) ‘Mandatory Social Worker Registration: Report on the Discussion Paper of 2011’, Social Workers Registration Board, Wellington, New Zealand.
21.
van HeugtenK. (2011) ‘Registration and Social Work Education: A Golden Opportunity or a Trojan Horse?’, Journal of Social Work11(2): 174–90.
22.
WitzA. (1992) Professions and Patriarchy. London and New York: Routledge.
23.
ZuffereyC. (2012) ‘“Jack of All Trades, Master of None?” Social Work Identity and Homelessness in Australian Cities’, Journal of Social Work12(5): 510–27.
