Social Work Students’ Attitudes and Knowledge of Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore social work students’ knowledge, attitudes, and support for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery and persistent structural discrimination. A 44-item self-administered online survey instrument was used to gather data. A total of 91 social work students across the United States responded to the survey. The findings demonstrated that there is a knowledge deficit about reparations. An overwhelming majority of students reported that they had never taken a college course that included content on reparations. To address this void, nearly 95% of the respondents indicated that they would like to learn more about H.R.40, a legislative bill that seeks to establish a commission to study proposals for reparations in the United States. Reparations align with the mission, values, and competencies of social work; therefore, students’ desire to learn more about this topic should serve as a motivator for U.S. social work educators to include this content in graduate and undergraduate courses.

1. Introduction

The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) identifies racial justice as a priority of the social work profession. In the 2022 Educational and Policy Standards (EPAS), the Council mandates that accredited social work programs demonstrate that students are exposed to anti-racist approaches across implicit and explicit curricula (CSWE 2022a). Furthermore, the 13th Grand Challenge of Social Work requires that social workers engage in efforts to eliminate racism and eradicate White supremacy (Grand Challenges for Social Work 2020). However, little is known about how social work programs are advancing the ideology of anti-racist approaches and social justice for people of color. The ongoing challenges faced by African Americans and the onslaught on diversity warrant greater attention to reparations as a social justice issue to redress the ongoing legacy of racism. Moore (2020) argues that “students should be taught multiple perspectives regarding reparations, including the historical events that precipitated the current focus on racial and social justice” (p. 27). However, data from the Southern Poverty Law Center indicate that there is a significant lack of knowledge about the brutality and historical injustices of slavery among high school seniors (Southern Poverty Law Center 2018). This deficit in knowledge among high school students is likely to continue into post-secondary education. It is the position of the authors that an understanding of the historical, political, and social factors that contribute to racial inequality, as well as the policy initiatives and proposals that are intended to redress these inequities, is critical to anti-racist and anti-oppressive social work practice. The current study aims to elucidate social work students’ perceptions about, knowledge of, and academic interest in reparations for African Americans.

Advocacy groups such as the National African American Reparations Commission (NAARC) and the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (N’COBRA) have been at the forefront of advancing reparations and H.R.40, a bill to study proposals for reparations (Taifa 2022). Additionally, the activism of these organizations has significantly contributed to the entry of reparations into mainstream politics. The 2020 elections marked the first time in U.S. history that several Democratic Party candidates for the U.S. presidency offered an official position on reparations (Politico 2019). Despite the realization of reparations in mainstream conversations, except for the National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW), the social work profession has yet to articulate a position on this important issue (McElderry and Jones 2021). In a study of 186 U.S. social workers, a majority of the respondents (73%) reported support for reparations, and an even larger percentage (81%) agreed that reparations can begin to repair racial inequity (Jones et al. 2021). Interestingly, more than half of the respondents (57%) held faculty positions. Whether this support for reparations is translated into the learning environment warrants further investigation. Engaging in anti-racist practice requires that aspiring social workers have the requisite knowledge to formulate an understanding of the historical aspects of slavery and its consequences. The results of the current study should shed light on disseminating information on reparations in social work education and the level of interest U.S. social work students have in this information.

Advancing reparations as a social justice issue and human rights priority is important for furthering the social work goals of anti-racist practice and racial justice. Reparations present an opportunity to redress institutional racism and to adhere to the National Association of Workers (NASW) standards of an anti-racist theoretical perspective. Insight into how social work educators present information on historical injustices and potential remedies, such as reparations, is important for examining how future practitioners will answer the charge of anti-racist practice. Scientific evidence on how social workers are prepared to engage in anti-racist social work practice is significantly lacking in the social work literature. The current study presents an opportunity to add to the knowledge base on this important topic. The Reparations Awareness and Support Scale (RAAS), a 44-item instrument developed by the researchers, was used to assess undergraduate and graduate-level U.S. social work students’ knowledge and perceptions of reparations. To date, no prior efforts have been made to specifically examine social work students’ attitudes and knowledge on this important issue.

2. Background

The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) is the accrediting agency for baccalaureate and master’s programs in social work. Accredited programs are expected to adhere to the Educational and Policy Standards (EPAS) established by CSWE, which are intended to assess the academic progress of aspiring social workers in achieving discipline-specific competencies. The most recent version of the expected standards is promulgated in the 2022 EPAS (CSWE 2022a). The document outlines the implicit and explicit curricula for social work programs. Unique to the 2022 EPAS is the addition of “anti-racism.” Unlike previous versions of the document, the 2022 EPAS requires programs to educate and challenge students to understand “how racism and oppression shape human experiences” and to “use their knowledge, awareness, and skills to engage in anti-racist practice” (CSWE 2022a, p. 9). Hence, future social work practitioners should be prepared to advocate for and engage in practices that attempt to repair systemic injustices and counter population-based inequities experienced by racially oppressed groups. The caste-like system that exists in the U.S. requires a macro lens to examine the institutionalization of white supremacy and its negative impact (Wilkerson 2020). Reparations is a macro approach to redressing the collective damages of white supremacy. However, given the reality that social work in the U.S. is largely micro-focused, a paradigm shift may be necessary to accomplish the objectives of anti-racist and anti-oppressive social work practice to address the structural inequities that currently exist (Morgaine and Capous-Desyllas 2015). Eradication of racism necessitates a transformative process that requires interventions at the macro levels of practice.

An important aspect of social work education is understanding the importance of working toward cultural competence or developing cultural humility. In this context, students must empathize with the experiences and perspectives of diverse populations, particularly communities that have experienced historical oppression. Although social work education attempts to prepare future social workers for multicultural practice, few remedies or interventions have been proposed to advance this ideology.

Social work students are taught ethical responsibilities, including promoting social justice. Therefore, knowledge about how social work students are prepared for scholarly and informed discussions about reparations is an important but absent piece of social work literature. Reparations is a highly controversial and complex issue that necessitates an understanding of what Darity and Mullen (2020) refer to as the “three tiers of injustice that form the basis for Black reparations in the United States: slavery, Jim Crow, and ongoing racial inequality and racism” (p. 28). The sequelae of chattel slavery and the impact of ongoing systemic racism as human rights violations and social injustices warrant intentional discussion in the social work community. While attitudes and knowledge of reparations among U.S. social workers and social work students may vary, it is important to assess whether they have been exposed to sufficient information to shape perceptions and reconcile personal values.

How social work educators promote anti-racism in the classroom is an important question regarding how to do anti-racist practice. Anti-racist ideology and reparations present social workers with a framework to engage, intervene, and evaluate the impact of historical oppression and persistent injustices in the African American community. Reparations represent a potential mechanism to redress the oppressive history of America toward people of African descent. Anit-racist social work practice implies actions geared toward the disruption of discrimination and racial trauma and dismantling racism at the structural level. The theory of reparations is a form of reparative justice that aims to repair the damages caused by systemic injustices and human rights violations. The priority of reparations is to ensure that such injustices do not occur in the future. Reparations are viewed as a multifaceted approach intended to address the interrelated systems of oppression (e.g., political, economic, education, culture, health, social, etc.) that have served to maintain inequity and disparate outcomes for people of African descent.

2.1. Reparations Theory

Reparations theory seeks to promote broad remedies for racial injustices and social inequities (Magee 1993). Several scholars have identified reparations theory in their work. These authors assert that reparations theory is based on more than unjust enrichment from past harms of enslavement and racial discrimination (i.e., “backwards-looking reasons”), but also concerns current wealth inequities and racial injustices endured by descendant communities (i.e., “forward-looking reasons”), such as wealth redistribution and educational and governmental reforms (Brophy 2006, p. 815; Evans and Wilkins [2017] 2017; Magee 1993; Reneau 2024; Táíwò 2022). Reparations encompass comprehensive material and non-material remedies for past, current, and ongoing harms committed by individual, corporate, and governmental entities. For example, as early as 1441, Africans were human-trafficked from their ancestral continent, endured over 200 years of chattel slavery in the Americas, and have faced persistent racial discrimination. Therefore, effective reparations must include intentional restitution and accountability on multiple fronts (Edwards et al. 2024). Reparations theory aligns with corrective, restorative, and transformative justice (Androff 2022; Brophy 2006; Davis 2021; Evans and Wilkins [2017] 2017; Táíwò 2022). Reparations seek to redress past harms, restore communities and social relationships, and transform societies. Reparations theory is consistent with social workers’ anti-racist and SREEJ (social, racial, economic, and environmental justice) goals to eliminate structural barriers, reduce inequities, and advocate for social resources and public policies (CSWE 2022a).

2.2. Knowledge of the Historical Context

Reparations are based on understanding the historical injustices that have contributed to present-day disparities. It is expected that U.S. social work students will be exposed to this type of information as a necessary step to gain a deeper understanding of how historical injustices continue to impact marginalized communities in contemporary society. Students should be given sufficient tools to understand how structural inequalities and systemic racism from a historical perspective persist in creating disparities in health, education, wealth, and other indicators of social well-being. Studying reparations offers the potential for students to gain insight into how to dismantle deeply ingrained systems of racial oppression and disparities. The complexities of policy design, prevailing arguments, and critiques of reparations, while significant, are not the primary focus of the investigation. The works of such scholars as Raymond Winbush (2003), Should American Pay? The Raging Debate on Reparations have addressed the legal, political, and practical challenges of reparations. Additionally, the pros and cons are widely documented and are not repeated here (e.g., see Bittker 1973; Brooks 2004; Brophy 2006; Jones and McElderry 2024; Táíwò 2022). This study explores the pedagogical feasibility and interest of U.S. social work students in reparations as a reparative justice issue that aligns with professional values.

2.3. Promoting Cultural Competence and Humility

An important aspect of social work involves developing an understanding of diverse cultural perspectives and experiences. An important aspect of cultural competence is honoring the history of other cultures. Darity and Mullen (2020) emphasize the importance of understanding the three tiers of reparations: slavery, Jim Crowism, and ongoing racism. By studying reparations, U.S. social work students are positioned to gain a deeper understanding of the consequences of historical injustices and to demonstrate the skills necessary to engage in cultural humility. Social work educators have an ethical responsibility to provide accurate historical information and data about the histories of cultural groups.

Although social work education attempts to prepare students for multicultural practice, few remedies or interventions have been proposed to achieve greater social justice. There is an urgency to expand diversity education in social work beyond aspirational approaches that primarily focus on awareness of differences, recognition of implicit biases, and tolerance. In the 2022 Education and Policy Standards, the Council on Social Work Education mandated that accredited programs prepare aspiring social workers for ant-racist practice (CSWE 2022a). The CSWE standards specifically state that “promoting social justice is an essential goal of practice” (CSWE 2022a). In addition, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), the largest body of social workers, issued a statement on anti-racism which in part stated that to “realize our core professional values, we must understand and commit to doing our part in abolishing racist and oppressive systems” (NASW 2022). The doing of social work must include an examination of the type and degree to which aspiring social workers are exposed to information to become transformative social workers. Reparations align with anti-racist practices and offer a pragmatic approach to promoting racial justice.

2.4. Trauma-Informed Practice

U.S. social work students should be exposed to the knowledge that documents the historical injustices that marginalized communities have experienced, as foundational to understanding racial trauma. Studying reparations can help future social work practitioners adopt trauma-informed practices that extend beyond the micro-mezzo level. Reparations evolved from a theory of restorative justice, which focuses on community well-being and recovery from trauma (Zehr 2014). Scholars from various disciplines have used an array of similar terms (e.g., historical, transgenerational, intergenerational, multi-generational, and cross-generational) to describe the cumulative harm of past trauma to subsequent generations over time (Mohatt et al. 2015). Leary (2005) coined the term Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome to describe the collective trauma of enslavement, legal segregation, and ongoing discriminatory practices toward African Americans.

Aligned with restorative justice, reparations theory provides the underlying logic for repairing the damages and abuses inflicted upon a community. Reparations is a form of reparative justice that presents a framework to address the intergenerational trauma of chattel slavery and ongoing racism that results in racial disparities in all major indicators of well-being for African American descendants. It is crucial to trauma-informed care that social work students acquire accurate knowledge about the institution of slavery and the role of white supremacy in developing and maintaining systemic racism. The forcible removal of African people from their ancestral homes and the violence and brutality of slavery represent foundational information that social work students should have exposure to as necessary to acquire the skills, disposition, and political consciousness to develop an anti-racist identity.

The abuses of slavery, Jim Crowism, and the persistence of systemic racial bias that manifested in unequal outcomes for African Americans create social trauma that impacts not only individuals but also communities. For example, police brutality and the murder of African Americans at the hands of police officers not only impact the victims but also the communities in which these individuals reside and beyond. The impact of past and contemporary trauma is an important aspect of understanding models of macro practice such as community organizing (Weil 2005; Androff 2022) in understanding reparations. Aspiring social workers need exposure to knowledge that fosters sensitivity and awareness of the impact of historical trauma on not only individuals and families but also communities. Racialized practices and policies impact communities in powerful and negative ways that give rise to the need for a broad perspective on trauma-informed interventions and methods.

2.5. Advocacy for Social Justice

A core value of social work is social justice. However, there is considerable ambiguity in the definition of social justice (Garcia and Van Soest 2021). The NASW Code of Ethics mandates that “social workers pursue social change, particularly with and on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individuals and groups of people” (NASW 2022, p. 14). Social workers, therefore, have an ethical obligation to advocate for policies that create greater equality for marginalized populations. U.S. social work students must be prepared for scholarly and informed discussions about the ethical implications of reparations for African American descendants. Accredited social work programs are mandated to promote critical thinking and open dialogue (CSWE 2022a). Therefore, meaningful discussions about ways to help marginalized communities must include reliable information on past injustices and approaches for advancing racial justice.

While attitudes among U.S. social work students and educators regarding reparations may vary, examining whether students have been exposed to sufficient information to shape perceptions and reconcile personal values is important. Social work students are encouraged to understand and empathize with the unique challenges of marginalized groups. Additionally, social work students need exposure to the resources and requisite knowledge to become transformative practitioners. Clarifying issues and misconceptions around reparations is crucial to knowledge-building on racial equity and promoting social justice. According to Gates and Alfrey (2023), the shift to clinical practice in social work must be reconciled to balance micro and macro practices (Gates and Alfrey 2023).

2.6. Advocacy for Human Rights

In 2001, the United Nations Conference on Racism declared slavery, inclusive of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, as “crimes against humanity” (United Nations 2002). Further, in 2013, the United Nations (UN) declared the years 2014–2024 the International Decade for People of African Descent. In so doing, the UN called on countries not only to implement anti-racist protections and abolish discriminatory practices but to acknowledge and apologize for historical anti-Black racism (Este and Walmsley 2022; United Nations n.d.). The document explicitly mentions reparation. Further justification for including content on reparations aligns with the CSWE competencies, specifically competency two of the EPAS. Based on this competency, accredited social work programs must demonstrate in the explicit curriculum that students are exposed to information that includes “ongoing injustices throughout history that result in oppression and racism” (CSWE 2022a, p. 9). Analyzing historical cases of reparations, such as the Japanese internment during World War II, can be used as case studies to introduce students to the historical precedent of reparative justice and the pragmatism of reparations to redress human rights violations.

In addition to acknowledging the human rights violations against Japanese Americans, the federal government has used reparations to address treaty violations and other atrocities committed against Indigenous communities such as the Ottawas of Michigan, Chippewas of Wisconsin, Seminoles of Florida, Sioux of South Dakota, Klamaths of Oregon, and Alaskan Natives (Reichelmann and Hunt 2021). Despite the complexities and sensitivity of systemic racial bias, social work programs must prepare students to critically examine the historical context that has precipitated the current reparations movement.

2.7. Policy-Based Practice

The inclusion of reparations in the social work curriculum offers the potential to equip U.S. students with the tools needed to advocate for policies such as H.R.40 that can aid in reconciling the sequela of past and present injustices. In addition, social workers must strive to dispel the myths that reparations are only about financial compensation. Social work students should learn about different models of reparations, particularly those that prioritize a collective approach aimed at improving social indicators of well-being.

Social work education emphasizes policy advocacy as a tool for social change. Reparations can be taught as a mechanism to advance transformative change that can potentially reform some of society’s most oppressive systems and institutions. While most social work students and educators would probably agree that dismantling structural racism is a worthwhile goal, less agreed upon is the pathway to achieving this goal. This lack of agreement may reside in the lack of emphasis on plausible or potential approaches in the learning environment. For example, to date, the National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW) is the only national organization of social workers that has articulated a position on the issue of reparations for African Americans. Moreover, while reparative practices have been examined in social work texts—including Reparation and Victim-Focused Social Work (ed. Bryan Williams 2002)—coverage remains limited and uneven; our study underscores the need for broader, practice-integrated curricular treatment and empirical evaluation across programs. The researchers contend that incorporating reparations into social work education can help future practitioners become more informed, empathetic, and effective advocates for justice and equity. Reparation theory aligns with social work’s mission of social change and the well-being of individuals, families, and communities.

The primary aim of the present study is to identify U.S. social work students’ attitudes towards reparations and knowledge on the topic. Information from the study sheds light on knowledge gaps and potential challenges to integrating this topic into the learning environment. The research questions are as follows: (1) What is the level of factual knowledge about reparations (history, mechanisms, and H.R.40 literacy) among U.S. social work students? (2) What is the level of attitudinal support for reparations, as captured by the Reparations Awareness and Support (RAAS) scale?

Methodology

This study adopts a cross-sectional descriptive survey design. We recruited a convenience sample of U.S. social work students via program listservs and course announcements from October 2021 to October 2022, after receiving electronic informed consent. The instrument comprises demographic characteristics, a 19-item Reparations Knowledge Index (dichotomous items; summed score), and a 10-item Reparations Awareness and Support (RAAS) scale (5-point Likert; averaged score). This design fits our study’s aims to describe U.S. social work students’ knowledge of reparations, social work students’ support of reparations, and the characteristics of social work students who support reparations. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee at Spalding University (Approval #202139).

2.8. Sample and Procedures

We used convenience sampling to recruit U.S. student participants who were accessible to social work program faculty and staff. Participants were recruited by email messages sent to members of the Association of Baccalaureate Social Work Program Directors, Inc. (BPD) E-mail List (BPD-L). Participant inclusion criteria included being 18 years of age or older, enrollment as a student in a U.S. social work program (BSW, MSW, DSW, or Ph.D.), and the ability to speak or read English well enough to complete the survey. A total of 91 student participants initiated this survey.

The participants completed the survey through QuestionPro (n.d.), which is online survey software with the capability to design, send, and analyze surveys. Before starting the survey, the participants were directed to respond to eight items designed to solicit electronic informed consent.

2.9. Measurement

The self-administered online survey comprised 44 items in total. The first set of questions (15 items) solicit demographic factors such as age, race/ethnicity, gender, academic classification, setting, financial assistance, professional status (e.g., private clinical practice, entrepreneur, or case manager, licensure status, and years of professional work experience).

The second set of items comprised the Reparations Awareness and Support Scale (RAAS). The scale consists of 10 questions, each rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Higher scores reflect increased support or awareness. Content validity was established in the initial study. Participants also had the option to skip an item. The RAAS items pertained to attitudes/support of reparations for African Americans and asked participants about familiarity with the debate, support for reparations, whether reparations can remedy and repair racial inequity, entitlement to reparations, entitlement to monetary reparations, entitlement to legislative reparations, entitlement to reparations in the form of social programs, whether reparations should be a social justice priority for professional social work organizations, and personal advocacy for reparations (i.e., two items).

The Knowledge of Reparations Scale consists of 19 items designed to explore social work students’ awareness or exposure to African American descendants of chattel slavery. Seventeen items are yes or no, and two items are multiple choice. Some of the yes or no items include the following: Have you heard of the concept of reparations? Have you ever heard of H.R.40? Reparations have never been granted to any racial or ethnic group in the U.S. And have you ever taken a college course that included content on reparations? The two multiple-choice items queried whether participants had read about reparations from a list of options, such as a book or blog, and the level of knowledge on reparations across a 5-point scale from expert (participated in conferences and studied topics extensively through scholarly readings) to no knowledge (never heard of this topic). A skip option was provided for all items on the Knowledge of Reparations Scale.

Statistical Methods

Descriptive analyses and analyses of association were used to interpret the data using the SPSS statistical package version 29.0 (IBM Corp. 2022). Because the majority of the variables did not follow a normal distribution, non-parametric statistical methods were used for analysis. Kruskal–Wallis H-tests were performed to calculate the relationship between categorized demographic variables and scores on the RAAS. The RAAS was recoded as a summed score for the purpose of analysis. Higher scores meant more support for reparations.

3. Results

3.1. Participants’ Demographics and Characteristics

Percentages, frequencies, medians, and interquartile ranges were calculated independently for both student demographics and their RAAS survey responses. This study analyzed responses from 91 students in the United States, as detailed in

Table 1. Demographic characteristics (N = 91).

Social Demographic	N (%)
Age
Between 18 to 21	24 (26.4)
Between 22 to 35	44 (48.6)
Between 36 to 59	22 (24.2)
Over 60	0 (0)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	1 (1.1)
Race/ethnicity
American Indian and Alaska Native	-
Asian American	3 (3.3)
Black or African American	22 (24.2)
Hispanic or Latinx American	18 (19.8)
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander	0 (0.0)
White or European American	40 (44.0)
Biracial American	2 (2.2)
Multiracial American (three or more races)	4 (4.4)
Other	2 (2.2)
Gender
Ciswoman/woman assigned female at birth	73 (80.2)
Cisman/man assigned male at birth	13 (14.3)
Transwoman	-
Transman	-
Intersex	-
Other	1 (1.1)
Skip/prefer to not answer	4 (4.4)
Classification
Junior, pursuing a social work degree	29 (31.9)
Senior, pursuing a social work degree	33 (36.3)
Pursuing an MSW	15 (16.5)
Pursuing a DSW	6 (6.6)
Pursuing a PhD	6 (6.6)
Pursuing another degree	2 (2.2)
Licensure Status
Licensed	9 (10.0)
Unlicensed	26 (28.9)
Unlicensed but interested in licensure	45 (50.0)
Unlicensed and not interested in licensure	4 (4.4)
Skip/prefer to not answer	6 (6.7)
Years of Service
Less than 1 year	11 (12.2)
Less than 5 years	10 (11.1)
5 to 9 years	6 (6.7)
10 or more years	8 (8.9)
I have never worked professionally in social work role.	52 (57.8)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	3 (3.3)
Member of a Social Work Organization
Yes	37 (41.1)
No	46 (51.1)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	7 (7.8)
Institution
Public	40 (44.0)
Private	43 (47.3)
Faith-related	3 (3.3)
HBCU	3 (3.3)
Hispanic serving	1 (1.1)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	1 (1.1)
Income
No income	16 (17.8)
Less than 29,999	28 (31.1)
30,000 to 49,999	17 (18.9)
50,000 to 69,999	12 (13.3)
70,000 to 99,999	2 (2.2)
100,000 or more	4 (4.4)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	11 (12.2)
Employment
Full-time employment	27 (30.0)
Part-time employment	32 (35.6)
Unemployed and not looking for work	8 (8.9)
Unemployed and looking for work	7 (7.8)
Retired	3 (3.3)
On disability or sick leave	1 (1.1)
Laid off	1 (1.1)
Other	6 (6.7)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	5 (5.6)
Social media for current events
Very often	32 (35.6)
Often	28 (31.1)
Occasionally	14 (15.6)
Rarely	8 (8.9)
Very rarely	3 (3.3)
Never	4 (4.4)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	1 (1.1)
Region
Northeast	3 (3.3)
Midwest	4 (4.4)
South	50 (55.6)
West	27 (30.0)
None—lives outside U.S.	3 (3.3)
Rate Level of Knowledge on Reparations
Limited	2 (2.6)
Intermediate	28 (36.40)
Advanced	33 (42.9)
Expert	13 (16.9)
Skip/Do not prefer to respond	1 (1.3)

. The majority of students self-identified as White or European American (44.0%), age group 22 to 35 years (48.6%), ciswoman/woman assigned female at birth (80.2%), live in the South U.S. region (55.6%), senior, pursuing a social work degree (36.3%), attended a private academic institution (47.3%), working part-time (35.6%), earning income less than USD 29,999 (31.1%), have never worked professionally in a social work role (57.8%), and unlicensed but interested in licensure (50.0%). More than half of the sample population (51.1%) reported that they were not members of a social work organization, and an estimated 35.6% of the total population often use social media for current events.

3.2. Assessment of Students’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices

Table 2. Summary statistics for the Knowledge of Reparations Scale (N = 77).

Reparations Knowledge Scale	Yes (N (%))	No (N (%))	Don’t Know (N%)
Have you heard of the concept reparations?	57 (74.0)	13 (16.9)	7 (9.1)
Reparations means to atone from wrong doings and to make amends.	68 (88.2)	1 (1.3)	8 (10.4)
I am familiar with the debates for or against reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery.	50 (64.9)	17 (22.1)	10 (13.0)
Have you ever heard of H.R.40?	19 (24.7)	53 (68.8)	5 (6.5)
H.R.40 is a bill passed in 1989 to study the issue of reparations for African American descendants.	26 (33.8)	5 (6.5)	44 (57.1)
H.R.40 is a congressional bill to examine the feasibility of reparations for African Americans.	30 (39.0)	1 (1.3)	45 (58.4)
Reparations seek a formal apology for wrongs committed against African American descendants of slavery, Jim Crowism, and ongoing oppression.	56 (72.7)	0 (0.0)	21 (27.3)
If approved, H.R.40 would award African American families a one-time payment of USD 12,000.	9 (11.7)	7 (9.1)	61 (79.2)
Would you like to learn more about H.R.40?	73 (94.8)	2 (2.6)	1 (1.3)
Reparations have never been granted to any racial or ethnic group in the U.S.	12 (15.6)	32 (41.6)	33 (42.9)
Reparations seek only monetary compensation.	9 (11.7)	42 (54.5)	26 (33.8)
The United States paid reparations to Japanese Americans.	27 (35.1)	6 (7.8)	44 (57.1)
There are no private companies that support reparations.	4 (5.2)	20 (26.0)	53 (68.8)
There is no governmental support for reparations.	6 (7.8)	26 (33.8)	45 (58.4)
Have you ever taken a college course that included content on reparations?	18 (23.4)	53 (68.8)	5 (6.5)
The National Association of Social Workers has formally endorsed support for reparations.	13 (16.9)	1 (1.3)	63 (81.8)

presents a summary of the assessment results regarding U.S. students’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices as measured by the Knowledge of Reparations Scale. Of those who responded to the RAAS (N = 77), the results showed that the majority of students had heard of the concept of reparations (74.0%) and were familiar with the debates for or against reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery (64.9%). These participants answered “Don’t know” to half (8 of 16) of the assessment questions, indicating gaps in the students’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices. The majority of students indicated that they had not previously completed a college course addressing reparations (68.8%), were unfamiliar with H.R.40 (68.8%), and expressed interest in acquiring further information about H.R.40 (94.8%).

4. Assessment of Students’ Reparations Awareness and Support Subscale

The summary distribution of students’ responses to the Reparations Awareness and Support Subscale questions shows that most students have a high awareness of and support for reparations, with most indicating that they strongly agree with the content assessed on 6 of 10 questions (

Table 3. Summary statistics for reparations awareness and support subscale.

Awareness and Support Scale	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neither Agree or Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Prefer to Not Respond
I am familiar with the debates for or against reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery (N = 77)	9 (11.7)	4 (5.2)	15 (19.5)	37 (48.1)	9 (11.7)	3 (3.9)
I support reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)	2 (2.6)	1 (1.3)	9 (11.8)	18 (23.7)	40 (52.6)	6 (7.9)
Reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery can begin to remedy and repair racial inequity (N = 76)	1 (1.3)	8 (10.5)	14 (18.4)	28 (36.8)	22 (28.9)	3 (3.9)
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations (N = 76)	1 (1.3)	2 (2.6)	8 (10.5)	22 (28.9)	37 (48.7)	6 (7.9)
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to monetary reparations (N = 76)	1 (1.3)	2 (2.6)	15 (19.7)	34 (44.7)	6 (7.9)	6 (7.9)
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to legislative reparations (N = 76)	1 (1.3)	1 (1.3)	7 (9.2)	18 (23.7)	44 (57.9)	5 (6.6)
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations in the form of social programs (N = 76)	0 (0.0)	1 (1.3)	5 (6.63)	22 (28.9)	44 (57.9)	4 (5.3)
Social work organizations should make reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery a social justice priority (N = 75)	0 (0.0)	2 (2.7)	13 (17.3)	20 (26.7)	35 (46.7)	5 (6.7)
I personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)	2 (2.68)	7 (9.2)	24 (31.6)	10 (13.2)	23 (30.3)	10 (13.2)
I do not currently but would personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)	1 (1.3)	3 (3.9)	9 (11.8)	25 (32.9)	30 (39.5)	8 (10.5)

). The majority of U.S. students indicated that they strongly agreed with supporting reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery (52.6%) and that African descendants of American chattel slavery are entitled to reparations (48.7%), legislative reparations (57.9%), reparations in the form of social programs (57.9%), and for social work organizations to make reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery a social justice priority (46.7%); about 39.5% reported that they do not currently but would personally advocate for reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery (Table 3).

We used the Kruskal–Wallis H test because the item-level outcomes were ordinal and non-normal, with unequal variances and uneven group sizes, violating one-way ANOVA assumptions. Accordingly, we tested whether Students’ Reparations Awareness and Support items differed across participant characteristics, reporting medians [IQR] by group and H(df), p, and ε² for omnibus effects. The results indicated statistically significant median differences among the demographic groups for nine of the ten questions on the survey, with a Bonferroni correction post hoc analysis used to identify the specific groups between which these median differences existed (

Table 4. Test of median differences in reparations awareness and support.

Knowledge Scale	Median Test		Kruskal–Wallis H
	Demographics	p	Demographics	p	DF	χ2
I am familiar with the debates for or against reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery (N = 77)	Age Institution type College course Expertise	0.018 0.027 0.029 0.001	Race/ethnicity Years of service College course Expertise	0.010 0.009 0.004 0.000	6 5 3 4	16.914 15.310 13.428 29.393
I support reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)	Age Student status Institution type Employment College course Expertise	0.007 0.028 0.030 0.039 0.000 0.004	College course	0.047	3	7.939
Reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery can begin to remedy and repair racial inequity (N = 76)	Years of service U.S. region College course Expertise	0.025 0.031 0.035 0.017	College course Expertise	0.037 0.028	3 4	8.467 10.860
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations (N = 76)	Age Institution type U.S. region College course Expertise	0.003 0.017 0.037 0.000 0.005	College course	0.025	3	9.342
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to monetary reparations (N = 76)	Age Institution type U.S. region College course Expertise	0.003 0.017 0.037 0.000 0.005	College course	0.049	3	7.878
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to legislative reparations (N = 76)	Age Institution type Income level College course Expertise	0.002 0.008 0.045 0.001 0.002	Social media for news	0.024	5	12.913
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations in the form of social programs (N = 76)	Age Institution type Income level Learn more about H.R.40 College course Expertise	0.000 0.002 0.010 0.040 0.000 0.001	Social media for news	0.003	5	18.256
Social work organizations should make reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery a social justice priority (N = 75)	Age Institution type Income level Learn more about H.R.40 College course Expertise	0.003 0.009 0.030 0.003 0.000 0.002	Social media for news	0.024	5	12.893
I personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)
I do not currently but would personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery (N = 76)			Licensure status Region	0.049 0.021	4 5	9.518 13.275

and

Table 5. Reparations awareness and support subscale post hoc pairwise comparison.

Knowledge Scale	Median	IQR	Percentile			Demographics (Median[IQR])	Bonferroni Pairwise
			25	50	75		p	Adj. p	χ2
I am familiar with the debates for or against reparations for African descendants of American chattel slavery	4.00	1	3	4	4	Race
						Hispanic or Latino American (3.5[3])–Black or African American (4.0[1])	0.012		19.425
						White or European American (4.0[2])–Black or African American (4[1])	0.004		17.273
						Years of Service
						Prefer to not answer (2[–])–<5 years (4[1])	0.037		34.500
						Prefer to not answer (2[–])–5–9 years (4[1])	0.014		43.200
						Prefer to not answer (2[–])–≥10 years (4[1])	0.017		40.143
						Never worked (4[2])–≥10 years (4[1])	0.018		20.120
						Never worked (4[2])–5–9 years (4[1])	0.019		23.177
						College course
						No (4[2])–yes (4[1])	0.001	0.008	18.316
						No (4[2])–Don’t know (3[2])	0.047		−42.038
						Expertise
						Expert (1[2])–Advanced (4[1])	0.004	0.044	12.199
						Expert (1[2])–intermediate (4[0])	0.000	0.000	30.485
						Expert (1[2])–limited (5[0])	0.001	0.008	−42.985
						Advanced (4[1])–intermediate (4[0])	0.016
						Advanced (4[1])–limited (5[0])	0.027
I support reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery	5.00	2	4	5	5	College course
						No (5[1])–Don’t know (5[2])	0.047		−18.804
Reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery can begin to remedy and repair racial inequity	4.00	2	3	4	5	College course
						No (4[1])–yes (5[1])	0.030		12.584
						Expertise
						Advanced (4[1])–intermediate (4[1])	0.025
						Advanced (4[1])–limited (5[0])	0.048
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations	5.00	1	4	5	5	College course
						No (4[1])–yes (5[1])	0.046		11.178
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to monetary reparations	5.00	1	4	5	5
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to legislative reparations	5.00	1	4	5	5	Social media for news
						Never (3[–])–occasionally (5[1])	0.016		30.542
						Never (3[–])–very rarely (5[–])	0.040		33.000
						Never (3[–])–very often (5[0])	0.003		34.914
						Often (5[1])–very often (5[0])	0.045		11.152
African American descendants of chattel slavery are entitled to reparations in the form of social programs	5.00	1	4	5	5	Social media for news
						Never (3[–])–often (5[1])	0.017		28.714
						Never (3[–])–occasionally (5[1])	0.006		34.750
						Never (3[–])–very often (5[0])	0.002	0.035	37.097
						Never (3[–])–very rarely (5[–])	0.012		40.000
						Rarely (4[2])–occasionally (5[1])	0.015		23.750
						Rarely (4[2])–very often (5[0])	0.003		26.097
						Rarely (4[2])–very rarely (5[–])	0.036		−29.000
Social work organizations should make reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery a social justice priority	5.00	1	4	5	5	Social media for news
						Never (3[0])–occasionally (5[1])	0.011		33.458
						Never (3[0])–very often (5[1])	0.006		34.048
						Never (3[0])–very rarely (5[–])	0.013		41.500
I personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery	4.00	2	3	4	5
I do not currently but would personally advocate for reparations for African American descendants of chattel slavery	5.00	1	4	5	5	Licensure
						Prefer to not answer (3[2])–unlicensed (5[1])	0.030		22.821
						Prefer to not answer (3[2])–unlicensed and uninterested (5.5[2])	0.010		36.025
						Licensed (4[2])–unlicensed and uninterested (5.5[2])	0.029		−28.000
						Region
						Midwest (3[–])–West (5[1])	0.027		−28.313
						Midwest (3[–])–Prefer to not answer (6[0])	0.000	0.007	−59.833
						South (4[1])–Prefer to not answer (6[0])	0.004		−36.237
						Northeast (5[–]–Prefer to not answer (6[0])	0.048		−33.833
						West (5[1])–Prefer to not answer (6[0])	0.014		−31.520

). The results show the following:

4.1. I Am Familiar with the Debates for or Against Reparations for African Descendants of American Chattel Slavery

The median tests were statistically significant for age, institution type, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). The differences in familiarity with the debates were most pronounced based on self-rated expertise (χ²(4) = 29.393, p < 0.001) and race/ethnicity (χ²(6) = 16.914, p = 0.010). Post hoc analysis confirmed that Black and African American participants reported significantly greater familiarity compared to White or European American participants (p = 0.004). Additionally, those who rated themselves as “Expert” demonstrated significantly higher awareness than those who rated themselves as “Limited” (p = 0.008, adjusted). For support of specific forms of reparations (Items 6, 7, and 8), the most consistent and significant differentiator was the consumption of social media for news, particularly regarding support for reparations in the form of social programs (χ²(5) = 18.256, p = 0.003). Additionally, whether individuals were willing to personally support reparations (Item 10) varied significantly by U.S. region (χ²(5) = 13.275, p = 0.021), showing that engagement levels differed across regions. These findings suggest that demographic variables play a crucial and differential role in shaping attitudes and knowledge about reparations.

A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between Hispanic or Latinx American and Black or African Americans (p = 0.012), White or European Americans, and Black or African Americans (p = 0.004). Statistically significant differences in years of service were also observed between those who do not prefer to respond and those with less than 5 years professional work experience (0.037), those who do not prefer to respond and those with 5–9 years professional work experience (0.014), those who do not prefer to respond and those with ≥10 years professional work experience (0.017), those who had never worked and those with ≥10 years professional work experience (p = 0.018), and those who had never worked and those who had worked 5–9 years (p = 0.019); differences between those who had taken a college course and those who had not (p = 0.001, adjusted p = 0.008); and differences according to rating of reparations knowledge between those who considered themselves expert versus advanced (p = 0.004, adjusted p = 0.044), expert versus intermediate (p < 0.001, adjusted p < 0.001), expert versus limited (p = 0.001, adjusted p = 0.008), advanced versus intermediate (p = 0.016), and advanced versus limited (p = 0.027). Table 4 and Table 5 display these findings.

4.2. I Support Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery

The median test was statistically significant for age, student program status, institution type, employment type, ever taken a college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for having ever taken a college course (χ²(3) 7.939, p = 0.047). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between students who had never taken a college course and those who did not know if they took a college course on reparations (p = 0.047). These results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5.

4.3. Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery Can Begin to Remedy and Repair Racial Inequity

The median test was statistically significant for years of service, U.S. region, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for having ever taken a college course (χ²(3) 8.467, p = 0.037) and expertise (χ²(4) 10.860, p = 0.028). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between those who had never taken a college course and those who had not taken a college course in reparations (p = 0.030) and differences according to the rating of reparations knowledge between those who considered themselves advanced versus intermediate (p = 0.025) and advanced versus limited (p = 0.048). Table 4 and Table 5 display these results.

4.4. African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery Are Entitled to Reparations

The median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, U.S. region, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for having ever taken a college course (χ²(3) 9.342, p = 0.025). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between those who had never taken a college course and those who had taken a college course (p = 0.046). Table 4 and Table 5 display these results.

4.5. African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery Are Entitled to Monetary Reparations

The median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, U.S. region, and college course (p < 0.05). The KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for a college course ever taken (χ²(3) 7.878, p = 0.049). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested no statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between these groups. Table 4 and Table 5 show these results.

4.6. African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery Are Entitled to Legislative Reparations

The median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, U.S. region, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for social media for news (χ²(5) 18.256, p = 0.003). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between those who responded “never” and “occasionally” (p = 0.016), “never” and “very rarely” (p = 0.040), “never” and “very often” (p = 0.003), and “often” and “very often” (p = 0.045). Table 4 and Table 5 display these results.

4.7. African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery Are Entitled to Reparations in the Form of Social Programs

The median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, income level, learning more about H.R.40, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for social media for news (χ²(5) 12.893, p = 0.024). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant racial differences in the knowledge scale between those who responded “never” and “often” (p = 0.017), “never” and “occasionally” (p = 0.006), “never” and “very often” (p = 0.002, adjusted p = 0.035), “never” and “very rarely” (p = 0.012), “rarely” and “occasionally” (p = 0.015), “rarely–very often” (p = 0.003), and “rarely–very rarely” (p = 0.036). These results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5.

4.8. Social Work Organizations Should Make Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery a Social Justice Priority

The median test was statistically significant for age, institution type, income level, learning more about H.R.40, college course, and expertise (p < 0.05). However, the KWH test only showed statistically significant differences for social media for news (χ²(5) 12.893, p = 0.024). A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant differences in the knowledge scale between those who responded “never” and “occasionally” (p = 0.011), “never” and “very often” (p = 0.006), and “never” and “very rarely” (p = 0.013). Table 4 and Table 5 display these results.

4.9. I Personally Advocate for Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery

The median and KWH tests showed no statistically significant differences among all groups.

4.10. I Do Not Currently, but Would Personally Advocate for Reparations for African American Descendants of Chattel Slavery

The KWH test showed statistically significant differences for only licensure, χ²(4) 9.518, p = 0.049, and U.S. region, χ²(5) 13.275, p = 0.021. A Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons suggested statistically significant differences in the knowledge scale between those who do not prefer to respond and the unlicensed group (p = 0.030), those who do not prefer to respond and the unlicensed and not interested group (p = 0.010), and the licensed group and the unlicensed and not interested group (p = 0.029). Statistically significant region differences were also observed between the Midwest and West groups (p = 0.027), the Midwest and those who do not prefer to respond (p < 0.001, adjusted p = 0.007), the South and those who do not prefer to respond (p = 0.004), the Northeast and those who do not prefer to respond (p = 0.048), and the West and those who do not prefer to respond (p = 0.014). Table 4 and Table 5 display these results.

5. Discussion

This study utilized a convenience, cross-sectional, and self-reported sample. As a result, the findings may not be representative of the broader population of social work students in the U.S. Therefore, generalizability is limited. In addition, the use of small subgroup sizes necessitated the collapsing of certain categories for analysis. Consequently, all inferences drawn from these results should be interpreted with caution, and causal claims should not be made based solely on this data.

The first research question asked about the level of factual knowledge about reparations (history, mechanisms, and H.R.40 literacy) among U.S. social work students. The current study yielded information suggesting that students’ factual literacy about reparations is uneven. They tend to recognize the broad purpose of reparations but show gaps in core mechanics—especially the status and scope of H.R.40, eligibility/design questions, and the range of non-monetary, community-level models (e.g., investments in housing, education, health). In short, baseline knowledge is sufficient to follow public debates, but not yet strong enough to reason through policy design or implementation trade-offs. This pattern is exactly what we would expect in programs where reparations content is sporadic and instructor-dependent rather than structured and assessed. Building on our earlier discussion on the need for historically grounded and critically engaged pedagogy, it is also important to acknowledge that reparations remain a contested issue across the aforementioned dimensions. In recognizing the importance of reparations, it is equally essential that students critically examine the principal objections commonly raised in the literature (Brooks 2004)—including legal challenges (e.g., standing and statute of limitations), practical concerns (e.g., determining eligibility and cost), distributive questions (e.g., fairness across groups), and political resistance (e.g., public and legislative opposition). By engaging with these critiques alongside historical data, social work students can develop nuanced, evidence-based perspectives that reflect the complexity of this issue.

The second research question asked about the level of attitudinal support for reparations, as captured by the Reparations Awareness and Support (RAAS) scale. Attitudinal support is generally favorable, but it is “brittle” around details. Students are comfortable endorsing reparations in principle and as a response to historical and ongoing harms; support softens when items reference financing, eligibility administration, or institutional delivery systems. That profile suggests values alignment without a commensurate grasp of how reparations can be operationalized beyond direct cash payments. Students largely endorse reparations as a justice-oriented goal, yet gaps in factual knowledge—particularly about H.R.40 and community-level models—limit their ability to translate endorsements into credible policy and practice advocacy. For social work education, the fix is not more abstract debate but targeted, practice-integrated instruction.

Students are predisposed to support reparations; education should now close the literacy gap so future social workers can advocate with specificity—knowing what H.R.40 does, which models fit which problems, and how to explain them to clients, agencies, and policymakers.

Limitations

The study relied on a convenience sample of social work students, which introduces several limitations. Because participants were drawn from a readily accessible group rather than selected through a probability-based method, the sample may not reflect the broader population of social work students. As such, the generalizability of the findings is limited. Additionally, students who chose to participate may differ in important ways, such as motivation, academic engagement, or interest in the topic, from the students who did not participate, introducing sampling and self-reflection bias. These factors should be considered when interpreting the findings and considering their applicability to other educational programs or professional contexts.

We used the Kruskal–Wallis H test because the outcomes were ordinal and non-normal. We acknowledge that Kruskal–Wallis compares rank distributions (not means) and may be less intuitive than Welch’s ANOVA; Welch ANOVA tests means and can be easier to interpret for practitioners and directly supports mean-difference claims (see Brown and Forsythe 1974). We note this as a future direction, along with ordinal regression, while keeping the current nonparametric approach aligned with our measurement and assumption checks. We note this choice as a limitation and identify confirmatory inferential testing as a priority for future research.

6. Conclusions

The principles of reparations are reflected in the value base of social work and the mandate to seek social justice, as well as in the ideology of self-determination and anti-racist practice. However, this understanding of reparations has not been brought into the social work curriculum. The results of the study clearly show opportunities for the addition and expansion of content on reparations in social work education. Although many U.S. students expressed that they had heard about the debates on reparation and some degree of information on the topic, an overwhelming majority (94.8%) of students reported that they had never taken a course with content on reparations. Similarly, 68.8% of U.S. students reported having never heard of H.R.40, and 81.8% did not know that the National Association of Black Social Workers endorses reparations. While most students rated their knowledge of reparations as advanced (42.9%) or intermediate (36.4%), there is a noticeable knowledge gap that brings into question the accuracy of what students believe they know about reparations for not only African American descendants but other groups who have been afforded reparations.

For example, a majority of students did not know that the U.S. has granted reparations to certain racial and ethnic groups (42.9%), specifically Japanese Americans (57.1%). On items related to current support for reparations, a large proportion of students knew that there is support for African American reparations from the private sector (68.8%) as well as governmental support (58.4%). This information sheds light on the knowledge deficit regarding reparations from both historical and contemporary contexts. The tenets of reparations intersect with multiple areas of the required content for accredited social work programs under the 2022 EPAS. For accreditation, social work programs must include ADEI in all courses and the learning environment of baccalaureate and master’s programs (CSWE 2022b). Students are expected to learn about positionality, power, privilege, and differences, as well as develop a commitment to dismantling systems of oppression, such as racism. Therefore, programs are required to include explicit and implicit content on the pervasive impact of White supremacy and prepare students to have the knowledge and skills necessary to engage in anti-racist practice. Thus, the incorporation of reparations into course content fits well with advancing reparations to address the historical costs of White supremacy and systemic oppression. Delivery of this information can be embedded into existing courses such policy, macro practice, and cultural competence. Social work educators can further fill the knowledge gap through actionable steps such as examining national and international case studies, connecting students to local and national initiatives and major organizations involved in the reparative justice movement. Aspiring social workers should leave their training programs with sufficient knowledge of reparations as a means to acknowledge wrongdoing and an effort to take responsibility for the trauma and harm caused by the legacy of enslavement and persistent structural discrimination. Reparatory justice prioritizes repair and healing.

Overall, the findings revealed statistically significant median differences across demographic groups for 9 out of 10 survey questions related to awareness and support for reparations (Table 4). The differences in familiarity with the debates were most pronounced, based on self-rated expertise and race/ethnicity. Black or African American participants reported significantly greater familiarity than European American participants. Additionally, participants who rated themselves as “Expert” demonstrated significantly higher awareness than those who rated themselves as “Limited” (p = 0.008, adjusted). Interestingly, the KW-H results demonstrated that the demographic variables had a significant differential impact on support, particularly how participants viewed monetary support. The post hoc analysis revealed that participants with more years of service had significantly lower support medians compared to those with fewer years. For support of specific forms of reparations (Items 6, 7, and 8), the most consistent and significant differentiator was the consumption of social media for news, particularly regarding support for reparations in the form of social programs. Furthermore, the willingness to personally advocate reparations (Item 10) was significantly influenced by U.S. region, indicating distinct regional patterns in engagement. These findings suggest that demographic variables play a crucial and differential role in shaping attitudes and knowledge about reparations.

Although reparations are not specifically mentioned in previous or current drafts of the EPAS, reparations are germane to social work competencies, particularly competency two (advance social justice), competency three (engage in anti-racist practice), and competency five (engage in policy practice). Each of these competencies offers a pathway to discourse on reparations. The current study demonstrates the knowledge deficit among U.S. social work students that social work educators are positioned to fill in order to prepare the next generation of professional social workers as change agents and justice advocates. CSWE-accredited programs should include curricula content on human rights violations and reparatory justice practices and policies. Additionally, future research should focus on further examination of racial/ethnic and regional differences in social work students’ perceptions and knowledge of reparations. This information can shed light on critical areas for targeted pedagogical interventions and continuing education for future and even veteran social workers. As Scheyett (2022) suggests, social workers have the skills and value base to disrupt oppressive and unjust systems. A principal recommendation of the CSWE Task Force to Advance Anti-Racism in Social Work Education involves the integration of anti-racial pedagogies into social work curricula (CSWE 2021). Accredited programs had, until July 2025, to implement the 2022 EPAS (CSWE 2022b).