If anyone is actually going to read my blog entry this week then please bear with me because it is going to sound incredibly stupid in my opinion. I didn’t enjoy reading this chapter in the Dollarhide & Saginak (2012) text for the course. The chapter made it seem as if we were going to get a concentrated, yet basic, understanding of what exactly is entailed by a “comprehensive counseling program.” I don’t know about you but I definitely left class on Tuesday feeling stupid in that I felt it was something I that I should know what it is but Dr. Baker left us all feeling like none of us knew what it was. I felt even more stupid because just the night before I was reading empirical research for my Pre-Practicum Competency Project. In one of the articles I was using from one of the journals we have to use it talked about implementing a comprehensive social-emotional learning program that is preventative in nature. So I thought I fully understood the contents of the article. But when Dr. Baker was talking about the concept of a comprehensive counseling program I thought I had a basic understanding but I definitely did not. So when I read Chapter 1 I thought I’d get a little bit better understanding beyond what I had Tuesday but I honestly don’t think that I did. It seems that from the perspective of the text we won’t be getting that understanding until at least Chapter 5. Obviously Rome wasn’t built in a day but I’m very impatient and want to begin to get a decent understanding of what is entailed in a comprehensive program and if I’m at least somewhat correct in my assumptions. I am thinking that based on the detailed look back on the history of philosophies of education that if we’re going to be counselors then we have to use an approach that includes teachers as well although this much is obvious without even reading that. But as a counselor, factoring in NCLB, you’re going to be fighting against the modern-day emphasis on traditional education and are going to try to be progressive. I guess this was the sentiment and foundation that Chapter 1 was trying to establish.

As for what else was discussed within the chapter even though the initial case study was clearly hypberole I found it to be incredibly funny because it’s an example that Dr. Gardner has given us several times in Theory I and Theory II. Despite this I had that exact kind of counselor in high school so that has been one of my motivating factors in trying not to do that if placed in a secondary setting. I know from personal conversations that Amanda feels that way too.  I also agree that intuition coupled with being taught results in the best possible counselors. I look at the difference between myself last year entering the program and now because I feel more confident from what I’ve learned. I also found the section describing competencies to be very relatable if not for the fact that many of those concepts were talked about as something people wanted to cover when announcing their 3 aspects.  

Either way, I look forward to seeing how close or far away my assumptions from my first paragraph were and what light the text is actually going to shed on it because so far I’m not a fan of the text. But that might just be me being lazy.