Blog 5

The standards and the ASCA model can have an empowering effect. In Schwallie-Giddis, ter Maat & Pak’s (2003) article I see a list of the great qualities of the counseling profession laid out. It is a statement of our place in society and most importantly our schools. The ASCA model and supporting literature is our advocate. It is increasingly difficult to implement a strict guideline of what our duties are in schools today. Budgetary constraints leave schools looking for new ways to utilize existing staff. Teachers are now being asked to counsel in TAP programs, many counselors fulfill many administrative and clerical tasks. Until there is more systemic change, the role confusion will continue. Defining our roles and backing up our programs through data is a way for us to protect and serve our profession.

I can empathize with the difficulty in promoting a school’s acceptance of a RAMP initiative. The task is quite large and includes promoting systemic change from top to bottom in some cases. This may be a difficult path for some counselors. Mason and McMahon’s (2009) article acknowledges the leadership qualities of counselors.  How are we to become adept leaders and effective change agents? We must promote proficiency in leadership skills.

I am interested in where my strengths lie within the 5 primary practices of leaders (Mason & McMahon, 2009). I believe at times I am able to use each of these skills, however, truthfully not to my satisfaction. I think that leadership is an important tool for counselors, and worthy of further imbedded program study. There are many books available on the topic. I have read some personally, but it would be interesting to experience a guided course in leadership initiatives. As well, there are surely some professional development opportunities in this field.

Leadership is also listed as a 21^st century skill to be suggested in future school curricula. Leadership has been found to be influential in many student populations ranging from special needs, at risk marginalized and gifted students. This educational opportunity addresses the encouragement of Adler’s socially useful style of life. My understanding is that encouraging a healthy way of relating to the world decreases the dysfunctional coping mechanisms. Self study in leadership will be beneficial personally, professionally and in the workplace.

In the Dollarhide & Saginak (2012) text, the differing CSCP models all have interesting components. I can see elements of each of them represented in the counseling programs with whom I have visited. The basic Developmental Guidance and Counseling model serves as the basis for most of the programs, i.e. a grandfather model. The adaptations appear to have grown and transformed from here. The most thought provoking is the DAP model, as it mirrors the ASCA model most closely, but with flexibility. In this model, the themes of leadership, advocacy, systemic change and collaboration are demonstrated as integral attributes. I appreciate the idea of a well diversified advisory council, but question how such a meeting would come about. It would be interesting to use the summit format initiated by Schwallie-Giddis, ter Maat & Pak (2003) to have small (4-6 people) discussion tables with relevant needs based prompts to discuss and hear the voices of each group after deliberation.  

Dollarhide, C.T. & Saginak, K.A. (2012) Comprehensive school counseling programs. (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc.

Mason, E. C., & McMahon, H. G. (2009). Leadership Practices Of School Counselors. Professional School Counseling, 13(2), 107-115.

Schwallie-Giddis, P., ter Maat, M., & Pak, M. (2003). Initiating leadership by introducing and implementing the ASCA National Model. Professional School Counseling, 6(3), 170-173.

Post #5 - Chapter 6

Before this week, I was not aware of how many comprehensive school counseling program models existed, outside from the ASCA National Model, of course.  It was interesting to compare the models presented by Dollarhide and Saginak (2012) with the National Model to see similarities and differences.   Of particular interest to me was the discussion on peer facilitation as a part of the Developmental Guidance and Counseling Method.  One word that I am very passionate about embodying in practice is “empower.”  I believe that as we empower students to be leaders, they will benefit personally and also be an asset to school counselors in that they are able to handle issues that may arise with peers.  According to Dollarhide and Saginak, peer facilitator programs can train students to do things such as “peer tutoring, peer mentoring, peers working alongside in-school suspension programs, tutoring students who have missed extended amounts of school…and peer mediation” (2012, p. 91).  Often, they note, students are more willing to talk to a peer than a parent, teacher, or other administrator.  As counselors seek to “multiply themselves” in order to reach more students, taking the time to invest in a small group of peer facilitators might be the greatest asset of their program.  Similarly, the emphasis on including teachers as a vital part of the guidance program can provide a stronger sense of unity in the school as counselors, administrators, and teachers work together to meet the academic, career development, and personal/social development needs of students.  One potential problem to implementing the Developmental Model would be a staff that is not united in this vision.  If that would happen, students would not really be receiving equal access to resources and services.

                The Social Justice Approach to Comprehensive School Counseling was also interesting to me.  While I agree that it is very important for all students to have equitable access to services, I am not sure that focusing on those students with the most needs is the best way to reach this goal.  If we focus only on those students who are “at risk” we risk allowing the majority of the students to “fall through the cracks.”  To me, social justice means that EVERYONE gets what s/he needs.  That may mean that we have to work more or focus slightly more on the students with more needs, but it certainly DOES NOT mean neglecting the rest. 

                Overall, I felt that most of the CSCP models covered the same basic material or elements, but simply called the elements different things or placed them in a different order of preference.  I feel that it is hard to adequately evaluate these models without seeing how they function first-hand, as we did with the ASCA National Model. 

References

Dollarhide, C.T., & Saginak, K. A. (2012). Comprehensive school counseling programs: K-12 delivery           systems in action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Post 5

At the beginning of Chapter 6, Dollarhide and Saginak (2012) present a case study about a school district in its beginning stages of creating a school counseling program. To be honest, it seems quite overwhelming! I can tell that this district needed to start with a foundation. The delivery model would be the foundation for their district wide guidance program. That is simple to say, but actually deciding on which program to role with is the difficult part. I like how Dollarhide and Saginak compared the delivery model to a vehicle for driving the program. There are different vehicles one can choose depending on what they are using it for. Large families would most likely choose a van/SUV for transporting multiple passengers. A college student would most likely choose a sedan for lower gas mileage. A person can use any transportation vehicle to get from point A to point B, but what transportation vehicle would be the best for them? I feel the delivery model chosen must be the best suited model for that particular school district/school. Counselors have different options when choosing a delivery model. Prescriptive models have clear assumptions for school counselors and their programs, while nonprescriptive models focus on the needs of the school and school body (Dollarhide and Saginak, 2012). After reading their descriptions, I couldn’t help but think about Second Step and our discussion from class a few weeks ago. My comparison may not be correct, but I’ll give it a shot. A prescriptive model would be like Second Step, where a teacher/counselor would follow the program step by step (script). A nonprescriptive model would give a teacher/counselor some freedom, but he/she would focus on a particular topic (empathy). Both models would be focusing on empathy, but the delivery would be different. Reading over the different types of delivery models, I felt more drawn to the nonprescriptive models. I feel that these models are more student focused. By this I mean that your delivery is based off of what the student body needs. As a teacher, we are data driven. The data comes from our students. If some of my students are poor in understanding the main idea of a selection, while others are poor at making inferences, and even others are poor at plot (conflict/resolution) – it is my goal to meet the needs of my students. I would teach all of my students about main idea (again) if they have already got it! I would simply be wasting their time. I feel that nonprescriptive models allow for differentiation based on student needs. At the same time, I feel that prescriptive models are needed to define the counselor’s role in a school (ASCA). Schwallie-Giddis, Maat, and Pak (2003) article recognizes, the ASCA National Model defines the role of the school counselor well. The model provides a counselor with a framework for the profession. If I am ever approached by the school board, administration, or parents asking what I do…I will refer to this model. In the end, I feel that a counselor can use parts of prescriptive and nonprescriptive models to better assist his/her school. Dollarhide, C.T., & Saginak, K.A. (2012). Comprehensive school counseling programs (2nd Ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc. Schwallie-Giddis, P., Ter Maat, M., & Pak, M. (2003). Initiating leadership by introducing and implementing the ASCA National Model. Professional School Counseling, 6(3), 170-173

Week 5 blog

            I am coming to realize more and more how central school counselors are to meeting the needs of students, and the extent to which it will be imperative for us to be leaders in our school districts.   I connected with several strategies that the textbook discussed related to counselors as leaders.

            First, I love the idea of a TAP program.  It seems like a great way for counselors to meet student needs “behind the scenes.”   I have heard of this type of program in the past, and have often wondered how such a program could benefit my school.  I feel that having this type of a mentor would be exceptionally beneficial to all students.  We currently have character ed once per month, which really does nothing to improve the climate of the school.  I always thought that, in order for such an intervention to work, it would need to occur much more frequently so that the teachers can actually get to know the students.  In order for such a program to work, counselors would need to get teachers on board, and to train them in how to run TAP meetings with students.  This type of group intervention would be very different than most teachers would be used to, so they would need lots of support to make it successful.

            The “Reflection Moment” on page 94 (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012) encourages readers to reflect on whether or not teachers and school counselors should co-deliver classroom guidance.  I believe that there are benefits to co-delivering curriculum.  First, the counselor is the expert in how to meet personal/social needs of students, and how to conduct discussions pertaining to this domain.  Teachers may need this type of support to deliver the information.  Secondly, co-teaching is a great way for counselors to get to know the students in the school, and to basically “advertise” themselves as a service to students.  It seems to be a common trend that students do not know whom their counselors are, let alone what they can do for them.  On the other hand, perhaps this type of co-teaching support could be faded eventually as the teacher becomes more comfortable in order to free up time so that the counselor can implement other components of his/her delivery system.

            The last section of chapter six focuses on a social justice approach to comprehensive school counseling.  It is timely that I read this when I did.  On Saturday night I was hanging out with some ladies who have school-aged children.  All but 2 of them are Hispanic.  One of the Hispanic women started talking about her 5-year-old son coming home from school and telling her that he was going to participate in a counseling group called “Banana splits.”  It’s a group to support children whose parents have broken up or divorced.  The mother was very passionately against this, saying, “he has never known his dad and I to be together because we split before he was born.”  She was also making fun of the name, saying that he may develop a complex thinking he is a banana.  She then further related it to a gorilla.  At one point she made the comment, “I’m so tired of these white schools.”  I just thought, “Wow, how could this have been handled differently to get this mother on board?”  Simply making a phone call home could make all the difference.  I would think that a logical first step would be for the counselor to determine how the parent believes that the child is affected by his parents’ break up.  I’m wondering, is it best practice to get a signature before placing a student in a group?  This is a change of educational placement, so students with IEP’s should definitely have a parent signature to ensure legal consent.   Something we will inevitably need to contend with is the fact that parents will not want their child in a group.  In this case, if we know that an intervention is essential, is it unethical to have the child in a group if he/she would like to join?   This is where our collaboration techniques will need to kick into gear.  I think that personality is a key factor in a person’s ability to build relationships.  Unless a parent has a relationship with you, they may not consider anything you have to say.  I wonder, what are some other ways that counselors have “chipped away at the mortar in the wall that divides schools from the very communities they are attempting to serve?” (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012, p. 105).

Reference:

Dollarhide, C. T., & Saginak, K. A. (2012). Comprehensive school counseling programs.             (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc

Blog 5

Blog 5 Chapter 5

For this blog I will focus on a piece of all the reflection questions from chapter five, by extracting what I think are some of the strengths of each model and some areas of improvement.

First the Developmental Guidance and Counseling model, focuses on learning behaviors, tasks, skills, and necessary developmental experiences (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).  I love that this model works to promote awareness of the developmental stages and gives kids the tools to work through stages of transition and crisis.  I also think this model can be easily integrated into the school’s mission.  This model gives students the opportunity to learn valuable life skills that will promote growth and success throughout their life.  One area of improvement that I can see is a lack of focus on advocacy and multiculturalism.  Neither is mentioned in the description of the model.  Some marginalized students may not be reached in this model.  Also I would like if some considerations would be made for students in longer periods of crisis, students who are at-risk are more likely to experiences additional hardships in their life that may slow down their maturity.  Responsive services and individualized attention is important. 

Next the Essential Services Model is based on the trait and factor approach and the context of environments (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012). Some strengths of this model are the counselor’s ability to delineate tasks, make referrals, coordinate services and otherwise same time.  I also think some of the strengths are also weaknesses of the model.  With the counselor making so many referrals and providing consultation, the counselor could lose providing individual services.  I see the potential for losing relationships with students by outsourcing counseling services to social services agencies.  Also it may leave administrators wondering what the counselor actually does if everything the counselor is supposed to do is being done by a third party, parent, or teacher. 

The Results-Based Program Delivery Model integrates counseling services into the academic curriculum (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).  The counselor utilizes teaming which is a great way to utilize collaboration to meet the needs of at-risk students.  The counselor also spends a considerable amount of time collecting data to determine interventions that will be applicable to the needs of the students.  Again marginalized students and individuals in crisis may not be reached when the counselor is focused on the needs of the majority.  In this model students may lose important individual and responsive services from the counselor. Overall this approach seems fairly sterile to me and I would least like to design a counseling program with this framework. 

Next, The Strategic Comprehensive Model focuses on assessing student needs first and then providing appropriate services based upon those needs (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).  This model balances facilitating normal development, serving at-risk students, life-skill acquisition, educational/ career planning, leadership, and program management, and citizenship (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).   This model is well balanced with the exception of community involvement and a strong focus on evidence-based practices.  School counselors need to utilize the community and collaboration if he/ she is going to meet the expectations of this model.  Also, there wasn’t much mention of data collection and evidence-based practices.  This model is too losey-goosey for me. 

The authors’ Domain/ Activities/ Partners Model focuses on the role of the counselor, student activities, student competencies, and partnerships (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).  I think the concept of outlining the roles of the counselor and how to effectively function in that role with the goal of student-centeredness makes perfect sense.  However, I found the table they used to describe the model to very confusing. 

Next, the Strengths- Based School Counseling Model focuses on the positive attributes of students rather than student deficits.  I really connected with this model because of evidence-based practices such as Positive Discipline and The Incredible years.  This interventions and others are showing counselors, teachers, and parents that if you want to see an increase in the desired behavior that it’s best to focus attention on what you want to see rather than giving attention to what you do not want to see.  This model is empowering as well as practical.  One downside may be school wide implementation and choosing strengths of individuals while reaching the student population as a whole. 

Lastly, the Social Justice approach gives considerable attention to advocacy.  The Social Justice approach takes into account the student’s family, culture, and environment (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012).  As counselors we must be willing to speak up against bias and be willing address our own.  However if the counselor’s primary focus is speaking out against injustice, the counselor may end up picking a lot of battles and damaging key relationships with decision makers.  The phrase, thread lightly but carry a big stick comes to mind.  A counselor much advocate in constructive ways by using his/ her relationship building skills, leadership, and expertise. 

Dollarhide, C.T. & Saginak, K.A. (2012) Comprehensive school counseling programs. (2nd ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc.

Blog 5

I must say that with every chapter and article assigned for this class, I know I made the right decision to pursue a degree in school counseling. I don't want to say that I regret my previous education at my old graduate school because it is definitely helping me in this program. Each time I read about the development of a comprehensive school counseling program and the statistics that are needed, I am so glad I am able to apply my previous graduate education.

As many of my classmates have heard, my previous degree was in experimental psychology where I was required to develop my own thesis and my coursework included a year of statistics. I think that just having the experience definitely makes me feel confident that I will be able to collect data and analyze it so that administrators and parents will understand the importance of a school counselor who is educated in developing programs and presenting their findings from research.

In addition, the last school counselor I interviewed gave me the motivation of how important it is to be well versed in conducting research and presenting my findings. In order for change to occur, a school counselor must be prepared to present results in a form that is understandable by the general public. This particular school counselor explained to me that my experience collecting data, even when the time-frame goes for an extended duration just like my previous degree, will demonstrate that having me as a school counselor is an incredibly helpful addition to the individuals that comprise a school system.

Speaking with a school counselor that is currently in the process of data collection and a graduate of the Millersville University school counseling program definitely makes me know that I made the best decision I could have made.  I was also fortunate enough to have the school counselor present to me the current findings of their research, and how the administration within the school finds it so incredibly helpful and beneficial to the school.

Dollarhide, C. T., & Saginak, K. A. (2011). Comprehensive school counseling programs, k-12 delivery systems in action. Pearson College Div.

Schwallie-Giddis, P., ter Maat, M., & Pak, M. (2003). Initiating leadership by introducing and implementing the ASCA National Model. Professional School Counseling, 6(3), 170-173.

Blog 5 Chapter 6

Chapter 6 opened with what seems to be a school counselor’s nightmare, the school-counseling program lacks a clear philosophical basis, mission, and organizational structure (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012, pg. 86).  It seems that the school counselors district wide need to come together and figure out a plan of action, a delivery method and consistency across the board.  I believe that the districts decision to provide funding to educate the school counselors in a comprehensive school counseling training was the district acting accountable for what was going on.  Hopefully the school counselors’ learn programs through the trainings and delivery systems can be modified to fit the schools students and needs of the district. 

The Results Based Model targets the academic, career, and personal/social domains, and “integrates the program into the educational experience of each student” (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012, pg. 95).  This delivery approach seems like it will benefit the school, administration, students, parents and community.  However, to know for sure, there will need to be data collected before and after the program that they choose begins.  And by data I don’t mean feelings about the counselors from the students or parents, but raw data like grades, absenteeism, and behaviors.

While reading the article “Initiating Leadership by Introducing and Implementing the ASCA National Model” it was very apparent that schools were in danger and school counselors were not even considered to be apart of the solution.  This to me is terrible considering we have spent a lot of our time learning Solution Focused Model, and that helping is what we want to do.  We as school counselors want a positive end result just like the teachers and administrators, we need to be given a chance to show our value.  In this article they discussed the national crisis of the 1980’s and how there was a lot of talk about school reform and A Nation at Risk.  It seems to me that they realized there was a huge problem and school counselors wanted to help, the development of the ASCA National Model helped a great deal.  The model gave a foundation for school counselors to follow, a framework to base their theoretical orientation off of. 

Because of the past there are negative connotations regarding school counselors, we only see bad children or we play head games with the children.  School counselors want to give every child a chance to be great and they want to be able to teach guidance lessons to further the education process in an emotionally and mentally acceptable way.  However, our job is really cut out for us we are entering a world where most of the school counselors in the area are veterans, they have 20+ years experience and are set in their ways.  Most of which are not using the ASCA National Model and there fore when or if we obtain a job we will have to start from scratch developing the model and teaching it to the administration.

Reference

Dollarhide, C. T., & Saginak, K. A. (2011). Comprehensive school counseling programs, k-12 delivery systems in action. Pearson College Div.

Schwallie-Giddis, P., ter Maat, M., & Pak, M. (2003). Initiating leadership by introducing and implementing the ASCA National Model. Professional School Counseling, 6(3), 170-173.

week 5

            As I read this week’s assignments, the word that kept going through my head was intentionality.   We have been discussing the ASCA National Model, yet I now see there are many other models as well.  And it would seem that many of the models have points of similarities and differences having been developed in particular contexts for particular reasons.  While some may be prescriptive and others not, and some focus on assessments while others stress social justice, all the programs seem to start from the assumption that the counselor be intentional when it comes to how he/she spends her time and energy.  Nowhere is it encouraged to simply be reactive to the various crises or fleeting requests of various stakeholders that may seek to define the position of school counselor.  Rather, all models invite and encourage thoughtful intentionality on the part of the counselor who must serve as a leader in the school.  Without the desire, wisdom, skill, and political savvy to be an effective leader in the school, the counselor could easily become a follower rather than a leader in developing a program that only he/she has the expertise and position to institute.

            That being said, it is important to balance the counselor’s singular role with partnerships and cooperation.  Nearly all models, although some to a greater extent than others, emphasized the importance of developing partnerships.  No counselor can effect change or enact a comprehensive guidance program by him/herself.  Students are indeed the primary partners in any CSCP.  Their cooperation, their wisdom, their perspectives, and their participation are crucial to the success of any CSCP. How does a counselor foster that partnership?  It would seem relationships, school presence, valuable and responsive programming, as well as competency will serve to establish and deepen student/counselor relationships.  School staff are also essential partners whose contribution and perspectives should be valued and encouraged.  Likewise, parents and community members are also vital partners who can contribute resources and affirmation for the work of the school counselors.  So often it seems schools can be closed systems with collaboration happening primarily within the walls of the building.  But with shrinking resources, and the acknowledgement that students are shaped by what happens after 3 pm, as well as what happens before, can encourage counselors to look beyond the school environment for support and opportunities to contribute to the CSCP.

            Looking at the various models, I can see that schools often pull from these various models as they seek to find the best fit for a CSCP in their school.  And it was refreshing to see that there is creative thinking beyond the ASCA National Model.  And as the text indicated, some of these models can be utilized in the context of the ASCA model.  Evaluation and intentionality seemed to be woven throughout nearly all of the models and would seem to be essential however a program was designed.    

            It can seem daunting to begin developing and instituting a CSCP using any of these models. But as the text reminded readers, development of a CSCP is a long process.  It doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t need to.  Steadfastness and patience seem to also be important attributes for any counselor beginning to develop a CSCP.

Dollarhide, C.T., & Saginak, K.A. (2012). Comprehensive school counseling programs (2nd Ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc.