Chapter 6 covers a lot of good information about many of the
different models and programs that are used in the world of school
counseling. I am now able to tell the
difference between a prescriptive and a non-prescriptive delivery model, and
have a good appreciation of what each type of model has to offer.
The one model
that really stood out for me was Myrick’s Developmental Guidance and Counseling
Model. Maybe it is because when I think
of a comprehensive school counseling program, many of the things mentioned
throughout The Developmental Guidance and Counseling Model come to mind. I especially like how the model includes the
seven key implementation strategies.
Those strategies include, administrative understanding and support,
selecting a school guidance advisory committee, developing and writing a
philosophy statement, creating a needs survey, developing and writing a program
rationale, setting goals, objectives, and
developing strategies for implementation, and accountability. (Wittmer, 1993) Along with the seven implementation
strategies, I think that the model provides a good solid framework for a
successful counseling program within a school.
Many of the
other models introduced throughout the chapter all have pieces included in them
that could also be implemented into any successful counseling program. However,
in my opinion, in order for any counseling program to be successful within a
school, there must be an accountability piece held up by every stakeholder
involved in the program. As a counselor,
I also must find a way to be able to hold myself accountable throughout the
process. That is why it is always
extremely important to be able to measure the results of my program.
I think it
will be nice to have a consistent, clear, prescriptive model in place that I
can use within my school. However, I
would also like to have some flexibility in place to be able to model the
program to cater to the types of students that I am working with. Many of the delivery models provide that type
of flexibility. When speaking with some
of the counselors that are currently out in the field, they seem to work better
being able to adapt their program to the particular types of students that they
are working with. Like everything else
in the field of counseling, I am sure that there is a fine line between
“personalizing” portions of the program for a group of students, and staying
within the parameters of the model.
Dollarhide, C. T., &
Saginak, K. A. (2012). Comprehensive
School
(2nd ed.).New
York
(2nd ed.).
No comments:
Post a Comment