This
chapter was a nice review of things we have learned in other classes and
described practical and realistic ways of tying everything together in a
comprehensive counseling program.
It was also a good reminder that school counselors are not “miracle workers”
and do need to refer to outside services when the issue is greater than what
counselors are able to handle.
One
topic that I appreciated hearing more about was issues surrounding crisis
intervention and suicide prevention.
I found the myths of suicide prevention to be interesting. I did not realize that the concerns,
such as “talking about suicide will cause suicide,” were actually common
concerns that prevent the implementation of suicide prevention programs. I especially find the myth that “schools
can be sued if they have suicide prevention programs” to be especially
interesting and ignorant (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012, p. 125). I would be inclined to think that
schools could be sued if they did NOT have this type of program! In some districts, especially the one
in which I work, parents try to sue for all kinds of reasons. The threat of being sued should not be
a deterrent if there is evidence that the program or intervention is best
practice to meet students’ needs.
The
authors discussed assessment within the counseling process. Ever since our appraisal class, I have
wondered what, exactly, assessment typically looks like for a counselor. I could not imagine that we would have
the time or the district would have the money to use norm-referenced
assessments and rating scales for every student, or even those in need of
counseling. I have had an
understanding of assessment being the starting and ending points to determine
needs and progress, but I am not sure to what extent this happens, or what the
process truly looks like. Until I
took the appraisal class I assumed that it was all informal assessment through
our individual interactions with students. I realized that I am not alone in my uncertainty when I
read, on page 130, “Some authors would consider assessment and appraisal to be
major activities in the comprehensive school counseling program, whereas other
authors argue that school counselors use assessment and appraisal an components
of other, more important activities, such as counseling and individual
planning” (Dollarhide & Saginak, 2012). I have an idea of how assessments are done in each
domain either on a large scale (i.e. ASVABs) or on an individual basis (i.e.
the solution-focused process and charting). I wonder, though, how assessments are used in groups. I would think it would be based on a
needs assessment, but how does one determine the effectiveness of the
intervention? Is a questionnaire
made for the students? Counselors
with whom I have talked often do not do assessments for their groups, and if
they do, it is very informal.
On
the topic of groups, I’ve also often wondered how counselors begin groups. How do they let students know why they
are there for a group without imposing some sort of focus or goal on the
group? What if students aren’t at
a point where they are able/willing to be an active part of the process of
these groups? I wrote this
before I read the paragraph on blended groups. I like the idea of having a topic of discussion, or
“stimulus experience or question to start the session” (Dollarhide &
Saginak, 2012, p. 133). This
provides a focus for the session, but still allows for open-ended processing
during the session. This is
basically what I do with my emotional support class each morning. I am still interested in knowing what a
straight process group looks like.
I
feel that, through reading the chapters, I am slowly gaining a holistic view of
what my job as a school counselor will look like.
Reference:
Dollarhide,
C. T., & Saginak, K. A. (2012). Comprehensive school counseling programs.
(2nd
ed.). New York: Pearson, Inc
No comments:
Post a Comment