Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ATHABASCA UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY
UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE
Counselling Practicum Placements
The Counsellor Educators’ Perspectives
by
Heather Lynn. Abbott Demish
Campus Alberta Applied Psychology: Counselling Initiative
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTERS OF COUNSELLING
Alberta
May 2005
i
DEDICATION
This is dedicated to my children, Samantha and Brandon, and my parents, Charles and Darlene, who
have supported and encouraged me throughout the completion of this Master’s program. Thank you
for your inspiration and your love.
ii
iii
iv
ABSTRACT
Supervised practice for master’s level counselling students during a practicum is often considered a
critical aspect of counsellor education training, yet, little is known about the processes used to
acquire high quality practicum placements. The research here sought Canadian counsellor educators’
perspectives on the barriers faced in acquiring high quality practicum placements and
recommendations for facilitating high quality practicum placements. An electronic survey was
distributed to 156 members of the Canadian Counselling Association Education Chapter. The data
was analyzed through the use of frequency analysis and a thematic approach. Barriers that were
identified in placing counselling students in high quality practicum settings were: government
policies, agency policies, lack of high quality practicum sites available, and lack of qualified
supervisors. A systemic framework for conceptualizing the practicum/internship system is utilized to
discuss the literature and the results. Future research suggestions are offered.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank my supervisor Dr. Vivian Lalande for her time and effort in
assisting me in seeing this project through, I am grateful for her guidance and her commitment to the
process. I would also like to acknowledge and thank the many Campus Alberta faculty members and
staff who are dedicated to supporting students in their academic journey. And of course, I would like
to extend my thanks to the many wonderful students and friends in the Campus Alberta pilot group,
particularly Katya Roubina and Patricia Hannigan for their support and friendship over the years.
You have enriched my journey and lightened the load. I also wish to extend my gratitude to my
treasured and closest friends, Wendy, Anne, and Rhonda, for their endless support and friendship
and of course, to my family for being so wonderful and patient while I embarked upon this journey.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication i
Approval ii
Abstract iv
Acknowledgements v
Table of Contents vi
CHAPTER I – INTRODUCTION
General Introduction and a Practicum Definition 1
The Importance of Practicum Training and Rationale 2
Purpose of the Study 5
CHAPTER II – LITERATURE REVIEW
The Practicum as a System; Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS 6
Student Subsystem 10
Student Impairment and Student Incompetence 12
Preventing and Addressing Student Problems in the PIS 12
Initial Screening to Prevent Student Impairment 13
Student Readiness for Practicum 15
Preparing Students for Practicum 17
Student Monitoring and Evaluation During Practicum 18
When Student Impairment/Incompetence Continues 19
Fear of Litigation 21
Summation of Student Issues in the PIS 21
Faculty Subsystem 22
vii
Faculty and Practicum Coordinator Roles 23
University Subsystem 26
Distance Masters of Counselling Education Programs 27
Placement Setting Subsystem 28
Quantity and Availability of Placement Sites 30
Quality of Supervision 30
Training of Supervisors 31
Counselling Profession Subsystem 33
CCA Council on Accreditation of Counsellor Education Programs (CACEP) 34
CPA (2002a) and Regional Licensing Requirements 35
Jobs and Potential Placement Sites 35
Codes of Ethics 36
Socio-Cultural Political Subsystem 37
Privacy Laws 37
Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada (CFHCC) 38
Summary 40
Summary of the Literature Review 42
CHAPTER III – METHODOLOGY
Sample and Participants 46
Data Collection 46
Theoretical Orientation and Procedures for Data Analysis 47
CHAPTER IV – RESULTS
Quantitative Analysis 51
viii
General Counselling Program Information 51
The Nature of the Practicum 52
Summary of the Quantitative Results 54
Qualitative Analysis 54
Government Regulation and Policies 55
Agency Policies 57
Quality and Quantity of Placement Settings 58
Quality and Quantity of Supervision 60
Faculty and/or Practicum Coordinator 63
Accreditation 64
Summary of Qualitative Results 65
CHAPTER V – DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Discussion and Implications 67
Strengths and Limitations 74
Recommendations for Future Research 75
Conclusion 78
REFERENCES 81
APPENDIX A 87
APPENDIX B 91
APPENDIX C 92
APPENDIX D 95
APPENDIX E 102
APPENDIX F 104
ix
x
1
CHAPTER I: Introduction
General introduction and a practicum definition
Currently in Canada there are 20 universities that offer a master’s degree in counselling
psychology and/or educational psychology (CanLearn, 2004; Peterson’s Guides, 2005). Essential to
all of these professional counsellor education programs is the provision of high quality supervised
counselling experiences in a placement setting whereby a student gains the competencies and the
skills necessary to become a proficient counsellor. In fact, Johnson and Stewart (2000) maintain that
most psychologists would state the most important aspect of graduate training is the quality and
quantity of clinical supervision received. The Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) (2002a)
defines the practicum as a field training experience to assist students in acquiring and applying
psychological skills and techniques to a variety of client problems and populations. Practicum
training begins early in graduate training and is usually integrated with didactic instruction via
coursework (CPA, 2002a) and provides a means for students to acquire skills and to begin to identify
with the profession. The CPA (2002a) further elaborates that student practicum experiences are
coordinated by “… a core faculty member or by an adjunct professor associated with the practicum
setting” (43) and that masters level students are supervised by practitioners registered for
independent psychological practice in the corresponding jurisdiction (CPA, 2002a). According to the
CPA (2002a), at this early stage of training, frequent access to supervision is required and faculty
and site supervisors should be in regular contact with one another.
In Canada, the Canadian Counselling Association (CCA) accredits master’s level counselling
programs and outlines accreditation guidelines and procedures for master’s level counselling
programs to adhere to through the Canadian Accreditation of Counselling Education Programs
(CACEP) standards (CCA, 2005a). CACEP sets very specific standards and guidelines for the
2
supervised practice experience during practicum and these particular guidelines are included in
Appendix A. The practicum guidelines cover supervision, client hours, counselling activities,
evaluation, activities and settings. The CCA introduced the accreditation standards in 2003 and to
date, there are no accredited programs, likely because it was so recently introduced (Lalande, 2004).
In regards to the practicum, CACEP states, “Clinical instruction includes supervised practice
completed within a program of study. Practicum requirements are considered to be the most critical
experiences of the program” (CCA, 2005a, Supervised Practice, ¶ 1). Throughout this project,
references will be made to the CACEP accreditation standards as it provides a national framework
and focus for practicum placements in Canada.
For the purpose of this research project, a practicum will refer to supervised field experiences
(by a host and faculty supervisor) whereby master’s of counselling psychology students apply and
develop psychological knowledge and skills in assessment and interventions with a variety of clients
and populations at a particular practicum placement site for a specified amount of time in fulfillment
of their master’s program requirements and in preparation for their professional roles.
The importance of practicum training and rationale
Practicum training in a counselling education program is critical for many reasons: the student,
the clients, counsellor educators and the profession. Roe (2002) stated acquiring academic
competence in knowledge, skills and attitudes are necessary but not sufficient; thus to train
competent practitioners, the knowledge, skills and attitudes must be applied to performance in
training. During a practicum, counselling students can effectively link theory to practice. The
practicum experience for some students may also constitute “an important part of the practical
experience that they will gain prior to applying for a professional position” (Pitts, 1992, Orientation
and Application, ¶ 2) and may be regarded as “an integral part of the students’ vita building process”
3
(Pitts, 1992, Orientation and Application, ¶ 2). The development of a professional identity also
begins during a practicum experience. For example, although referring to the internship, Kaslow and
Rice (as cited in Pitts and Miller, 1990) describe the internship as an important part of training which
impacts a student’s professional identity. Thus the quality and the nature of the practicum/internship
experiences are critical in supporting healthy and integrated emerging professional identities.
In terms of the counsellor educators’ roles in acquiring high quality practicum placements,
Custer (as cited in Jordan, 2002) states, it is the obligation and responsibility of faculty members and
the university to ensure that those who graduate from their programs are competent to the public thus
making the issue of practicum training an important one for educators and students alike. Sexton
(2000) succinctly sums up the importance of high quality counsellor education and training, for all
involved: the students, the public, the profession and the counsellor educators. He states:
Because the work of professional counseling affects the lives of so many, counselors entrusted
with the responsibility of promoting the welfare of clients while protecting them from harm
carry a significant ethical, societal, social and professional responsibility to provide the most
effective treatments.
Counselor education programs are the educational foundation that professional counselors
draw upon to meet these expectations and responsibilities. Thus, the stakes of clinical training
are high for both individual practitioners and the counseling profession. Unprepared or poorly
trained counselors have the potential to harm their clients (Lambert, Bergin, & Collins1977)
(Sexton, Reconstructing Clinical training, ¶. 3 & 4).
Despite the importance of the high quality training during a practicum and its potential
implications for students, counsellor educators, the profession and the public, no research exists
regarding how practica are obtained and monitored for quality in terms of outcomes, supervision, or
4
challenges faced in acquiring and maintaining such high quality practicum placements. Most of the
Canadian research to date on related areas focuses on clinical psychology training regarding quality
of supervision of internships at the doctoral level (Johnson & Stewart, 2000); the relevance of
integrating empirically supported treatments in practice and training (Dobson, Johnston, Mikail, &
Hunsley, 1999); future directions and expansions of the role of clinical psychologists in Canada
(Arnett, 2001); and the importance of diversity training in Canada (Dobson & Meyen-Hertzsprung,
2000).
Other research on practicum/internship issues tends to be American-based, with an emphasis
on clinical psychology and doctoral level training. Much of the research examines issues of supply
and demand of internship sites (Keilin, Thorn, Rodolfa, Constantine, & Kaslow, 2000); methods and
models of counsellor training and supervision (Peake, Nussbaum, & Tindell, 2002; Sexton, 2000);
pre-practicum course based training (Schwitzer, Gonazalez, & Curl, 2001; Woodard & Yii-Nii,
1999); supervision models (Ward & House, 1998); training of supervisors (Borders & Bernard,
1991); new internship and training environments (Humphreys, 2000); and the future role of
counselling and clinical psychologists (Levant, et al, 2001).
From a licensing perspective, this lack of specific research regarding how supervised practice
hours are initially obtained and monitored for quality is of concern given that all the Canadian
regional licensing boards (with the exception of Quebec and the Yukon) require supervised practice
hours in order to charter and register as a psychologist (CPA, 2002a). From an educational and
accreditation standpoint, this lack of research is also a rational concern given the importance of the
practicum in training and its centrality to counsellor education. CACEP (CCA, 2005a) outlines the
standards and procedures required during supervised practice at a practicum placement, but there is
no research or information regarding on how to obtain such high quality practicum placement
5
settings. In summary, pursuing research on practicum training in counselling education at a master’s
degree level is important because of its centrality in producing and training competent practitioners
and most importantly, because there is no Canadian research regarding practicum placements.
Barriers to achieving high quality practicum placements affect students and counsellor education
departments alike and are worthy of exploration given the potential implications.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research is to assess Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives and
explore what they believe are some of the current barriers or facilitative factors in obtaining essential
training in high quality practicum placements. This research represents the first Canadian source of
information regarding practicum placements and as such, it could have implications for training. It
will explore the relevant issues and future trends in counselling psychology today related to
practicum training.
In the research here, I have endeavoured to explore some of the factors of how counsellor
educators obtain and maintain practicum sites, what types of sites and counselling experiences they
seek, and what expectations and concerns they have regarding the placement of students in practica.
The questions relevant to this research are: What are some of the issues and barriers in obtaining
high quality practicum placements in Canadian contexts? What are some of the facilitative factors?
How do counsellor educators assist students in obtaining high quality practicum placements? What
recommendations and perspectives do they offer regarding the gaps, issues and trends for the future
in obtaining and maintaining high quality professional training for students in their programs? This
research will shed light on these issues and identify future areas of research regarding the
counselling psychology master’s level practicum placements in Canada.
6
CHAPTER II: Counselling Practicum Literature Review
The Practicum as a System, Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS
The Canadian definition of a counselling practicum was defined above and American
definitions are similar. For example, the American Council for Accreditation of Counselling and
Related Education Programs (CACREP) state (as cited in Pitts, 1992), a counselling practicum
consists of a supervised experience from both the host and counsellor educator, to enhance
counselling skills whereby students can perform some of the activities a regularly employed
counsellor would in that particular setting. Pitts and Miller (1990) discuss the practicum and the
internship together as they view the experiences and issues as similar to both. They holistically
conceptualize the practicum/internship as a system and label it the practicum/internship system
(PIS). The PIS incorporates the many potential factors impacting the placement of students in high
quality practicum sites. According to Pitts and Miller, the PIS consist of the following components
or subsystems: students, faculty (counsellor educators and departments), university, placement
settings, and the larger professional context. Each of these subsystems interacts with one another and
impacts the practicum process (quality and quantity of placements) and experience of training. For
example, student abilities affect success at practicum sites and quality of supervision at the site
impacts the overall training of the student.
Pitts and Miller (1990) also conceptualize the coordination and organization of practicum
placements from Caple’s (1987a, 1987b) self-organizing principle (as cited in Pitts & Miller).
Briefly, Caple’s self-organization paradigm “emphasizes the necessity for openness to growth and
change” (Pitts & Miller, A practicum and internship program, ¶ 1). They cite Caple in stating:
“’Each system must evolve or it becomes extinct. Without creative fluctuations that result from a
free exchange of energy with its environment, the organization moves toward equilibrium and
7
ultimately toward dysfunction (Caple, 1987b, p. 101)’” (Pitts & Miller, A practicum and internship
program, ¶ 1). As Pitts and Miller state, the purpose is to foster an optimum degree of order in a
dynamic environment to fend off both chaos (excessive responses and changes) and rigidity (not
enough responses and changes).
When problems arise in any of the subsystems, the organization must respond to such issues
and barriers in terms of first and/or second order changes. A first order change is a response to
fluctuations and problems in the system but do not alter the systems structure (Pitts & Miller, 1990).
Pitts and Miller cite the example of a first-order change as a situation when a student has a
placement and the placement site has closed due to funding cuts. A first order change would be for
the student to find a new site – no change in the counselor education system and/or practicum
program is required.
Second order change demands a change in the PIS structure (policies and/or procedures) in
order to meet the current demands and results in counsellor educators doing something different. An
example of this could be developing more formal procedures for screening sites and supervisors in
response to problems, which may have arisen at a placement site resulting in an ineffective
placement. Another example of this is the implementation of more formal procedures to assess a
student’s ability to perform at a particular site in response to situations where a student may not have
been successful at a particular site. As Pitts and Miller suggest, failure to respond to problems and
implement the appropriate second order changes which arise in the PIS can result in a dysfunctional
system and lead to dissatisfaction amongst the various stakeholders in any or all of the subsystems.
Dissatisfaction with the practicum/internship program can lead eventually to dissatisfaction with the
counsellor education program as a whole, thus creating barriers to the successful future placement of
students at these sites.
8
Pitts (1992) recommends it is best to have one faculty member coordinating and managing the
practicum placement processes. Responsibilities of this designated practicum coordinator include
establishing practicum procedures and creating an environment conducive for interactions between
students, faculty and placement sites. This coordinator (a) assists students in applying and obtaining
practicum sites, (b) provides clinical supervision individually or as a group, (c) communicates with
the site supervisor, (d) evaluates the students, and (e) ultimately, is the person responsible for
enhancing facilitative factors and responding to problems or barriers (first and second order
changes).
There seems to be some useful applications of the PIS. It is a holistic and systems perspective
of the coordination and management of practicum placements and it effectively identifies a number
of subsystems that comprise practicum experiences and elaborates the processes by which the
subsystems interact and changes are made. From this framework, a practicum coordinator can
approach his or her role within the PIS from a much broader perspective, beyond the academic
department. This may prove valuable in effectively managing the PIS. The conceptualization and
organization of practicum placements from Caple’s self-organizing principle (as cited in Pitts &
Miller, 1990), whereby practicum coordinators respond to fluctuations in any or all of the
subsystems is also of relevance when discussing barriers and responses to barriers in placing
students in high quality practicum placements.
The limitations of this conceptual framework are that is has not been empirically tested or
validated. It is just that, a conceptual framework. It also neglects another overarching subsystem,
which embraces the PIS, that is the socio-cultural political subsystem. Political, economic and
cultural forces can influence the counselling profession and subsequently the education and training
of master’s level counselling students, creating barriers or facilitative factors. National and regional
9
health care policies, privacy laws, economics and cultural forces can all impact counsellor education
and ultimately the practicum system. For example, the funding of mental health services and health
care in general (federally, provincially, municipally) impact the quantity and level of services thus
the availability of sites to place students in practica. Privacy laws at the federal, provincial and
regional levels may impact and limit the use of videotapes as a means to evaluate student’s work
with clients. The cultural diversity of our nation demands all counsellors be prepared and trained to
work with a variety of clients in a wide spectrum of settings. It is important to add this broader,
overarching subsystem (socio-cultural political system) to the Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS as a
means to integrate the relevant literature in this area and to consider its potential impact on
counsellor education and training and its relevance to obtaining and maintaining high quality
practicum sites.
In summation, the PIS is empirically limited, but has value in providing a framework that
captures the complexities of factors, activities, participants and influences involved in the practicum
component of counsellor education. It also has value as a means to conceptualize and organize the
literature and research. The following sections describe in detail how Pitts and Miller (1990)
conceptualize the student, counsellor educator, university, placement site and professional
subsystems. Related literature on practicum/internship placements and issues will be integrated into
each subsystem. An added section of the socio-cultural political subsystem (the overarching system
within which the PIS operates in) will briefly highlight some of the issues and forces that influence
the counselling practicum experience.
10
Student Subsystem
The student subsystem includes the students, their individual performance at a placement site,
and all their interactions and relationships with site staff and clients. Pitts and Miller (1990) state the
effectiveness of the PIS is greatly affected by the practicum coordinator’s ability to respond
appropriately to student needs and demands. They state students need clear expectations and
guidelines about counselling program and practicum placements and clear ideas about the settings
and clients with whom they will be working. This allows them to be able to integrate into a
placement setting without major problems. Other students’ needs not directly mentioned by Pitts and
Miller which might be included are (a) adequate pre-requisite training prior to placement at a site,
(b) a clear idea of how they will be evaluated during practicum, (c) some preparation in handling
potential problems at a site and, (d) knowledge of how to best seek faculty support should they
experience difficulties or issues. Once at a placement site, students must navigate their own needs
within the placement setting structure and the sites’ needs and demands. Developing cooperative
relationships with clients and staff, keeping appointments, and managing paperwork sufficiently are
some of the roles and functions Pitts and Miller state students need to master in order to experience a
smooth progression into a placement site. Students may also demand or need extra faculty support
once at a placement site in terms of mastering some of these activities and skills. Ensuring such
student needs are met enhances the likelihood that students will integrate into their placement sites
and progress accordingly without major issues.
Some students do not experience this “smooth progression” and practicum coordinators may
receive feedback regarding various problems students face from the site clinical supervisor, the
student themselves, or other people at the practicum/internship site according to Pitts and Miller
(1990). These problems range on a continuum from “mostly student generated” to mostly “system
11
generated” or some combination of the two. Pitts and Miller (1990) describe the latter as early
warning signs that there are inadequacies in the PIS that lead to stakeholders’ dissatisfaction, create
PIS dysfunction and may require second order change. Inadequacies include the need for more
formal communication between the site and academic department, unclear expectations from site
supervisor, and unhealthy group dynamics. As Pitts and Miller suggest, student generated problems
typically result from the student being at “odds” with a system is that is functioning well and usually
are the result of inappropriate and/or incompetent student behaviour. Pitts and Miller state student
generated difficulties include: missing important appointments or deadlines with clients or
supervisors, inappropriate conduct and dress, inability to develop satisfactory relationships with
others at the placement site and/or failure to keep up with required paperwork. They suggest these
problems demand two levels of responses from practicum coordinators. Firstly, the practicum
coordinator must address the student’s issue in terms of remediation (first order change) and/or
termination (second order change) if students fail to incorporate the practicum coordinators feedback
and plans. Secondly, the practicum coordinator must engage in ‘”damage control” with the
placement site in order to maintain a good working relationship with the site and to ensure future
placements of students at this site.
Pitts and Miller (1990) state when issues in the student subsystem result from a combination of
causes (both student or system generated) the practicum/internship coordinator needs to gather
information from the student, the site, the clinical supervisor and other appropriate sources and
decide on a course of action to remedy the situation. For example, if there are misunderstandings,
solutions “…may be as simple as a phone call to correct a misperception or as elaborate as a face-to-
face meeting of all of the persons involved and discussion of possible second-order change in the
practicum and internship system” (Pitts & Miller, Students, ¶ 7). There is no direct literature on
12
“systems” type problems in the student subsystem, but there is ample, albeit mostly American,
literature on student problems and issues and means for counsellor educators to address them and
these will be summarized below.
Student impairment and student incompetence. Jordan (2002) elaborated upon the definition of
student impairment whereby a student’s “judgment and behavior with his or her client(s) are below
acceptable standards and/or harmful” (35) and/or they exhibit inappropriate behaviour with peers
and faculty. Faculty might identify student impairment if, (a) students functioned better in previous
semesters, (b) if there is the possibility of psychological and/or emotional disorders not previously
evident, (c) if there is potentially substance abuse, (d) and/or if the student has indicated there are
overwhelming events in their life (Jordan). Enochs and Etzbach (2004) add that other identifiable
symptoms of student counsellor impairment may include: cynicism, anger, depression, temporary
emotional imbalance due to personal loss or trauma, stress, paranoia, over involvement with clients
and denial of feelings. For Jordan, students are not intentionally unethical, but rather their judgment
is impaired. Both Jordan and Enochs and Etzbach agree that preventing and addressing student
impairment is critical for ethical reasons.
Preventing and addressing student problems in the PIS. There are some ways counsellor
educators can attempt to address such potential student issues within the counselling program itself
by: (a) screening and carefully selecting students into the program and/or a particular site (Enochs &
Etzbach, 2004; Nagpal & Ritchie, 2002; Pitts, 1992); (b) by assessing and preparing students to enter
practicum sites (Frame & Stevens-Smith, 1995; Jordan, 2002, Pitts); (c) by monitoring and
evaluating student conduct and progress at the site (Jordan, Pitts, Pitts & Miller); and (d) by
addressing continued student problems/impairment at a site with the student (Enochs & Etzbach, &
Jordan). Addressing issues with the student alone (student makes changes) would be considered first
13
order changes; new policies and methods would be considered second order changes. These are
discussed below.
Initial screening to prevent student impairment. To reduce the potential of admitting
potentially impaired students who could possibly be unfit to practice during a practicum/internship
placement and/or subsequently with the public, most counselling education programs have a
selection and screening process to screen out those who may cause potential harm to clients (Nagpal
& Ritchie, 2002). Screening should also include: “…vital information such as personal
characteristics; students’ willingness to participate in counseling themselves if needed; openness to
self-exploration; and desire to enter the field” (Enochs & Etzbach, 2004, 399). Bradey and Post
(1991) advocate for a personal interview to screen out those with desired personal qualities, yet
Market and Monke (1990) found that interview evaluations do not always correlate with therapeutic
or counselling effectiveness.
Nagpal and Ritchie (2002) were interested in what personal qualities and characteristics
counsellor educators looked for in applicants, how they measured these qualities in applicants, and
how this all translated into the decision making of accepting or rejecting applicants. They
interviewed nine full time faculty members in four counselling education departments in Ohio
(master’s level) on the evaluation criteria and decision-making processes utilized in student selection
interviews (admission to the masters of counselling program) and subsequently analyzed the
interviews using a grounded theory approach. Two metathemes were found in participant responses:
decision criteria (qualities or characteristics counsellor educators looked for when interviewing
applicants) and decision making (personal processes used to decide if they accept or reject an
applicant). Under the decision criteria, they found there were basically ten characteristics which
faculty looked for in the initial screening of potential counselling students. These fell into the three
14
themes of, (a) professional attributes (goal appropriateness, motivational appropriateness,
professional preparedness and academic preparedness), (b) personal attributes (personal maturity,
flexibility and emotional stability), and (c) interpersonal skills (presence, social appropriateness, and
verbal skill). Nagpal and Ritchie noted that these characteristics of professional attributes, personal
attributes and interpersonal skills were similar to those characteristics cited by others in previous
literature such as Bradey and Post (1991) and Cormier and Hackney (1993)(as cited in Nagpal &
Ritchie).
Nagpal and Ritchie (2002) found there was consensus between counsellor educators on the
general personal qualities, but there was little consensus on the decision-making processes used to
evaluate such qualities. There were a wide variety of objective and subjective decision making
processes utilized in accepting or rejecting applicants. They state that the selection interviews were
used as a screening tool, to eliminate applicants with inappropriate characteristics, but this does not
necessarily mean the potentially most qualified were admitted. Whilst there was agreement on the
sought after qualities desired in applicants, there was no agreement or valid way of assessing such
qualities in interviews. They recommended that once there is agreement amongst all counsellor
educators on what qualities potential student counsellors should possess, a means to objectively
analyze these criteria during the selection interview process should be established. CACEP also
includes the following criteria for admission decisions, (a) acceptability to the Faculty of Graduate
studies, (b) appropriate background as specified by the program, (c) evidence of openness to self-
examination and commitment to self-growth, (d) evidence of a commitment to a counselling career,
(e) reputed social and interpersonal skills, and (f) evidence of satisfactory person-oriented field/work
experience (CCA, 2005a).
15
Student readiness for practicum. Initial screening procedures alone will not rule out all
potentially impaired students because not all impaired or inappropriate students can be avoided
(Frame & Stevens-Smith, 1995) and some students may develop problems after admission (Enochs
& Etzbach, 2004; Jordan, 2002). After admission and prior to placements, counselling departments
need to define how to determine when a student is eligible for a practicum. Pitts (1992) recommends
the development of policies regarding courses satisfactorily completed, endorsements by faculty and
student’s advisors’ as a means to assess student readiness and suitability for practicum placements.
Jordan (2002) discusses the use of the Personal Characteristics Evaluation Form (PCEF) by
Frame & Stevens-Smith (1995) as a tool to evaluate student clinical training readiness that was used
in a western university (the University of Colorado) accredited by CACREP. This form is used to
identify students who show inappropriate behaviour for the profession, who may have psychological
and/or substance abuse problems, who may be immature, who may have difficulty transferring
learning into practical situations and/or who may be unwilling or unable to incorporate faculty
feedback (in Jordan). Frame and Stevens-Smith established specific guidelines to be utilized with the
PCEF on monitoring and addressing impairment issues, and in implementing a three-step
remedial/dismissal procedure which was reviewed by the university’s legal staff and the
Ombudsman’s office.
The PCEF specifies nine characteristics essential for counsellor development including (a)
openness, (b) flexibility, (c) positive, (d) cooperative, (e) willingness to accept feedback, (f) an
awareness of one’s impact on others, (g) ability to deal with conflict, (h) personal responsibility, and
(i) appropriate and effective expression of feelings. The University of Colorado decided that all
students would be assessed on these characteristics at the midterm and at the end of the semester.
Students were rated on a five point Likert scale and a “3” was considered a minimum standard of
16
behaviour to proceed to a practicum placement. If a student received less than a “3” on any form
during the semester, they were required to meet with the professor to discuss remediation plans. If a
student received the same score twice or more in a semester from more than one form or professor,
students were required to meet with their academic advisor for further remediation plans and/or to
reconsider remaining in the program. If a student received three forms and low scores on all in one
semester, the student met with an academic advisor and other faculty members to discuss
continuation in the program. If students are unable to successfully implement remediation plans and
demonstrate improvement, faculty decided if the student’s personal and professional behaviour is
appropriate to the counselling field and if they viewed the student’s behaviours as potentially
detrimental to the clients, faculty remove the students from the program. Frame and Stevens-Smith
(1995) note all students were aware of the PCEF evaluation form and procedures upon admission
and signed consent forms to be regularly evaluated by faculty prior to working with clients at
practicum/internship sites.
There are no reports of this evaluation form being empirically validated, although Frame and
Stevens-Smith (1995) report a one-year post-evaluation of the implementation of this model with six
faculty members and randomly selected students (number of students is not provided). In the one-
year follow up survey, 82% of the students were aware of the monitoring process; 93% of students
and faculty agree that student monitoring is important; and 81% believed faculty have an ethical
responsibility to monitor students. Fifty percent of the faculty thought this evaluation method had
assisted them in providing a concrete approach for dealing with students who may have professional
liabilities; 25% were neutral on its use; and 25% disagreed that this process assisted in providing a
concrete evaluation method. Finally, 86% of faculty felt that because of this model, they had become
17
more intentional about evaluating students’ personal qualities since the implementation of the
monitoring process.
Although the PCEF has not been empirically validated (survey itself or post evaluation of its
use) and it is based on American research, it provides is a promising example of means and method
to assess student readiness for practicum/internship placements beyond academic performance and
based on personal characteristics and abilities.
Preparing students for practicum. Along with screening entry and assessing student readiness
for practicum/internship experiences, there is support for the implementation of a pre-practicum
course to enhance the success of the student’s learning experience at a placement site (Kaplan,
Rothrock & Culkin 1999; Schwitzer, Gonzalez & Curl 2001; Woodard & Yii-Nii, 1999). For
example, Woodard and Yii-Nii, state that a pre-practicum course is useful in transitioning students to
a practicum site and such courses aid in uncovering and dealing with student difficulties that may
have been previously undetected. The goal of such courses is to further enhance a student’s ability to
adapt and function effectively at a practicum/internship placement site, to reinforce counselling
skills so that clients receive appropriate care, and to address any potential student problems that may
arise prior to placement. Pre-practicum courses can include observational learning of the application
of direct counselling skills with live clients (Kaplan, et al.) and/or semester long role plays
(simulations) of agency settings and clients (Schwitzer, et al., Woodard & Yii-Nii). CACEP
standards recommend a pre-practicum experience including a minimum of 40 hours of laboratory
experience practice in counselling skills and simulated client interviews (CCA, 2005a) prior to site
placement. Pre-practicum courses assist with the development and training in counselling skills and
assist in uncovering and addressing any potential student difficulties prior to placement at a site.
18
Student monitoring and evaluation during practicum. According to Jordan (2002), from an
ethical and legal perspective, and at a bare minimum, enough feedback and supervision should be
provided so that clients are receiving at least minimal care. Jordan recommends that students’ quality
of work be continually monitored and assessed by faculty. Questions remain as to how much
feedback and supervision are required over the practicum/internship (each session, once a week).
The amount and kind of supervision (live, video, audio, and consultation) depends on the student’s
developmental level and faculty comfort with student skills. For example, Jordan stated that
beginning students with little clinical experience (practicum level) benefit from more frequent live
supervision and frequent feedback than perhaps more experienced students. Ongoing and regular
monitoring/feedback allow students to address identified problem areas early on thus preventing
problems in the student subsystem. According to Jordan, all supervision and feedback should be
verbally communicated to the student and recorded in a document. Jordan suggested using a weekly
monitoring/evaluation form such as a form she developed called the Weekly Evaluation Rating
Sheet (WERS) which evaluates students on, (a) core counselling skills (e.g.: active listening,
warmth), (b) skills and techniques (e.g., role-playing) (c) supervision (e.g., openness to supervisor’s
feedback).
Jordan (2002) suggested more comprehensive and detailed evaluations on a number of
dimensions of student performance occur during the mid-term and final evaluation reviews that
should also be communicated verbally and documented in a written form. These dimensions include,
(a) process skills (e.g.: displaying relaxed behaviour with clients), (b) personal and professional
behaviour (e.g.: expresses feelings appropriately), (c) clinic policies (e.g.: prepares and plans for
sessions and discussions), (d) supervision (e.g.: openness to feedback and new and different
procedures), (e) ethics (assessed ethical decision making ability of students), and (f) overall
19
performance (e.g.: main strengths and main areas requiring improvement). Jordan recommends two
faculty members review a student’s taped work to assess clinical skills and to enhance the objectivity
of the evaluation. At the mid-term and the final evaluation, the faculty supervisor and the student
should identify the student’s strengths and clearly delineate a specific action plan for areas, which
may require improvement, and again, this should be verbally communicated and documented. Some
ideas Jordan suggested for action plans (depending on the nature of the student issue or
incompetence) are (a) counselling for the student themselves, (b) the completion of exercises, (c)
reviewing clinical tapes, and (d) role-plays (first-order changes). If there are areas requiring
improvement, students should be more frequently monitored and supervised (weekly) and they
should be given guidance, support and time to make the necessary changes. Potentially serious
ethical violations require the provision of closer supplemental supervision, requesting a student take
a break from the program and/or leaving the counselling program altogether (second-order change).
A thorough and comprehensive review by the faculty or a sub-committee should be conducted prior
to asking students to leave the practicum site (take a break) and/or to leave the counselling program.
Jordan suggests that students must also be provided with an opportunity to respond to faculty
requests in writing and to also present their case (due process). For Jordan, ultimately, faculty has an
ethical and legal obligation to proactively monitor and evaluate students and to share their
evaluations with those students and other faculty in making decisions about professional readiness.
When student impairment/incompetence continues. If there is no improvement or growth in an
impaired/incompetent student, and there is a risk to clients in receiving below minimal care, then
counsellor educators need to terminate the student’s practicum for protection of the client, the PIS,
the counsellor education program as a whole and the profession (Enochs & Etzbach, 2004; Jordan,
2002; & Kerl, Garcia, McCullough & Maxwell, 2002). CACEP standards reflect this as well and
20
state if performance reviews indicate inappropriateness for the counselling profession, then faculty
must facilitate the student’s transition out of the program (CCA, 2005a).
Yet, dismissal of impaired students may be difficult for counsellor educators. For example,
research by Olkin and Gaughen (as cited in Kerl, et al., 2002) found in 100 masters level programs
(counselling psychology, clinical, community and marriage and family and child programs) faculty
members identified 3% of all counselling students as problem students during the year and 24% of
these programs identified more than four problem students a year. Similarly, Gaubatz and Vera
(2002) summarize various studies and report that 93% to 95% of mental health faculty and students
have reported observing impaired students in their programs and yet only 66% to 76% of the faculty
members in these programs have reported that their programs actually engaged in remediation or
dismissed such students.
It also seems that many master’s level counselling education programs have no clear policies
on handling incompetent/impaired students. Olkin and Gaughen (as cited in Kerl et al., 2002) found
that 45% of the programs surveyed had no written policies on remediation and/or dismissal
procedures for students demonstrating lack of professional competence. Further, only 28% of these
programs had formal evaluations to identify problem students (as cited in Gaubatz & Vera, 2002).
Olkin and Gaughin found that most counselling/clinical programs hope that students choose to
voluntarily leave or get counseled out (as cited in Kerl et. al., 2002). Bradey and Post (1991), Kerl et
al,(2002) and Enochs and Etzbach (2004) all recommend that counselling programs have clear and
concise formal and written procedures in place for dismissing the impaired counselling student and
provide a concise means to measure student competence. There is no similar Canadian research on
the numbers of potentially impaired/incompetent students and/or remedial and dismissal procedures
and policies employed by counselling programs.
21
Fear of litigation. Developing policies and procedures for remediation and dismissal (an
example of second order change) is important yet many counsellor educators are reluctant to
implement such approaches because of possible litigation and personal recrimination (Frames &
Stevens-Smith, 1995 in Kerl, et al., 2002) particularly in the United States. Kerl et al. state that
students who are dismissed from the program as incompetent may sue the university, although
dismissals based on personal reasons are more likely to go to court than those based on professional
reasons. However, not dismissing an impaired student could also have potential litigation issues for
the counselling education department in the future. Frame and Stevens-Smith (1995) noted that
counsellor education programs may be held liable for graduating incompetent students or ones who
could cause harm to clients. Kerl et al. (2002) discuss an example of where there was a 1994 lawsuit
filed against Louisiana Tech University (LTU) for graduating a counsellor who had insufficient
training. The judge ruled it is a university’s responsibility to ensure the people they graduate are
competent to the public and as Kerl et al note, this particular case was settled for 1.7 million dollars.
In most legal cases (based on medical school cases), the courts defer to the educational institutions
for judging academic, skill and professional competence of students and educational institutions are
the best judge regarding student performance, not judiciary boards (Kerr et. al., 2002). If litigation
becomes a more common practice in Canada, sound and well developed remedial and dismissal
policies will be important.
Summation of problems in the student subsystem. As noted, strong and valid screening
procedures alone don’t guarantee student incompetence/impairment will be eradicated and students
must be assessed for clinical readiness and prepared for practicum/internship placement as
demonstrated in the above literature. Again, there is a lack of Canadian research in this area. It is
unknown if there is a specific and similar form or measure such as the CPEF to assess a student’s
22
readiness to be placed at a practicum site in Canada and it is also unknown if the use of such a tool
actually reduces potential student incompetence/impairment once at a practicum placement.
Intuitively, it makes sense to pre-assess clinical readiness and to prepare students for practicum (pre-
practicum courses) but it is unclear if such courses reduce the overall incidence of student
incompetence/impairment and this is worthy of study. Developing such courses would be considered
a second order change. It could be again, that perhaps if potential placement sites know that students
are assessed for clinical readiness and properly trained in pre-practicum courses, that they may be
more willing to accept counselling students from that particular counselling program. Again, this
could be an enhancing factor in facilitating high quality practicum placements and reducing barriers
to entry.
Faculty Subsystem
The faculty subsystem includes the counsellor educators involved in the counsellor education
program, and particularly those persons (practicum coordinators) involved in practicum/internship
placements. For Pitts and Miller (1990), the faculty also has needs and these needs must be met
within the PIS. Needs in the faculty subsystem are met through the structure of the program and
clear expectations, guidelines and roles, particularly in relation to the PIS (e.g.: clinical supervision,
clear structure in place for grading). One of the most important needs of the faculty is to provide and
create an environment that fosters the free exchange of information between students, faculty and
placement site supervisors. Faculty needs to be clear on the roles, guidelines and expectations
regarding practicum/internship placements and faculty supervision and evaluation and there must be
an effective means in place for them to communicate with students, other faculty and site
supervisors.
23
Some of the other faculty needs that practicum coordinators must attend to according, to Pitts
and Miller (1990), are appropriately matching faculty to students for supervision. They suggest
matching faculty to students who have shared interests in particular client groups or issues, similar
theoretical orientations, interpersonal dynamics, scheduling, and matching students to faculty who
are appropriate for the students’ professional and/or skill developmental stage. A positive experience
for both ultimately affects how a student and a faculty member relate to a practicum site and such a
positive experience could be a facilitative factor in maintaining a high quality practicum placement.
Faculty and practicum coordinator roles. All faculty, especially those who supervise
practicum/internship students, are involved to some extent in all the activities that are required to
coordinate a practicum/internship program and these activities can range from simple to complex,
depending on the size of the counselling education program (Pitts, 1992). It is better to have one
faculty person in the role of practicum coordinator to manage the PIS (CCA, 2005a; Pitts, 1992) who
can manage the internal parts of the system and coordinate the practicum/internship program’s
activities as they relate to the external parts of the system over which less direct control can be
exerted. Specific responsibilities of this designated practicum coordinator include, (a) organizing and
maintaining the structures and procedures that foster an environment conducive for interactions
between students, faculty and placement sites (e.g. such as establishing formal and informal
communication procedures and facilitating meetings), (b) assisting students in applying for and
obtaining practicum sites, (c) providing for and/or setting up clinical supervision individually and as
a group, (d) communicating with the site supervisor, (e) evaluating and/or arranging other faculty
evaluation of students (f) monitoring and evaluating the PIS itself, and (g) responding to problems or
barriers (first and second order changes) that might arise in the PIS.
24
Pitts (1992) elaborates on the specific structural functions of the practicum coordinator. He
recommended that practicum coordinators secure the placements sites and provide a pool of sites
from which students can choose. In seeking out and approving sites, practicum coordinators choose
placement sites that will have the ability to fulfill the counselling program practicum goals and
provide meaningful learning experiences for students. Once sites have been screened, approved, and
secured practicum coordinators are responsible for (in collaboration with faculty and perhaps
university legal advisors) establishing written contracts and agreements with sites and clearly
delineating the expectations and roles of all parties involved and guidelines around video/audio
taping. Indeed, Pitts and Myer (as cited in Pitts, 1992) found in a survey of CACREP approved
programs, that over 90% of the counsellor education departments have such formal agreements with
placement sites. Boylan, Malley, and Scott (as cited in Pitts) recommended a standard written
agreement contract that includes the following elements (a) statements about the conditions and
guidelines to be followed by the site, faculty and counsellor, (b) preparation programs, and (c) a list
of expected practicum/internship activities. Pitts believes that the effort it requires to establish a
standard contract is worthwhile because it eliminates the need for case-by-case approval of contracts
and agreements thus eliminating delays. Delays in this area of the PIS could be viewed as a barrier to
obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements, particularly if a potential site is lost
due to a timing issue if an agreement is not reached prior to the student’s placement at a site. Clear
guidelines and expectations also potentially prevent problems surrounding roles, expectations, and
activities for all once a student is at a practicum/internship placement by reducing the incidence of
possible confusion.
Once sites are secured and written contracts are established, the practicum coordinators role is
to orientate and to assist students in applying for the various placement sites. This involves an
25
orientation about the application process, interviewing skills, developing potential questions for
students to ask potential sites and exploring what types of expectations and needs students have to
ensure they are applying for appropriate placements. Pitts recommends documenting the application
process as part of the student’s records and maintaining a roster with site information. Maintaining a
roster of such information is an efficient way to document the current status of site information and
thus could be a facilitative factor in enhancing practicum placements. Effectively preparing students
and ensuring they are matched appropriately could also contribute to reducing potential problems in
the PIS, particularly student problems in the student subsystem if students are not a right “fit” for a
particular placement site.
According to Pitts (1992), practicum coordinators facilitate faculty supervision for
practicum/internship students and they should develop and implement a clearly defined grading and
evaluation structure. There should also be a process for students to offer feedback for the
supervisory/evaluation experience. Although not mentioned here, this structure could also include
policies and procedures for remediation and dismissal as discussed in the student subsystem. Pitts
states faculty supervision can be a program faculty member, an affiliate faculty member or an
adjunct faculty member. In Canada, CACEP accreditation standards specify that a supervisor spend
a minimum of 1 hour per week supervising a student (CCA, 2005a). Pitts states the practicum
coordinators should also coordinate group supervision by a faculty member. CACEP standards
specify 1.5 hours per week of group supervision by a program faculty member or a supervisor under
the direction of a program faculty member, and this supervision should be based on video recording
and case studies provided on a regular schedule throughout the practicum course (CCA, 2005a). Pitts
states that group supervision provides an avenue for students to confidentially but freely discuss
client cases, discuss issues which may be arising at the site which they may not wish to discuss with
26
their site supervisor, and to assist each other with insights and to provide each other with emotional
support. It would appear that such an avenue for students would enhance the overall functioning of
the PIS by directly addressing student needs under faculty supervision.
University Subsystem
The university subsystem consists of the wider university and its structure, bylaws and policies.
Pitts and Miller (1990) state practicum coordinators in counselling education faculties operate in this
larger university system and must be conscious of working within all university policies and
procedures. Practicum coordinators must work with university staff (e.g. university lawyers) in
ensuring all public dealings are appropriately following the proper protocols (e.g. establishing
written contracts with sites) and all insurance and liability issues for the department and the student
have been sufficiently addressed (faculty and student liability insurance in place prior to practicum).
Although not stated, another example of this could be adhering to university policies regarding
proper student remediation and dismissal procedures. Pitts and Miller state that the emerging
definition of the legal status of the practicum/internship is a growing concern (Cormier & Bernard,
1982, as cited in Pitts & Miller). To compound the complexities of navigating the university policies
and bylaws, counsellor educators must navigate and ensure they are fulfilling placement site
procedures and legal guidelines. Some sites may have their own legal contracts which faculty and
students are required to agree to. Thus, a lack of attention to the university and external procedures
in coordinating different systems could create problems in the overall functioning of the practicum
system and create potential barriers in the facilitation of practicum placements.
Unfortunately there is no Canadian or American research that may be appropriately applied in
this subsystem. One can speculate that if a university has cumbersome policies, legal requirements
and procedures to be followed in establishing contracts with potential placement sites, that this could
27
create a barrier in facilitating high quality practicum placements. Potential placement sites may
refuse practicum/internship students if they feel they are committed to signing laborious and
meticulous legal contracts. One can also speculate about the reputation and credibility of a university
impacting practicum placements. Potential placement sites may favour practicum/internship students
from more reputable universities if there are limited placement positions available. Another factor
that may impact obtaining potential placements is the economics and funding situation of the
university, particularly in regards to the counsellor education program. If there have been recent
funding cuts to this department, potential placement sites may wonder about faculty having adequate
resources and staff to meet their and student needs. It is also unclear as to whether traditional
programs are preferred over universities that offer counsellor education at a distance. To date, there
is no research on how the university subsystem may impact the overall functioning of the PIS system
and create enhancing factors or barriers in facilitating high quality practicum placements.
Distance Masters of Counselling Education Programs. Universities that offer counselling
programs at a distance are one type of counsellor education program that may have unique
procedures and challenges for practicum placements. Lalande (2004) discusses the first-ever
Canadian delivered master’s level counselling psychology program through the Campus Alberta
Applied Psychology Initiative which was launched in 2002 and she notes this program plans to
admit up to 120 students a year. In terms of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum
placements, the sheer numbers of students could place increased demand on existing sites. Many
students in rural and remote areas now have the opportunity to pursue a master’s degree in
counselling education without relocating, but perhaps students in these areas could be challenged to
obtain a suitable practicum placement where services and agencies may be limited. Practicum
28
coordinators and faculty may need to be very instrumental in facilitating and/or developing potential
practicum placement sites in order for students to fulfill practicum program obligations.
Another possible challenge for practicum coordinators and faculty of this program could be to
organize and manage the PIS on a national basis. In Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS, the practicum
coordinator is responsible for organizing and coordinating the practicum placements and supervision
within a limited locale. Coordinating and managing placements and supervision across the nation
could present a more ominous and larger task. All of the roles which Pitts (1992) outlines for
practicum coordinators could take on more complexity. For example, establishing one standard
written contract and legal agreement could be difficult in some circumstances given the vastness and
diversity of placement setting needs and policies across the nation. Faculty site visits (for
supervision) could also be difficult. It would be interesting to explore how this unique masters of
counselling program, of which I am a part of, manages and coordinates the PIS over time given its
unique and vast national focus, and how it is similar or different to more traditional programs.
Placement Settings Subsystems
Pitts and Miller (1990) state the demands placed on the PIS in meeting the needs of the
placement sites are similar to meeting the needs of the university subsystem and they make a number
of suggestions to improve this subsystem. Placement settings need to perceive that counsellor
educators are capable of meeting their needs and this is again, fostered by open communication and
a free exchange of information. One way to enhance this perception is provide clear expectations and
guidelines up front along with the methods and documents necessary for managing and supervising
practicum/internship students during their placements. The standard written contract agreement
outlining the various roles and expectations (Pitts, 1992) was discussed in the faculty subsystem and
could be an effective way to prevent misunderstandings and miscommunications about placement
29
hosts’ roles. Another way to enhance this perception is to send only qualified and screened students
whose skills; attitudes and knowledge correspond with the setting needs. Placement sites may
appreciate faculty pre-screening appropriate students thus saving them time interviewing prospective
placement candidates. It minimizes the disruption to routines at the sites and they are more likely to
have favourable perceptions of the counsellor education program and may be more willing to accept
students for practicum/internship placements. Lastly, as Pitts and Miller recommended, it may be
beneficial to offer a fee for hosts so that sites may benefit financially from working with students. If
counsellor educators can recognize and honour placement sites needs and meet their demands whilst
meeting and navigating student learning needs and counsellor education program expectations and
needs, the likelihood of increasing the overall functioning of the PIS is enhanced.
Pitts (1992) states that good placement sites are essential to the PIS and the more
comprehensive the programs and specialties a counselling education department has, the more
variety of placements sites (e.g.: mental health, schools, higher education) is required. Pitts and
Miller (1990) also suggest that in selecting and obtaining sites, practicum coordinators should screen
sites to ensure they have the necessary and appropriate on-site supervision, adequate facilities, client
flow and suitable policies including video/audio taping policies. If sites are pre-screened and
approved, this assists in ensuring that students will have beneficial learning and professional
experiences and potential problems in the placement subsystem can be prevented. For example,
knowing what type of client flow exists in an agency prevents putting students in a position to not
have enough clients and hours required during a practicum.
There are two main issues that emerge in the literature with relation to the placement
subsystem, and these are the issues of quantity of appropriate sites available to place students in and
quality of training and supervision students receive from onsite supervisors. Lack of high quality
30
sites and/or lack of quality of supervision impact the effectiveness of the training and practicum
experience.
Quantity and availability of sites. The data here are presented for doctoral level psychology
students seeking internship (completed after a practicum); there is no available data for master’s
level counselling psychology students in Canada. In 1998, the Association of Psychology
Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) implemented a computerized matching process to
match doctoral students to potential internship sites across Canada and the United States (Keilin,
Thorn, et al., 2000). The APPIC Match allows the profession to have a clearer picture of the
numbers of students applying for internship, number of available positions, and numbers of unplaced
applicants (Keilin et al., 2000). Since the inception of the APPIC Match, Keilin et al. (2000) report
that the numbers of internship positions (with the APPIC match) are now nearly balanced (demand =
supply of sites). In 1999-2000, only 263 applicants didn’t find a match where as in previous years, it
was estimated nearly 400-500 applicants had been left unmatched. This process saves time for
students researching sites on their own and provides them with enough information to decide which
potential sites they may be interested in.
At this point, it is not known if quantity of placement sites is an issue for masters programs and
given its importance in training, this would be very beneficial to know. At the master’s level, there is
no similar matching system and counsellor educators and students navigate and manage potential
placement sites on their own. A similar matching system may be beneficial to ensure sufficient
numbers of quality practicum placements for these students.
Quality of site supervision. Overwhelmingly, the literature focuses on the many issues of
supervision and its impact on the quality of training at the practicum and internship level. Ward and
House (1998) state, “Counseling supervision is central to both counselor education and to the
31
ongoing professional development of counselors” (Counselling supervision, ¶ 2). They state skill
enhancement is important, but it is the supervision process which “encourages greater self-
awareness’ and fosters an integrated professional and personal identity related to the roles and tasks
of counselors (Holloway, 1995)” (Ward & House, Counselling supervision, ¶ 2).
The definition of supervision utilized in this project is defined as a “…teaching procedure in
which an experienced person aids a less experienced person in the acquisition of a body of
knowledge and experience that will foster competence and skill in handling therapeutic situations”
(Kurpius & Gibson, 1991, Ethical issues in supervising, ¶3). Goodyear and Bernard (1998) note that
supervision, as a component of training generally refers to a student engaging in counselling
activities with real clients in a counselling setting being supervised outside the university
environment.
Training of supervisors. A major theme emerging in the literature, that could be a barrier to
effective training during a practicum/internship placement, is the lack of training of supervisors.
Johnson and Stewart (2000) state, “In contrast to our knowledge about the theory and practice of
psychotherapy, where we know a great deal, the literature on clinical supervision remains in its
infancy (Watkins, 1997b)” (Johnson & Stewart, ¶1).
Johnson and Stewart (2000) conducted a national study on the background preparation of
clinical supervision, workplace support for supervision, and satisfaction with current supervisory
load. They sent 357 surveys to 63 sites (28 academic settings, 35 service settings) across Canada
listed in the 1997 CCPPP Directory of Pre- and Post-Doctoral Internships in Clinical Psychology.
They received 156 responses (43.7%) from a total of 45 sites (71.4%) from every province listed in
the CPPP directory with 20 academic sites (n=28) and 26 of the service sites (n=35) responding. The
main finding of the research was that of the 156 clinical supervisors in academic or service settings
32
across Canada, almost two-thirds of the respondents had received no formal training in supervision.
In fact, 63% had selected 1 (“not at all”) on a 7-point Likert scale in regards to the extent of their
training in supervision in graduate school and 19% had selected the next lowest value. Most felt
inadequately prepared to supervise; the respondents who reported feeling somewhat prepared to
supervise had received some training in supervision in graduate school.
Although supervision training was low in graduate school, 55.1% of the respondents indicated
that their initial supervision was supervised and this “supervision of supervision” was perceived as
moderately helpful. They also found many supervisors engaged in supervisor self-study (e.g., books,
workshops) to enhance their supervision knowledge. One of the most important factors that
contributed to the supervisor’s self-study activities was the encouragement and support of the work
place environment. Johnson and Stewart (2000) also confirmed that supervisors in academic settings
were more likely to supervise novice therapists at the practicum level where as those supervisors in
service settings tended to supervise more advanced therapists at the internship level. Finally, the
respondents suggested their ideas for improvements to enhance supervision and these were, (a)
increasing the amount of time available for supervision (b) receiving more training in supervision (c)
peer supervision (d) increased recognition for the supervisory role (e) more support in supervisory
role and, (f) addressing supervisee developmental issues including the remediation of impaired
supervisees and increasing trainees’ background preparation for clinical practice. Johnson and
Stewart concluded that clinical supervisors need and ask for increased training in supervision in
graduate school and through continuing education.
Borders and Bernard (1991) reported that many American writers have also made calls for
more systematic training in clinical supervision such as Hart & Falvey, 1987; Hess & Hess, 1983;
and Lumsden, Grosslight, Loveland, & Williams, 1988 (as cited in Borders & Bernard). Borders and
33
Bernard discuss a draft of a standardized curriculum for training supervisors. prepared by a group of
counsellor educators, practitioners, researchers in the field of supervision and supervisors across
many settings. The committee established three main threads in the resulting curriculum, which were
self-awareness, theoretical and conceptual knowledge and skills and techniques. The seven core
curriculum areas were: (a) models of supervision, (b) counselor development, (c) supervision
methods and techniques, (d) supervisory relationship, (e) ethical, legal and professional regulatory
issues, (f) evaluation and, (g) executive (administrative) skills.
The authors stated the implementation of this guide will contribute to curriculum planning,
assist in establishing standards of supervision for practica in counselling education, contribute to a
supervisor credential, and stimulate further research on supervisor training. It could also provide a
means to assess supervisor competency. Canadian data on training programs for supervisors are
unavailable.
In Canada, CACEP states site supervisors must, (a) have a master’s degree in counselling, (b) a
minimum of two years professional experience, (c) knowledge of the program’s expectation,
requirements and evaluation procedures for students and, (d) reputable competence (CCA, 2005a).
In terms of specific training and/or supervisory approaches, there are no national standards other
than the minimum requirements.
Counselling Profession Subsystem
All counselling education programs including students, faculty and placement setting
subsystems and related professional counselling organizations, associations and bodies exist within
the larger context of professional counselling. It is professional associations that set guidelines, and
standards for the counselling profession and masters’ level counselling academic programs. CACEP
34
accreditation standards will be discussed below as part of the Canadian professional subsystem along
with the CPA accreditation standards and regional licensing requirements in Canada.
CCA Council on Accreditation of Counsellor Education Programs (CACEP). At the
supervised practice level, CACEP states that practicum’s in counselling education are likely the most
critical experiences of any program (CCA, 2005a). They set ten guidelines for a practicum/internship
and these are included in Appendix A. Some of these standards in terms of hours and site supervisor
qualifications have been discussed. Other highlights are that students complete an initial practicum
with a minimum of 100 supervised hours. Half of these hours must be in direct client contact and
during this practicum; students should receive a minimum of one hour of direct supervision per week
and 1.5 hours of group supervision from a faculty member and/or a supervisor under the supervision
of a faculty member. For the final practicum, students must complete 400 hours of supervised
practice with 200 hours spent in direct client contact. These 200 hours should include 160 hours in
individual client contact and 40 hours in-group work. Although CACEP does not specify the number
of required supervision hours during the 400-hour practicum, the standard for supervision may be
the same as the requirement for the 100-hour initial practicum. During the second practicum students
should also become familiar with a variety of professional activities and upon completion; a formal
evaluation from a program faculty member in consultation with the site supervisor should be
conducted. It is recommended that faculty and site supervisors’ roles are clearly defined and it is also
recommended that practicum supervisors use a combination of methods to evaluate (direct
supervision, video, audio, client and peer reactions). Again, standards for site supervision are, (a)
minimum of masters degree in counselling (b) two years professional counselling experience (c)
knowledge of program’s expectations (d) and reputed competence.
35
At an individual level, counsellors can certify as counsellor through the Canadian Counselling
Certification process (CCA, 2005b). Among course criteria, a student who wishes to certify as a
counsellor is expected by the CCA (2005b) to have obtained a minimum of 120 hours of supervised
practice in direct client contact. The primary objectives of the individual counsellor certification
process is to promote professional accountability and visibility; to identify to the public and
professional peers that specific counselling professional standards have been met; and to encourage
the continued growth and development of counsellors (CCA, 2005b).
Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) and Regional Licensing Requirements. The CPA
(2002a) also maintains accreditation standards for the education and training of students and
institutions albeit from a doctoral level and currently the CPA has accredited three programs: the
University of Alberta, the University of British Columbia and McGill University (in Lalande, 2004).
From a licensing perspective in Canada, the regional psychological associations are responsible for
licensing and setting provincial standards and according to Lalande, these boards are usually more
closely affiliated with the CPA. Despite this affiliation, there is a great variety in terms of setting
criteria for licensing and setting educational and training requirements across the jurisdictions;
however, 2/3 of the 12,000 registered psychologists in Canada, are licensed at the masters level
through their regional boards (Lalande). It would seem imperative that regionally, counselling
educational programs would strive to develop master’s programs to meet minimum practicum and
supervised practice requirements where possible in fulfilling their own regional licensing
requirements.
Jobs and Potential Placement Sites. Counselling practicum experiences could prepare students
for the types of jobs and activities that graduates will engage in. Hiebert and Uhlemann (1993)
surveyed 300 registered members of the CPA and the counsellor educator’s chapter of the Canadian
36
Guidance Counselling Association (CGCA) and found that counselling psychologists work in a
number of settings such as academia, schools or university settings, and private practice. The largest
category of client concerns which counselling psychologists addressed were remedial and these
client concerns included issues such as unemployment, relationship problems, bereavement, abuse,
chronic illness, career concerns, stress and anxiety, low self-esteem, and special issues (Hiebert &
Uhlemann). The second largest category of client issues was preventive and included adolescents
with career concerns, students with low self-esteem and special needs clients. Lalande (2004) also
cites a more recent survey of counsellor graduates (1990-1998) from a Master of Educational
Counselling program in Ontario. Smith and Drodge (as cited in Lalande) found that these graduates
worked in the following settings: “…schools, community agencies, colleges, universities,
government, medical/rehabilitation settings, private practice, and industry” (Lalande, 279). The
professional counsellors surveyed reported participating in the following work activities:
personal and career counselling offered individually and in groups, intake and assessment,
academic advising, crisis intervention, staff training and development, administration,
standardized testing, research and program evaluation, academic teaching, family and couple’s
counselling, clinical supervision, and rehabilitation counselling. Counsellors reported to
provide services most frequently to adults. They served adolescents, children and elders in
decreasing order of frequency (Lalande, 279).
Such information regarding where counsellors are employed and what types of activities they
engage in is useful for the counsellor educator to know in seeking practicum placement sites.
Code of Ethics. Other profession factors, which may impact the PIS, are the CCA Code of
Ethics (Schulz, 2000) and the Canadian Psychological Code of Ethics (CPA, 2001). In the CCA code
of ethics for example, the ethical articles in section F list 11 ethical principles for counsellor
37
education, training and supervision (CCA, 2000). The CPA (2001) incorporates supervision ethical
issues amongst the four overarching principles and the author found 32 direct and indirect ethical
standards in respect to the training and supervision of students. Part of the role of the practicum
coordinator would be to ensure that students, faculty and site supervisors are adhering to these Codes
of Ethics and promptly addressing the necessary first and/or second order changes to maintain sound
ethical practice in the PIS.
Socio-cultural-political subsystem
I have included this as a subsystem although it is not included in the original PIS (Pitts &
Miller, 1990). All of the practicum subsystems in the PIS exist within a wider context including
political, legal, and health care policies that can impact the training of students. These include, (a)
new, and developing mobility acts across Canada and the U.S. (Gauthier, 2002; Lalande, 2004)
which could affect type of training and licensing procedures, (b) new national and provincial privacy
laws which could affect how students share their work (for example through the use of video tapes)
(Lalande, 2004), and, (c) new changes in national and provincial Health Care Acts which could
impact funding and ultimately training, research and service in counselling psychology. All of these
broader socio-political forces may create new challenges or barriers in achieving and maintaining
high quality practicum sites and some of these will be described in detail.
Privacy Laws. It is beyond the scope of this project to discuss all provincial policies and laws
that may impact the profession of psychology and training. However, these privacy laws and
legislation may greatly impact internet based counsellor education programs and they have the
“potential to limit the use and sharing of technological communications, such as video taping
students’ counselling practice in counsellor education practicum placements” (Lalande,2004, 283).
In terms of the internet based training, Lalande recommends the profession advocate in regards to
38
privacy legislation issues. Limits regarding video taping of counselling sessions have significant
implications for the sound supervision and evaluation of students’ counselling practice with clients
at practicum sites. CACEP recommends the use of audio and/or video tape of students work, and
unless faculty can regularly attend practicum sites to provide live supervision, the means and
methods of effective evaluation could be limited by such privacy acts (CCA, 2005a).
Commission on the future of health care in Canada (CFHCC). One theme in the broader socio-
political landscape in the Canadian psychological literature is the future role of psychologists in a
different and broader health care system as outlined by the Romanow report for the CFHCC (2002).
The primary goal of the CFHCC is the sustainability (costs) and the delivery of high quality health
care to all Canadians. Briefly, some of the major recommendations for change are, (a) a move
beyond the traditional Medicare model which evolves around doctors and hospitals, (b) more
comprehensive health care programs with a focus on wellness and prevention, (c) enhanced and
extended home care and community services, (d) better access and services for remote, rural regions
and the Aboriginal population, (e) collaboration between healthcare providers, and (f) accountability
to the public.
Initially, the CPA (CPA, 2002b) conducted an analysis of this report and as Lalande (2004)
noted, they expressed concerns that the psychological aspects of health were not included in this
report. Romonow and Marchildon (2003) and Romanow and Marchildon (2004) responded to
concerns raised by the CPA (2003) and their subsequent advocacy by discussing how the proposed
changes could greatly include psychologists on publicly funded health teams. They saw
psychologists’ playing a role in: (a) providing wellness, prevention and educational services (b)
being case managers for extended home care and community services (c) and in providing high
quality and effective counselling services and interventions for a variety of mental health issues, thus
39
assisting in the reduction of expensive drug costs often associated with the treatment of these issues.
Romanow and Marchildon (2003) agreed with Dobson et al. (1999) that psychologists should
develop treatment lists and practice guidelines for a host of mental health services in order to be
accountable and provide evidence based treatments to qualify for public funding. They also agreed
with Arnett, Nicholson, and Breault (2004) in stating that psychologists may need to expand their
roles and training if they wish to have a greater role in the future of Canada’s health care system, (in
Romanow & Marchildon, 2004)
Although referring to clinical psychology, Arnett (2001) stated that over the last 25 years, the
curriculum and training for psychologists has maintained a unidimensional focus on mental health
and the current education is training students more for the past than the future. He states other
professions, such as medicine, nursing, pharmacy, social work, and occupational therapy, have
broadened their approach to health and have embraced broader training and more diversified roles.
Although efforts in the mental health area should continue, the education and training of
psychologists must expand greatly into other aspects of physical health where psychological
interventions can be effective such as in lifestyle management (e.g. diet, exercise and control of
substance abuse). Arnett, Nicholson, and Breault (2004) stated this training should occur early on in
the educational process and in health settings. Ultimately, from their perspective, “Ignoring major
areas of health in educating future psychologists will significantly increase the risk of the field losing
credibility with both the Canadian public and ultimately the governments that support psychology”
(Arnett, et al, 2004, ¶10).
Dobson (2002) and Dobson, Johnston, Mikail and Hunsley (1999), also advocate for the role of
psychologists being further expanded and integrated into the new health care system. They believe
psychologists’ should be more trained in empirically supported treatments (EST) and that public
40
funding should be limited to those psychologists who are trained in and specialize in the delivery
EST for mental health concerns. In terms of training and accreditation, Dobson (2002) stated, he
didn’t believe that counselling psychologists are taught EST as much as clinical psychologists.
Dobson, et al. (1999) offers many recommendations on how to integrate the training, practice and
use of EST in the profession of psychology and in training. Dobson, et al. fear as the Canadian
health care system restructures, professional psychology risks being marginalized unless psychology
organizations make an effort to develop practice guidelines of evidence based practice.
Many American psychologists (e.g. Humphreys, 2000; & Knapp & Keller, 2001) also call for
an expanded role of psychology into new settings, beyond the traditional psychotherapy clinic (e.g.
government agencies, mental health advocacy groups, business) which embrace more diversified
roles in training and practice (e.g. evaluation, prevention, public policy and program development).
Humphreys believes even if there are no direct clients, these roles and hours should be counted
towards the practicum hours. As suggested in by the above Canadian psychologists (Arnett, 2001, &
Dobson, 2002), Humphreys stated the profession of psychology’s long term growth is questionable
if the profession and training programs don’t expand into new territories where psychology can
contribute to many areas of human welfare. If the views and ideas of the Canadian and American
writers are realized, significant second order changes would be required in counselling education
programs and the PIS. Problems could arise in the PIS if despite significant forces and changes in the
broader socio-cultural-political subsystem, counsellor educators fail to respond appropriately and
change and adapt.
Summary. The PIS exists in the wider socio-cultural-political landscape which can potentially
influence training programs and ultimately affect the facilitation of practicum placements. Privacy
laws were discussed in regards to how they may impose guidelines and restrictions surrounding the
41
use of students’ video taping their work with clients at a placement site. This has implications for
monitoring and evaluating students’ counselling performance and could pose concerns for distance
counselling education programs where it is not always possible for faculty to conduct supervision at
a placement site. Recent changes in the political landscape of national health care could also impact
the education and training of psychologists. In light of these changes, there have been
recommendations by clinical psychology for the psychology profession to expand into broader and
more general areas of health and to increase the training and use of EST in training and in practice.
Canadian counselling psychologists’ perspectives on these issues are lacking. If these proposed
changes are embraced, this could have implications for training and the practicum placement as the
type of setting and type of practicum activity may vary and change. For example, if counselling
training and practice expands into new and broader general health areas or other areas discussed, this
could potentially enhance the numbers of practicum placements obtained and secured. If there is a
limited response by counsellor educators and/or the profession to such changes in socio-cultural
political system, in adapting to the changes, then this could potentially restrict the facilitation of
practicum placements.
Finally, American perspectives on the expansion of the profession and potential
practicum/internship settings and activities were briefly highlighted and again, these areas represent
potential practicum/internship settings and activities. There is no similar literature in Canada, which
reflects this position, and it would be interesting to explore if Canadian counsellor educators views
on this. On the one hand, the profession of psychology would be broadened, but it could become
more diluted as a specialty, on the other hand; expansion into these areas could increase the quantity
of potential practicum placements and represent an appropriate response to the changing socio-
cultural-political landscape.
42
Summary of the Literature Review
The PIS captures how the practicum component of counsellor education is impacted and
interacts with many internal (within the academic program) and external (beyond the academic
program) factors and subsystems. With the addition of a socio-cultural-political subsystem, this
framework provides an effective means to organize research and literature. Although any faculty
member can coordinate and manage the PIS, it is recommended that this be done by a practicum
coordinator. Most importantly, should any problem or fluctuation arise in any of the subsystems, the
practicum coordinators must respond effectively and deliver the appropriate first and/or second order
change to restore functioning of the PIS and ensure the effective facilitation of practicum
placements.
The review of the literature related to the Master’s level practicum suggested a variety of
factors that facilitate or create barriers for high quality practicum placements. In the student
subsystem, issues range on a continuum from student generated (e.g. student
impairment/incompetence) to system generated issues (e.g. unclear roles for site supervisors). A
number of strategies (first and second order changes) were suggested to prevent student problems
from arising in the PIS, including screening policies, assessment of student readiness for practicum,
preparing students with a pre-practicum, monitoring and evaluating, and addressing student issues
during practicum.
In the faculty subsystem, having one practicum coordinator can prevent problems as he or she
take on the role to obtain sites, write practicum/internship site agreements, strive to meet other
faculty needs by providing a structure with clear guidelines, create an environment of open
communication, and effectively match students to faculty supervisors. There was a lack of research
regarding the faculty subsystem.
43
Regarding the university subsystem, the PIS must operate by the bylaws, legal requirements
and policies of the university. Such policies and legal requirements could be barriers to achieving
high quality practicum placements particularly if sites view the guidelines as cumbersome. Distance
counselling education programs may pose new challenges in obtaining and facilitating practicum
placements because the role of the practicum coordinator takes on more complexity as he/she seeks
to manage the PIS on a much broader, national level and students in rural or remote areas may find it
difficult to acquire high quality practicum placements in areas where limited counselling services
exist.
In the placement subsystem the practicum coordinator can strive to meet placement setting
needs (clear guidelines, open communication, effective matching of student to site), to enhance the
likelihood that settings will accept and maintain practicum students. Practicum coordinators should
screen sites themselves to ensure the provision of a quality practicum placement in terms of client
hours, activities, and supervision. There are two important issues regarding practicum settings: the
quantity of available sites and the quality and quantity of supervision. The fewer high quality sites to
choose from, in terms of client hours and counselling activities offered the more barriers that exist
for quality practicum placements. The lack of supervisor training can also create barriers in
achieving a high quality practicum experience.
National regulatory bodies influence and shape the profession of counselling and the training
within the counselling profession subsystem. CACEP has standards for supervised practice however;
there are currently no accredited masters programs in Canada. Individual counsellor certification
standards, licensing requirements, and the Code of Ethics, all influence the nature of the practicum
placement and counsellor educators must balance these professional standards within the PIS. The
effectiveness in carrying out this task could have implications for the facilitation of practicum
44
placements. Lastly, research on where Canadian counselling psychologists work (settings), with
whom (client type) and with what issues may inform and guide counsellor educators in seeking
potential practicum placement settings.
Finally, the overarching socio-cultural political subsystem from a national perspective is the
wider context that can influence the nature of the practicum and the functioning of the
practicum/internship. Privacy policies and laws may limit the use of vide taping of students
counselling interactions with clients thus impacting the process of performance evaluation at a site
and potentially limiting how counsellor educators evaluate practicum students. Changing national
health care policies may impact the profession and the training of counsellors by broadening the
profession and training into general health areas in education, wellness and prevention. The use and
practice of EST is also increasingly recommended in the counselling profession. If the training of
psychologists does not change in light of the health care revisions, the profession of psychology as a
whole could be threatened. All of these broader forces (government policies and acts, changing
market place) provide opportunities and barriers for the training of counselling psychologists and
shape and influence the nature of the practicum setting and activities.
It is evident that there are many gaps in the research regarding the PIS and the various
subsystems. For example, there is no direct research on the university subsystem and very little
research on how faculty and/or practicum coordinators manage their roles and/or what their
perspectives are on obtaining and maintaining practicum placements. There is also no known
Canadian research on issues of student incompetence/impairment and how this may impact the PIS
and no Canadian research on screening and selection procedures, practicum preparation, and student
remediation and dismissal policies. There is also a lack of research regarding the quantity and quality
of placement sites in Canada from master’s counselling educators’ perspectives and a similar lack of
45
research in the quality and quantity of site supervisors available for master’s level students. In terms
of the socio-cultural political subsystem, there was some literature and research presented, albeit
from a clinical psychology or American viewpoint and it would be interesting to explore Canadian
counsellor educators’ perspectives on this. Other research gaps have been discussed. What is missing
in all of this is the Canadian counsellor educators’ perspective at the master’s level. It would be
worthy to explore some of their perspectives initially particularly in regards to the nature and
facilitation of the practicum placements.
The primary research questions in this exploratory study were: What are some of the issues and
barriers in obtaining high quality practicum placements in Canada for master’s level counselling
students? What are some of the facilitative factors? How do Canadian counsellor educators assist
students in obtaining high quality practicum placements? How do Canadian counsellor educators’
perceive the current state of professional training and what recommendations do they offer in
addressing the issue (overcome barriers) of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum
placements? This initial exploratory study may inform future research conducted on this topic.
46
CHAPTER III: Methodology
Sample and Participants
A survey was developed and distributed to Canadian Counsellor Educators. The purposes of
this survey were to better understand the topic of practicum placements from Canadian counsellor
educators’ points of view and inform future research in this area. One hundred and forty-six
counsellor educators in the Education Chapter of the Canadian Counselling Association were invited
to participate in a web-based survey (Appendix D) in June of 2004.
The survey was distributed electronically through the Canadian Counselling Association
member list serve in June 2004 (see Appendix B for the research invitation) and two reminder
invitation notices to participate were sent in September and October 2004 through the same list
serve. The sample was a purposive, theoretical and homogeneous as those participating were likely
to have expertise and experience in managing and coordinating the practicum placements.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to get information on how many of the 20 English speaking
universities offering a master’s program in counselling psychology or educational psychology, were
on the CCA list serve. There were three responses from a potential of 20 (15%) English speaking
universities. Despite the low number of returned surveys, the data is useful for the purposes of this
exploratory research. Of the three respondents one was from Central Canada, one was from Western
Canada and one was from Eastern Canada, providing a cross regional perspective of the nation. To
protect their identity (and upon their request), I will label them A, B, and C when reporting results.
Data Collection
If members were interested, they selected the link to the cover letter, and if still interested, they
selected the submit button to the informed consent form (see Appendix C for the consent form). If
they agreed to the terms, participants selected the submit button that led them to the survey. The
47
survey combined open/closed questions seeking descriptive information in the following areas:
demographics, securing practicum sites, the nature of practicum placements, videotaping and privacy
policies and general issues (barriers and facilitative factors) and recommendations. The use of open-
ended questions was appropriate because of the exploratory nature of this research.
Upon completion of the survey, participants selected a submit button that transferred their
responses to a database at the University of Calgary with the Educational Technology Department.
Access to the database was password protected and limited to the researchers. The Survey Kit
(University of Calgary, Educational Technology Department, 2004) program accepts and stores
online surveys in a safe and secure fashion and allows one to view and download results in a tabular
database format. Prior to the survey being distributed a variable key was created (with a logical label
and numerical value for questions/responses) and integrated into the database so that the survey
results could be sorted and accepted according to the key variables. Once the data was collected and
stored, the data was downloaded and manually organized according to the survey questions, since
the program automatically sorted all data categories numerically and alphabetically.
Theoretical orientation and procedure for data analysis
The research combined quantitative (frequency counts) and qualitative analyses of the written
responses to the open ended questions. Qualitative analysis is appropriate as a means to analyze the
text responses in this exploratory study. The following quote seems fitting for the research in this
unexplored territory: ‘“We undertake qualitative inquiry not so much from our recognition that we
do not know all the answers to our problems but rather from an appreciation of the fact that we do
not know all the questions (Edson, 1988, p, 45)”’ (as cited in Burge, 1994, 25).
The written text data was interpreted from a constructivist/interpretive theoretical orientation.
In this research, we sought detailed information on the perspectives of counsellor educators in
48
placing students in high quality practicum placements in terms of barriers and facilitative factors. I
have followed and combined the qualitative analysis principles outlined by Tesch (as cited in
Mertens, 1998), the steps in qualitative analysis as outlined by Miles and Huberman (as cited in
Mertens), and a grounded theory analysis approach by Glaser and Strauss (as cited in Rennie, 2000).
It should be noted that grounded theory analysis is generally recommended for 30-50 interviews (in
Mertens, 1998), however, the general approach of analyzing the data and generating higher-level
themes proved useful in the research here.
Briefly, Tesch stated (as cited in Mertens, 1998) that in qualitative analysis, the researcher
carefully studies all the data, seeking differences, similarities, correspondence, categories, concepts,
ideas and themes, and then analyzes the logic of previous analytical outcomes, categories, and
themes searching for weakness or gaps in the data. The analysis is systematic and comprehensive
and as Guba and Lincoln recommend (as cited in Mertens), continues until no new information or
categories emerge.
All reflective activities and steps were carefully kept track of and are reported here. The data
analysis began with reading all the data at once. As per Glaser and Strauss suggestions (as cited in
Rennie, 2000), I made personal thematic reflection (theoretical memoing) notes for each response on
the second reading, in the bottom margin, noting ideas, questions and thoughts about the data. Then,
for each response, I wrote out key phrases and ideas in the margin and repeated this process again,
dividing the key phrases and ideas into smaller and meaningful units and words. I recorded key
words in the right hand margin and, as Rennie describes Glaser and Strauss (1967) grounded theory
analysis, these fragments of texts were then sorted and grouped into descriptive categories
“…according to shared meanings, and the meaning of each cluster is represented as a category”
(Rennie, 485). Going over the key words and ideas again, I sorted through the data to find similar
49
words, relationships, patterns and themes, looking for distinct differences in subgroups and common
sequences (in Mertens) in arriving at the initial categories. These categories were later combined into
a “…higher order synthesis in the form of…patterns or themes,” (Tesch, in Mertens, 1998, 351).
I met with two individuals (Dr. Vivian Lalande, my supervisor and a fellow graduate student
conducting similar research) to check my interpretation of these higher order categories and themes.
This was accomplished by sharing the open-ended survey responses with them, providing a list of
the ideas and themes, and seeking their input on what ideas and themes they derived from particular
responses. In most instances, we had similar ideas and themes and in a few instances, I incorporated
their ideas. I went back to the data and again, systematically began to group some of the themes into
higher order categories and themes again, looking across all the data at once. This analysis of the
written responses resulted initially in identifying eighteen themes or categories with corresponding
ideas and sub-themes for each category (Appendix E).
Following the method of analysis of Glaser & Strauss, (as cited in Rennie, 2000), I repeated the
analysis on these 18 descriptive categories to build and refine these categories into higher order
abstract categories that subsumed the lower descriptive ones (in Rennie). These higher order
categories gathered the shared meanings and relations (in Rennie) amongst the initial 18 categories
and resulted in five higher order themes and one category unique to one respondent. The resulting
five higher order themes were: Government regulations and policies, agency policies, quality and
quantity of placement settings, quality and quantity of supervision, and faculty and/or practicum
coordinator. There was one unique category, accreditation, which will be commented on as it
appeared central to one of respondent comments. These five themes and one category were written
beside the corresponding 18 original categories and themes, and often, one of the 18 themes applied
to more than one category demonstrating how each theme inter-relates and impacts the other. For
50
example, the level of student satisfaction at a practicum placement is related to and a sub theme of
the broader themes quality and quantity of placement setting, quality of site and faculty supervision,
and interpersonal dynamics between supervisor and student. This is reflective of the grounded theory
approach whereby the understandings of the text are represented in the form of categories and the
relations among them (Rennie) thus each theme and sub theme interacts and affects the other. As
Rennie states eloquently, “…the understanding of the whole of the text influences the understanding
of a part of it, and the understanding of each part in turn influences the understanding of the whole”
(484).
Finally, I then repeated the process by listing the five main themes and one category and
grouped the 18 sub themes and categories under the appropriate broader, higher order theme and/or
category. The list of the five higher order themes and related sub themes, along with the
accreditation category is included in Appendix F.
In addressing the credibility of this data analysis, I followed Mertens (1998) suggestion of
using peer debriefing as one strategy. These two individuals assisted me in challenging and checking
the list of original ideas, categories and themes. In addressing transferability as Mertens states,
“…the burden of transferability is on the reader” (182) to determine how applicable this particular
research context is to another and I attempted to address this by providing thick descriptions and
actual quotes thus enhancing transferability. The description of the method of analysis provided
contributes to enhancing the dependability of my procedures and methods (Mertens). Stainback &
Stainback (as cited in Mertens) define authenticity as presenting a balanced view of all perspectives
and beliefs and in this case, authenticity was addressed simply since there were only three responses
to report so all their responses were fairly presented and included.
51
CHAPTER IV: Results
The research utilized both quantitative (frequency analyses) and qualitative analysis of the
survey responses. The socio-demographic information regarding the responding counsellor educator
programs and frequency analyses are presented first, followed by the results of the qualitative
analysis of the written responses.
Quantitative Analysis
General Counselling Program Information. As noted earlier, three universities (one from
Eastern Canada, one from Central Canada, and one from Western Canada) responded, providing a
small, somewhat, regional perspective. The counselling specialties, reported were (with the number
of responses in brackets) school counseling (3), career counselling (2), counselling psychology (1)
and community psychology (1).
Of the three respondents, one reported having a specific practicum coordinator, one reported
that professors coordinated their own and one did not respond. The numbers of counselling students
placed in practica each year varied from 10 to 85 students, with most programs having some
fluctuations each year. For example, respondent A stated that in 2001 and 2002, there were 60
students placed. This increased to 85 students for 2003 and it was expected to decrease to 50
students for 2004. Respondent B stated they place 10 students each year (2001-2003) with expected
placements increasing to 16 students for 2004. Respondent C stated they place 20 students each year
from 2001 to 2003 and it was expected to place the same number of students in 2004. Two of the
respondents indicated they would be changing the numbers of students admitted to their programs.
Respondent A stated they would be admitting 60 students in the fall of 2004 and didn’t comment on
the reasons why. Respondent C reported expected decreases for September 2005 as they are moving
towards an accredited program and the program’s current resources cannot handle 20 students. As
52
such, their new admission goals will be 10 full time and 18 part time students for September 2005.
Respondent B reported no change, they admit 20 students every second year.
The Nature of the Practicum. Expected student practicum hours at each program ranged from
10 to 32 hours per week. Respondent C reported the expected practicum hours of client contact (32
hours per week) for the fall of 2005 as the program intends to move towards accreditation.
Respondent A stated they required students have 15 hours per week of client contact at a practicum
site; respondent B stated 10 to 12 hours per week of client contact at a practicum site. The total
number of practicum weeks for each program was: 13 to 15 weeks (A); 13 weeks (B); and 15 weeks
(C). Calculating the number of expected client hours during practicum for each program over the
number of expected weeks results in a range of total client hours from 130 hours to 480 hours. If one
removes the program that is intending to accredit (32 hours per week over 15 weeks), the range for
total client hours during the practicum is 130 to 225 hours. For respondent A, the total possible hours
are: 195 hours, 210 hours, and/or 225 hours. For respondent B the total possible number of hours is:
130 hours; 143 hours; and/or 156 hours.
In terms of supervision hours per week per student, Respondent A stated, 2.5 hours faculty
supervision and one hour of on-site supervision; respondent B stated 1 hour per week; and
respondent C stated as per accreditation guidelines which is 1.5 hours per week.
The respondents were asked to check the type of counselling activities they desire students to
partake in during practicum and here are the response frequencies: intakes (2), assessments (2), crisis
intervention (2), psycho-educational activities (2) and testing (1). In the open-ended response for this
question, one stated they desire general individual counselling experience, and one stated they desire
group and personal counselling with minimal administrative consultations with outside groups and
agencies.
53
In regards to testing experience, one respondent reported administering tests as a desired
counselling practicum activity and two reported interpretation of tests as desired counselling
practicum activities. One of the respondents specified the types of tests as being mostly Schedule B
tests (Strong inventory, CPI and MBTI).
Two of the respondents stated students at practicum placements engage in group counselling
activities and the type of group appears to be related to the setting including relationship, anger
management, grief, parenting, obsessive compulsive disorder, defiant children, career, social skills
training, and assertiveness groups. One counsellor educator didn’t indicate whether practicum
students participated in groups. In acquiring practicum placement settings, two of the counsellor
educators stated they had set agreements with practicum sites. All three stated using the following
processes for acquiring practicum placements for students (a) Faculty approaches individuals in
agencies/organizations, (b) historically there are set agreements with agencies/organizations, and (c)
encouraging students to approach potential sites as processes for acquiring practicum placements.
Each respondent reported different placement settings as being difficult to access. Respondent
A reported colleges, universities, and hospitals as being difficult settings to access for practicum
placements. Respondent B reported primary and secondary schools (elementary, junior high, high
school, colleges and universities), private clinics and non-profit clinics as being difficult to access.
Respondent C stated hospitals and non-profit clinics were difficult to access for practicum placement
settings. In the open-ended part of this question, one respondent stated there is a preference to place
students in settings that serve a broad range of client issues.
Some types of client groups and issues were more difficult to access in placement settings than
other types of client groups and issues for each respondent. For example, accessing placement
settings, which serviced primarily individuals (2), couples/family (2), specialized (1) and group (1),
54
were reported as being difficult client groups/issues to access for practicum students. It should be
noted that one category, educational counselling, did not show up due to a technical difficulty.
Unfortunately, when transferring the results from the data base, this particular cell was lost when
copying the data. I attempted to contact the respondents and successfully contacted two: one
reported that they had checked educational counselling as a difficult client group/issue to access in
practicum settings; the other reported that they had not checked this category. It is unknown if the
third respondent checked this category. No one mentioned other client groups.
All three counsellor educators indicated they were able to successfully place students 90% to
100% of the time in practicum placements. On a 4-point scale from “not satisfied at all” to “highly
satisfied”, one of the counsellor educators reported that generally students are highly satisfied with
their practicum placements, and two reported students generally being moderately satisfied with
practicum placements.
Summary of Quantitative Results
From the above results, there is some commonality and some differences amongst the
responses. There was similarity reported in the methods utilized in acquiring practicum placements
as all three stated that (a) faculty approaches placement settings, (b) historical agreements are
utilized in placing students, and (c) students are encouraged to approach placement settings on their
own.. There was also agreement on the percentage of time each counsellor educators’ reported as
being able to successfully place students in practicum sites (90-100%). One counselling program
stated they had a specific practicum coordinator to organize and manage placement settings, one
stated each professor coordinates their own.
There was a wide range between counselling programs in the numbers of students placed in
practica from 2001 to expected numbers for 2004, probably due to the size of region and the size of
55
the academic program (10 to 85). The number of students placed each year (2001 to expected 2004)
in practica varied and fluctuated within the counselling programs for two of the respondents.
Respondent A indicated the largest change in the numbers of students placed each year but did not
provide any information on this change. Respondent C reported a decrease in the numbers of
students being placed in a practicum placement for 2005 due to their intention to accredit and thus
reducing the numbers of students being admitted to the program.
The expected practicum hours and weeks also varied, and for respondent C, the expected
practicum hours for September 2005 (reported) was significantly higher (32 hours per week) than the
other two respondents and this is related to the intention to become an accredited program. If one
removes respondent C who reported accreditation practicum hours, there is still a range of 130 to
225 and this appears to depend on the variable hours per week for respondent B; and variable weeks
for respondent A. There was variance in the types of counselling activities that counsellor educators’
desire students to partake during practicum; types of settings that they find difficulty in placing
students; and types of client and client issues they find difficulty in placing practicum students with.
Students are generally satisfied with practicum placements as two reported moderate student
satisfaction and one reported high student satisfaction.
Qualitative Analysis
Below is a description of the one category and each of the five higher order themes and the sub
themes in relation to barriers and facilitative factors in obtaining and maintaining high quality
practicum placements. Identifying information has been removed and simply replaced with “our
province” in all quotes used to exemplify the themes.
Government regulation and policies. This theme incorporates ideas and words that reflect how
government regulation and policies can impact the facilitation of high quality practicum placements
56
and create barriers or impose restrictions. It incorporates the two sub themes of (a) how provincial
health policies can create barriers in accessing certain placements, and (b) how provincial privacy
laws influence students videotaping of work with clients at a placement site.
It seems that in Canada, provincial policies can regulate and impact counselling and other
professions in education and practice. For example one respondent here reported provincial health
policies created barriers in achieving high quality practicum placements in certain settings with
particular counselling activities as follows:
Mental health. Our province is governed by a health board that has deemed that social workers
at a bachelor’s level or master’s level can work in health settings. This limits our access to
addiction services, mental health services etc., it is an ongoing battle.
“Ongoing battle” seems to suggest that limited access to desired practicum placement settings
can be frustrating for educators who place practicum students. This same counsellor educator had
indicated a preference for (but found difficulty) placing students in hospitals and non-profit settings
and this may be related to this provincial health policy. It may also demonstrate in this case, how
provincial health care policies may create competition for placement settings amongst other related
disciplines; increasing demand on a perhaps a limited supply. This could create barriers in accessing
such practicum placements.
Privacy laws also seem to impact practicum placements in terms of how and if students’ can
record their work with clients at a practicum for faculty to view and evaluate. From the same
counsellor educator above, there was one comment in relation to provincial policies regarding the
limits and use of videotapes with clients. “Institutions which house young offenders will allow
taping here in our province, but the person cannot be seen in the video. As long as consent forms are
in order we are generally okay”. It appears that provincial regulation and policies allow taping, but
57
there are some restrictions in regards to minors and consent forms must be in place. Overall, this
doesn’t restrict the evaluation procedure, but it does reflect how privacy laws can impact evaluation
procedures in regards to video taping work with clients at a placement site.
Agency Policies. Agency policies also were identified as an influence on the nature and the
ability to obtain a high quality practicum experience. This theme refers to any agency polices or acts
(formal/informal) that created barriers to securing high quality practicum placements and/or agency
policies regarding privacy and videotapes of a client at a practicum site. It embraces the two sub
themes of agency policies regarding who they select as practicum students and agency policies
regarding if and how they can use videotapes of their work with clients at a practicum site.
An example of an inability to obtain high quality practicum placements due to agency policy
was stated as “…often agencies have policies that favour others like social workers do not favour
counselling students”. It appears that for this counsellor educator, some agency policies can create
barriers in achieving high quality practicum placements is. Agencies that favour and prefer students
from other disciplines limits access to certain placement settings and could create competition
amongst various disciplines that seek practicum placements.
Agency policy also seems to place restrictions about videotaping students’ work with clients.
For example, two counsellor educators spoke of videotape limitations during and at placement sites
due to agency policy as exemplified in the following quote.
In some settings, the agency does not allow tapes to leave the agency. This makes it impossible
to prepare effective case conferences. However, it does serve the primary needs (which are to
provide a mechanism by which individuals can review their own practice). In virtually all
cases, the agency requires consent/release forms to be signed, and in the odd setting, where that
is not an agency requirement, we make it a program requirement.
58
From this comment, the limited use of videotapes to record students work with clients (tape not
allowed to leave site) does not in and of itself pose a barrier to high quality practicum placements;
but it does create difficulty for faculty to view and evaluate students’ work. Consent forms were
mentioned as an agency and/or program requirement to allow students to videotape their work with
clients at a practicum site. It is unknown if agency policies or privacy may be unique to the agency
context, or influenced by the provincial and/or national policies and laws.
Quality and quantity of placement settings. What a potential placement setting can offer in
terms of hours, client flow, counselling activities, and facilities is also important to high quality
training. Quality of setting embraces some sub themes and these are: (a) criteria by which counsellor
educators reported approving a setting, (b) barriers regarding accessing high quality placement
settings including the quantity of settings available, (c) the quality of activities offered in a
placement setting that impact student satisfaction, and (d) recommendations for enhancing the
facilitation of high quality practicum placements.
In terms of qualifying criteria, it appears that the counselling programs approve sites on the
basis of the following criteria (a) the site supervisor’s qualifications and commitment to supervision;
(b) the nature of the counselling services offered with a preference for broad based services; (c) the
opportunity for students to engage in a variety of counselling activities, preferably with individuals
and some group work; and (d) whether sites can offer the required client hours as per accreditation
guidelines.
Although these are the site criteria by which placement settings are approved, it appears that
there is some difficulty in obtaining and maintaining placement settings that meet each criteria all of
the time. For example, there was a fairly consistent theme about the lack of qualified and trained
supervisors in placement settings as being a barrier to obtaining and ensuring a high quality
59
practicum placement experience and this is discussed in the following sub theme. There were also
barriers reported in accessing preferred settings and/or preferred various counselling activities. One
counsellor educator reported a preference for settings that provided counselling activities that
included “counselling families, victim/perpetrators of abuse, child and adolescent counselling,
mental health counselling” and yet they reported difficulty in accessing such populations and
settings which service these clients and issues. The same counsellor educator also reported that
occasionally (once or twice a year) when students cannot find a placement, faculty persist until a
placement is found, and this sometimes results in an acceptable placement but not necessarily a
preferred placement. Another respondent reported that barriers to obtaining high quality practicum
placements exist because there is a limited range of counselling services available in their small
region with high quality supervision. For this counsellor educator, the quantity of high quality
placement settings appears to be a direct barrier. In terms of client hours, for one respondent, it was
important that future placement settings be able to offer the required number of client hours for
students as these hours will increase through the accreditation process. It seems that in terms of
qualifying site criteria and counsellor educator preferences, there are some barriers in accessing high
quality placement settings some of the time and this is related to barriers surrounding a lack of
qualified and trained supervisors, accessing certain placement settings and/or certain counselling
activities, and sometimes barriers regarding the quantity of available placement settings.
Student satisfaction can also be affected by the quality of a placement setting in terms of client
hours and/or the type of counselling activities available. For example, one counsellor educator stated
“Students are happy when they see lots of clients. They love settings where they have lots of
personal counselling”. It appears that settings which can provide the client flow and hours and
desired counselling activities can influence a student’s satisfaction with the practicum experience.
60
In terms of recommendations to enhance the practicum placement process, a suggestion was
made about establishing a procedure to create a list or registry of approved sites. This registry could
assist students and counsellor educators in selecting sites that have already been approved to meet
certain placement setting and/or supervision criteria. There were no direct suggestions from any of
the respondents on how to address the quantity issue or limited number of available settings in a
region.
In summation, it appears that for these counsellor educators, there are some barriers in
accessing high quality practicum placements in terms of meeting site approval criteria and
preferences for types of clients and counselling activities. The quality of the placement site by the
nature of the counselling activities and amount and type of clients, may also impact student
satisfaction. There is also a quantity issue for one – a lack of sites available and a lack of qualified
supervisors in these settings for smaller regions.
Quality and Quantity of Supervision. The quality of supervision in terms of supervisors’
credentials, expertise, and commitment (time) to the supervision process in supervising counselling
students during a practicum is important for high quality training and the professional development
of student counsellors. The quality of supervision theme emerged from the responses here and it will
be described in terms of the following sub themes, (a) minimum criteria counsellor educators’ set for
site supervision, (b) the quality of supervision being a barrier in achieving high quality practicum
placements, (c) the quality and quantity of supervision as it impacts student satisfaction, (d) the
interpersonal factors between site supervisors and students that impact student satisfaction, (e)
faculty support and supervision, and (f) an insight and recommendation on how one counsellor
educator addresses the barrier of a lack of qualified supervisors.
61
It would appear the first step in ensuring high quality supervision is for counselling programs
to set minimum criteria and standards for site supervisors. All three respondents stated they required
site supervisors to possess a minimum of a master’s degree in counselling and/or a master’s degree
in a related field and a minimum of 2 to 5 years counselling experience. One counsellor educator
also stated that supervisors be willing to engage in the supervisory process, which suggests that on
site supervisors be willing to provide the time and commitment to their supervisory role with
practicum students.
Both of the respondents above indicated a lack of qualified supervisors as a barrier in achieving
high quality practicum placements, and one commented on the lack of trained supervisors in certain
settings in regards to student satisfaction. For example, one directly stated one of the obstacles in
placing students is due to a, “Lack of qualified supervisors in agencies or settings where services are
currently offered in our region”. It is important to note, that although site supervisors may meet the
minimum standard supervision criteria (a master’s degree and experience), this doesn’t seem to
always guarantee that a supervisor is trained, committed and engaged in the supervisory process.
The quality and quantity of supervision also impacts and affects student satisfaction during the
practicum placement. In terms of student satisfaction, one counsellor educator stated that the key
factor contributing to student satisfaction is “good supervision and mentorship”. Another counsellor
educator stated:
There is quite a bit of variety of student experience; some are highly satisfied and there is
usually one or two a year who are not at all satisfied. This reflects the limited number of
agency settings that employ highly qualified counsellors, who also have an interest in
professional development. The problem is most acute in educational settings, where many
counsellors have limited or no training.
62
It appears that in the few instances when students are not satisfied at all, it has been attributed
to the lack of quality supervision received that may be due to limited supervision training. It may
also be important for supervisors to be committed to the roles of supervising and assisting in
professional development.
Along with the qualifications of supervisors (being trained and interested in professional
development and providing good mentorship), the quantity of time supervisors spend with students
also impacts their satisfaction. For example, one of the counsellor educators stated that students
don’t like it when supervisors cancel sessions or when they are left on their own. Spending time with
a student maybe related to the supervisor’s commitment and interest in the student and the student’s
professional development.
Personal and interpersonal factors between supervisor and students could also impact student
satisfaction at a site. For example “Sometimes they do not have positive experiences with a student”
and “often times it is a supervisors’ idiosyncratic needs or personal needs”. This suggests that the
quality of the supervisory relationship and the quality of interaction between student and supervisors
can impact student satisfaction and quality of practicum and training experience.
Lastly, student satisfaction is also impacted by faculty supervision. One counsellor educator
stated “Support from the university supervisor is also a key element. Students need to be free to
express their frustrations, concerns, etc. with a university supervisor. Their support is crucial to a
student’s level of satisfaction.”
A lack of qualified supervisors may also create extra work on the part of the counselling
program and faculty supervisors. One of the counsellor educators offered a solution into how they
handle a lack of qualified supervisors at placement settings: “In the interim, we have arranged for the
course instructor to serve as a site supervisor when needed, making regular site visits and conducting
63
weekly supervisory meetings with the students”. This demonstrates how the lack of qualified
supervisors can create extra work and cause faculty to exert more time and effort in compensating
for this lack of qualified site supervision. As a policy or procedure recommendation to improve the
facilitation of high quality practicum placements, this counsellor educator stated: “That is tough –
We need to raise the floor of practice, and that is a long-term solution” which perhaps refers to the
lack of high quality settings and lack of highly qualified and trained supervisors since this was a
consistent theme throughout this respondent’s answers.
Faculty and/or Practicum Coordinator. The respondents reported on who is ultimately
responsible for the coordination and management responsibilities for securing and obtaining
practicum placements for students. The sub themes are (a) how faculty actually assist students who
are having difficulty in finding placement settings, (b) the persistence in acquiring a placement, (c)
the amount of time involved, (d) and the recommendation of having one person to obtain and
maintain high quality practicum placements.
In terms of the counsellor educator’s role in assisting students who are experiencing difficulty
in finding practicum placements, all the respondents suggested that faculty must contact past
supervisors and known counsellors in the community with past and current contacts to secure
placements. They did this by “contacting supervisors and making requisitions”; and for another by
“…calling people we know who have supervised in the past and asking for their assistance”. One
counsellor educator said this generally happens once or twice a year and stated “…basically, faculty
members work with the student to get a placement. If there is difficulty, we continue until they get a
placement. Sometimes, this is not the preferred placement but it would be an acceptable placement”.
It appears that faculty involvement in assisting students can be very demanding on their time.
One counsellor educator stated students not being placed usually only occurs once or twice a year,
64
but despite its infrequency, finding placements for these students “is very time consuming” and
“Obtaining and maintaining sites is a full time job”. Finding placement sites and conducting the site
supervision seems to add to the workload of counsellor educators requiring significant extra time and
effort.
One counsellor educator suggested the process would be enhanced if there was one sole person
coordinating field placements and in recommending policies or procedures that would enhance the
process. He or she said “I believe the process would be enhanced by having a person, coordinator,
whose job is solely field placements”.
Accreditation
The concept of accreditation was unique to one respondent and is included as a separate
category as this was emphasized for this particular respondent. Reflecting how CACEP accreditation
standards impacted the counselling program practicum component. The respondent mentioned
accreditation four times in relation to, (a) the numbers of students being admitted in the fall of 2005,
(b) new required practicum hours, (c) conditions for site approval (being able to meet the required
student practicum hours for accreditation) and (d) as noted above, in terms of recommending
policies or procedures to enhance the process, having a practicum coordinator. The numbers of
students being admitted in the fall of 2005 were expected to decrease because of limited department
resources. Required practicum hours per week would increase and sites would be approved on the
basis that they can provide students with the necessary client hours. With accreditation, this program
hopes to have a practicum coordinator. Accreditation procedures have impacted the structure and
processes of one counsellor education program in Canada in this manner, but it is unclear if other
programs that become accredited will undergo the same changes.
65
Summary of Qualitative Results
The qualitative analysis suggests that there are some barriers in obtaining and maintaining high
quality practicum placements in Canada. Some of the barriers discussed were: government
regulation and policies, agency policies, lack of quality and quantity of sites which may not meet all
site approval criteria, lack of high quality and trained supervisors who can provide a high quality
training experience, and the time involved in assisting students in finding practicum placements.
Possibly related to government and agency policy barriers, is interdisciplinary competition
amongst related disciplines that seek similar practicum placements in similar settings. This could
increase the demand for placements on a limited pool of available high quality sites. Also related to
government and agency policies is the use of videotapes of clients during practicum at a site. Limits
and/or restrictions could impact how students work with clients is evaluated by faculty and sound
evaluation would seem important in achieving high quality training.
Two of the three respondents listed site approval criteria and for both, qualifications of
supervisors were listed first suggesting their importance in achieving a high quality practicum
placement. It appears that there is difficulty in meeting each of the criteria all of the time. There is
also some variation in the types of counselling activities, and clients and settings in which counsellor
educators deem difficult to access for practicum placements. For example, it appears that both
respondents approve sites on the basis of being able to provide a broad range of counselling services
with a variety of counselling activities and that sites can offer preferably personal and individual
counselling experience with required hours, yet it is difficult to access some of these activities and/or
populations. Quantity of available sites was also listed as barrier for one counsellor educator due to
the region size. Student satisfaction is related to the quality and quantity of placements, in terms of
the types of clients and counselling activities offered.
66
Meeting supervision criteria seems to be important for site approval and it appears the
minimum standards for approving site supervisors for all three respondents is for site supervisors to
possess a minimum of a master’s degree in counselling and/or a masters degree in a related field, and
to have a minimum of 2 to 5 years counselling experience. One counsellor educator also stated that
supervisors must be willing to engage in the supervisory process, which suggests that on site
supervisors be committed to their supervisory role.
In regards to high quality supervision being a barrier, one counsellor educator directly stated
that this is a significant barrier in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum experiences. To
compensate for a lack of supervision, they sometimes send faculty to sites to provide site supervision
on a weekly basis for students. Quality of supervision also impacts student satisfaction as both stated
supervision is key to the students’ quality of experience. Interpersonal dynamics, quantity of time
that supervisors spend with students and faculty support also appear to affect student satisfaction.
It appears that all three respondents become directly involved in assisting students to acquire
practicum placements (contacting people they know) when there is difficulty and this was noted as
time consuming by one. Accreditation impacted the practicum program structure for one counsellor
education program in terms of number of students, required practicum hours, and conditions for site
approval.
Lastly, in terms of recommendations in how to facilitate and overcome barriers in achieving
high quality practicum placements, one suggested developing a registry of sites and “raising the
floor of practice”, and one suggested having one person being solely responsible for practicum
placements such as a practicum coordinator.
67
CHAPTER V: Discussions and Conclusions
This section will highlight some of the research findings and implications and discuss the
themes in relation to the literature review and Pitts and Millers’ (1990) PIS. The strengths and
limitations of this research and suggestions for future research within the PIS framework will also be
presented. Finally, some concluding comments are made.
Discussion and Implications
There are four comments worth stating in relation to some of the quantitative results. Firstly,
respondent C reported a notable change, as the program moves towards accreditation and plans to
decrease the number of full time students by eight for the fall of 2005. CACEP guidelines
recommend that there is one full time faculty member for 10 full time students, and for faculty
supervision of practica students, the standard is set at five students per one faculty member for each
term. This could have implications for other Canadian counselling programs that wish to obtain
accreditation. To meet the faculty ratios, within the program and for faculty supervision, there must
be an increase in funding and/or a decrease in the numbers of students admitted. Obtaining increased
funding could interact with two other subsystems, the university (in terms of funding academic
programs) and the socio-cultural political subsystem (in terms of funding universities). To decrease
the numbers of students to meet the CACEP accreditation standards implies that perhaps, the
standards to enter counselling programs may need to change and become higher and this has
implications for the faculty subsystem in terms of screening and selection policies (e.g. Nagpal &
Ritchie, 2002). If the numbers of students decreases, this could potentially enhance the facilitation of
high quality practicum placements because there are less students applying for possibly a limited
number of placement sites in the regions.
68
Secondly, programs that choose to become accredited will need to increase the number of
direct client contact hours to 200 hours over the practica term, and it is unclear whether this will be a
facilitative factor or a barrier in terms of obtaining high quality practicum placements. It is possible
some placement settings may find the practicum hours too high to accommodate, however they may
favour programs that are accredited and prefer higher student practicum hours at their site.
Thirdly, two of the respondents indicated that they have ongoing agreements with agencies for
practicum placements and all three selected that they have historically set agreements as a process to
place practicum students with agencies. Ongoing agreements refers to the future continuance of
practica agreements that are new; historical set agreements refers to utilizing past agreements with
placement settings. For one counsellor educator, their program utilized past, historical agreements,
but did not have set ongoing agreements, suggesting, that perhaps acquiring new and ongoing
agreements is challenging. It is also possible, there may have been some confusion about the terms
(historical and ongoing) and perhaps “ongoing” should have been more clearly defined. Often
students find new and different placement settings on their own, thus increasing the pool of available
sites and paving the path to establish new and ongoing agreements with the academic program. Most
notably, no one selected that they received information or brochures from agencies/organizations as
an attempt to recruit students for their placement setting and no one listed other possible methods of
acquiring placement settings in the open ended response. Since all three respondents indicated some
barriers to accessing high quality practica settings, creating new means of acquiring placements
(second order change) may be valuable.
Lastly, all three respondents indicated that they successfully placed students 90-100% in
practica each year yet this is surprising since all reported barriers in accessing certain settings and/or
reported difficulty in obtaining high quality placements. In retrospect, an exact percentage should
69
have been sought, since a 10% range can be significant. Also, even if students are placed 100% of
the time, this doesn’t reflect the quality of the placement in terms of counselling activities and client
hours. It also does not reflect the amount of resources needed to place all students in such settings.
From the qualitative analysis, it appeared some barriers in obtaining high quality practicum
placements do exist and these evolved around the themes of: government regulations and policies,
agency policies, quality and quantity of placement settings, and quality and quantity of supervision.
In terms of government policies and acts potentially creating barriers to achieving high quality
practicum placements, one of the respondents mentioned how their provinces’ health board policy
allows other professions to work in mental health, thus limiting their access to preferred practicum
placements in addictions and mental health. In the literature review, it was beyond the scope of this
project to discuss each provincial health act; however the revised national health care policy
(CFHCC, 2002) along with Canadian clinical psychologist’s responses was presented. For example,
Arnett (2001) and Arnett, et al. (2004) perspective, the profession of psychology and the training of
psychologists must broaden and change and adapt to new health care policies and changing health
needs. The examples in the results and in the literature illustrate how broader socio-cultural political
forces at a provincial and national level could have implications for potential practicum placement
settings and potential practicum activities. These results support the inclusion of the socio-cultural
political subsystem within the PIS, as suggested in the literature review. If there is no response to
these forces in the broader socio-cultural political subsystem, at the professional or educational level,
further barriers in obtaining high quality practicum placements could persist.
Agency policies were also cited as a barrier in facilitating high quality practicum placements in
the results, and it is important to note that agency policies may be impacted and influenced by other
broader policies and acts in the socio-cultural political system. It may be beneficial for counsellor
70
educators to become familiar with the intricacies of agency policies in their regions in order to
facilitate the successful placement of students in practica. There was no related literature which
referred directly to agency policies.
The use of videotapes to evaluate students’ work with clients during a practicum was discussed
by Jordan (2002) and cited as a supervision and evaluation guideline in the CACEP accreditation
standards (CCA, 2005a). Privacy laws, provincially and/or nationally, can certainly impact how and
if students are able to record their work with clients during practica. Both government and agency
policies were mentioned in the results reported here in terms of limits and restrictions of students
videotaping their work with clients at a placement site. Privacy laws were also discussed in the
socio-cultural political subsystem, and as Lalande (2004) stated, as privacy laws evolve and change,
this could mean further limitations on how faculty supervisors evaluate students’ work with clients.
This could have implications for training and practice and could pose challenges for effective student
evaluation, particularly for distance education programs that may not be able to conduct faculty site
visits for supervision. If video tapes are the only and primary means available for faculty supervision
and more sites restrict this completely, then this could potentially restrict the pool of available sites
of which to place students in for a practicum.
The quality and quantity of placement settings were discussed as themes in the above results
and discussed in the placement subsystem literature review. In terms of quality of sites, Pitts and
Miller (1990) also suggest faculty screen sites to ensure there is good client flow, quality supervision
and appropriate counselling activities from which the student can achieve a sound professional
experience. CACEP accreditation standards also set guidelines around the types of activities and
settings in which students should conduct their practica (CCA, 2005a). Quantity of available high
quality placement settings was considered a barrier in the results; in addition, the issue of placement
71
setting quantity was discussed in the literature in relation to the APPIC match for doctoral students
(Keilin, et al., 2000). There is no similar matching system for master’s level practicum students,
however, the suggestion by one respondent of maintaining a registry of approved sites could initially
address more effective matching of students to sites and perhaps contribute to some decreases in any
supply and demand issues by providing a list of pre-approved sites.
The quality (criteria and training) and quantity of supervision was also a theme in the results in
terms of barriers to securing high quality practicum placements. The lack of highly qualified
supervisors who are trained echoes what Johnson and Stewart (2000) found in their study of clinical
supervisors. Quality of supervision is important because as Borders & Bernard (1991) state, it is an
ethical requirement; untrained supervisors pose risk to students (low quality of training) and
potentially clients if students are not adequately trained and supervised. Given the importance of
clinical supervision in counsellor education (Johnston & Stewart, Ward & House, 1998), the quality
of site supervision is a concern for master’s level counselling programs and has important
implications for counsellor educators as they assist students in seeking practicum placements and
approving placement settings.
The quality of supervision also had implications for student satisfaction in the results above. As
one of the respondents indicated, faculty supervision and support is also important in student
satisfaction and Pitts (1992) also stated, it is important for faculty to support students and meet their
needs and demands. Interpersonal dynamics (between supervisor/student) was also mentioned as
factor contributing to student satisfaction and this reflects Pitts and Miller’s (1990) idea of unhealthy
dynamics, which may occur at a practicum placement. From this, it would seem imperative that
counsellor educators monitor and assess student satisfaction during practicum placements as
dissatisfaction may indicate something else in the PIS is not working.
72
Because the quality of supervision appears to be a dominant theme in the literature and in the
results of this survey, perhaps it would be possible for counsellor educators and placement settings to
collaborate in addressing this. Johnson and Stewart (2000) suggested developing supervisor training
seminars, courses and programs and Borders and Bernard (1991) described a supervision training
course to enhance the quality of supervision. Together, counsellor educators and site personnel could
develop and implement supervision training courses. In this way, the needs of particular placement
settings will be heard and met (as suggested by Pitts and Miller, 1990, as important in the overall
functioning of the PIS) and counsellor educators could step out of the “ivory tower” so to speak.
This could link theory to practice and practice to theory as well as enhance cooperative relationships
between faculty and placement settings, thus possibly enhancing potential practicum placements.
The practicum coordinator could recruit potential site personnel to partake in this collaboration. Such
an endeavour is ambitious, but it could benefit all stakeholders (students, faculty, site supervisors
and ultimately clients) in the PIS.
The issue of whether there should be a practicum coordinator was reflected in the results and
discussed in the literature as a sub system of its own (Pitts & Miller, 1990). One of the counsellor
educators stated that the process of facilitating high quality practicum placements would be
improved if there was one practicum coordinator. This could enhance the efficiency of obtaining and
maintaining practicum sites and it could reduce the work load and time involved in doing this for
other faculty members. CACEP accreditation standards also state there should be one core faculty
member identified as the clinical coordinator and/or practicum coordinator for student field
experiences (CCA, 2005a).
It is worth commenting on some of the factors not mentioned by the respondents but discussed
in the literature review. Not one respondent mentioned students’ behaviour and/or performance
73
(student subsystem) as being a barrier in the obtainment or maintenance of high quality practicum
placements as discussed thoroughly in the literature review of the student subsystem (Enochs &
Etzbach, 2004; Jordan 2002; Pitts & Miller, 1990). The university subsystem and related issues was
also not mentioned as a potential barrier in obtaining and maintaining sites and this seems to be
reflective of the lack of literature in this subsystem too. This may indicate that the measures that
these counsellor programs are using to prevent student related issues are effective. It also suggests
that the universities provide adequate support for the practicum component of the counsellor
education programs.
It appears the practicum component of the counsellor education does seem to be a complex,
interacting system and the respondents indicated how factors outside the program, can impact the
success of the practicum. For one respondent, the quality of supervision and the limited quantity of
placement sites (placement subsystem) seemed a paramount factor, beyond the counselling program
itself, impacting the success of the practicum. To compensate, they sent faculty to provide weekly
site supervision for students; clearly a time consuming task. For another respondent, government
health policies (socio-cultural political subsystem), impacted the ability to acquire particular
practicum placement settings. This respondent too, had indicated the time involved for faculty in
obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements (faculty subsystem) and recommended
one practicum coordinator. Effectively managing and coordinating practicum placements could be a
full time job in and of itself, particularly for larger programs, and it seems that counselling programs
and the success of the practicum component would benefit if the resources are available to support
one faculty member in this full time role. Overall, the results of this survey tend to support the PIS
model: barriers existed in the additional socio-cultural political subsystem, in the placement setting
subsystem, and in the faculty subsystem (in terms of resources).
74
Strengths and Limitations
In terms of strengths, this the initial research is useful because to date, there have been no
studies conducted on what Canadian counsellor educators’ at the masters level regard as barriers and
facilitative factors in obtaining high quality practicum placements. Another strength is how the
literature review was conducted and presented in terms of the PIS model as a means to categorize
barriers and facilitative factors, and organize a synthesis of the relevant literature and research on
this topic. The research results were also considered within the PIS model, highlighting the systems
that may be most relevant for Canadian counsellor educators and providing a means to demonstrate
support for the PIS model. Lastly, the addition of the socio-cultural political subsystem to the PIS
adds another important dimension that can and does impact the facilitation of high quality practicum
placements.
The most obvious limitation of this research was the low return rate, however, enough initial
information was provided to build on for further research. Perhaps follow-up research would be best
conducted with direct and personally addressed mail out surveys to each and every counsellor
educator in Canadian universities that offer master’s level programs in counselling. This may
enhance response rates, since there was no guarantee that all counsellor educators were members of
the CCA in the Counselling Education Chapter; and if they were, there was no guarantee they were
on the list serve. There were a few questions in the survey that may need to be reworded since in a
few questions, it appears may have not been clear. For example, asking for an exact percentage of
successful placements and specifying site and faculty supervision hours so both would be included in
all responses may have been helpful. Lastly, it may also have been beneficial to ask the types of
settings counsellor educators successfully place students in and what specific factors account for this
success so as to illuminate the enhancing factors that are currently operating.
75
Recommendations for further research
In the socio-cultural political subsystem, it would be beneficial to seek counsellor educators’
perspectives on other laws, policies or acts that may be impacting the facilitation of practicum
placements in their region. It would be worthy to explore counsellor educators’ responses to the
changes in the national health care act and to seek their perspectives on how they think the education
and training of counselling students may need to change and adapt to changes in the wider health
care system. Do they agree with some of the clinical psychologists’ perspectives on broadening the
role of psychologists (e.g. Arnett, 2001) and/or becoming more trained in EST (e.g. Dobson, 2002)?
If so or not, how does this impact the nature and the setting of the practicum placement for
counselling students? In regards to Humphreys’ (2000) perspectives on expanding the settings and
nature of the practicum, what do Canadian counsellor educators think about the possibility of new
and different potential practicum placement settings and roles? Do they view this as enhancing the
practicum placement opportunities or reducing the quality of essential counsellor training? In regards
to privacy laws, how have privacy laws further impacted the evaluation of students at a practicum
site and has this been a significant barrier in achieving high quality practicum placements? More
importantly, how do they overcome this barrier?
In relation to the professional subsystem, as noted, it would be interesting to explore how
accreditation standards will impact the facilitation of practicum placements. Research on employed
areas of practice by Hiebert and Uhlemann (1993) and Smith and Drodge (as cited in Lalande, 2004)
was presented in the literature review in the professional subsystem. It would be interesting to
explore if the settings and activities in which students participate during practica, reflect the types of
work positions graduates acquire. If graduates are working in settings and performing roles that are
76
quite different from their practicum experiences, perhaps counsellor educators’ may need to respond
and seek practicum placements in these types of work settings.
In regards to the placement settings subsystem, there is no research nationally on the quantity
of placement sites available for the master’s level practicum or how often master’s students are left
unplaced. What are the gaps between demand and supply for masters programs? Also, it may be
beneficial to explore what some of the placement settings’ needs are in hosting practicum students.
Knowing and meeting such needs may assist in the facilitation of high quality practicum placements
as indicated by Pitts and Miller (1990).
The quality of supervision was a dominant theme in the findings and the literature, yet there is
very little research from Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives. It would be worthwhile to
further explore what qualities (beyond minimum supervision criteria) and training they regard are
important. For example, Freeman and McHenry (1996) conducted a study on the perspectives of 329
counsellor educators with CACREP accredited masters level programs and sought their views on the
ideal roles, methods, goals and ideal functions that supervisors should have. Repeating such a study
in Canada would be beneficial to uncover what high quality supervision clearly entails in order to
maximize the training opportunities for students. Along with this, it may also be interesting to
explore what counsellor educators’ perspectives are on training supervisors (e.g.: Johnston &
Stewart, 2000) and what some of their suggestions would be in regards to courses and training for
supervisors at the masters level (e.g. Borders & Bernard, 1991).
In the university sub system, it would also be interesting to compare the practicum placements
between traditional counselling education programs and distance programs such as Campus Alberta
in terms of types of settings, unique issues, barriers and facilitative factors. In the faculty subsystem,
it would be worthy to explore how faculty manages their roles and how they manage issues in the
77
PIS. Specifically exploring potential barriers in every subsystem and the means to resolve these
barriers could provide valuable information for many counsellor educators in Canada.
As indicated, there is no Canadian research in the student subsystem, particularly in regards to
student impairment/incompetence and the means to address such issues should they arise. Although
the results of this research suggest that this may not be an issue, it may be interesting to explore if
student impairment/incompetence are problems in Canada (e.g. Olkin & Gaughen in Kerl, et al.,
2002) and if these are barriers in obtaining and/or maintaining practicum placements. Much
literature and many writers (e.g. Enochs & Etzbach, 2004) state counselling education programs
should have formalized remediation and dismissal policies to deal with impaired/incompetent
student. Research to identify whether similar policies exist in Canada would be worthwhile. If
litigation becomes an issue in Canada, as discussed by Kerl, et al. (2002) in America, then it may be
even more critical to, (a) have sound initial and selection procedures for admission (e.g. Napal &
Ritchie, 2002), (b) sound counsellor preparedness through courses and skill development in pre-
practicum (e.g. Woodward & Yii-Nii, 1999), (c) proper and formal pre-assessment prior to
placement (e.g. Frames & Stevens-Smith, 1991), (d) sound monitoring, supervision and evaluation
procedures during practicum (e.g. Jordan, 2002), and (e) formalized and sound remediation and
dismissal policies (e.g. Enochs & Etzbach, 2004; & Kerl, et. al). These are important factors in
preventing and addressing student impairment/incompetence issues and may be helpful in the
facilitation of high quality practicum placements in terms of demonstrating sound polices in
addressing student issues prior to and during a practicum placement. From Pitts and Miller’s (1990)
perspective, addressing student issues promptly and appropriately in terms of first and second order
change is critical for the overall maintenance of the PIS and in terms of maintaining good relations
with placement settings.
78
Conclusion
As indicated in the literature review, although the practicum component of counsellor
education programs at the Master’s level is very important, little is known about how to optimize the
practicum experience for students, particularly in Canada. This exploratory research sought
Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives as a means to better understand (a) what the issues and
barriers were in obtaining high quality practicum places, (b) what the facilitating factors were, (c)
how practicum placements were acquired, and (d) what recommendations counsellor educators have
in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements.
The results of this survey were considered in relation to Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS
conceptual framework: a systemic representation of the practicum component of counsellor
education. Another subsystem, the socio-cultural political subsystem was added by the author to the
five subsystems presented by Pitts and Miller and the relevance of this subsystem was supported by
the results. Some of the relevant themes in terms of barriers in facilitating high quality practicum
placements emerged in the socio-cultural political subsystem (government policies) and the
placement subsystem (agency policies; quality and quantity of sites; and quality and quantity of
supervision). No barriers or themes emerged from the student subsystem, the faculty subsystem, the
university subsystem and/or the professional subsystem. Recommendations to overcome barriers
included raising the standards of practice for supervision and settings (placement subsystem),
developing a registry of approved sites (placement subsystem) and implementing one faculty
member as a practicum coordinator (faculty subsystem). Accreditation was reported as a category as
it was a dominant theme for one respondent throughout the comments. It also demonstrates how the
professional subsystem can impact the nature of the practicum placement through accreditation
procedures.
79
From Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS framework, responding to any problems or fluctuations
appropriately in any and all the subsystems is necessary for maintaining the optimum functioning of
the PIS. Being able to effectively deliver the necessary first and/or second order changes ultimately
affects the facilitation of high quality practicum placements. The respondents here indicated some
second order changes that they currently engage in to reduce some of the barriers and/or suggest
other second order changes to overcome barriers. One respondent sends faculty to supervise students
at a site to compensate for a lack of highly qualified site supervisors; one respondent plans to have a
sole person, a practicum coordinator to manage the practicum component. Interestingly, one of the
respondents suggested raising the floor of practice, in order to maximize high quality practicum
placements: supervision standards and the quality of the placement setting must be addressed over
the long term. These appear to be some of the unique Canadian issues and forces impacting the
quality of the practicum experience and training and the literature and the results, seem to
demonstrate how the facilitation of high quality practicum placements is the result of many
interacting forces within and outside the counselling program. From the results of this survey, and in
accordance to the PIS model, it appears that in order to optimize the facilitation of high quality
practicum placements, some second order changes will be required in the PIS.
The exploratory research and results presented here, provides a means for conceptualizing and
further exploring barriers and facilitative factors in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum
placements for Canadian masters’ level counselling students. To date, the success and/or challenges
of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements for master’s level counselling
students has not been explored in Canada. Significant and potential barriers in the literature were
presented and integrated into the PIS, with the author’s addition of the socio-cultural subsystem. The
research results were also explored and considered within the overall framework of the PIS and in
80
both the literature, and the results, there is evidence for the addition of the socio-cultural political
subsystem. To the author’s knowledge, there has not ever been a framework or model, such as the
one presented here, to categorize and analyze barriers to effective practicum placements in Canada.
Building on the PIS model, and adding the socio-cultural political subsystem proved valuable for
considering the issue of successful practicum placements. There were suggestions made for further
research in each of the subsystems of the PIS framework from a Canadian perspective. The value of
using the PIS framework, demonstrated how complex facilitating the successful practicum can be.
Many forces within each subsystem and between each subsystem impact and affect obtainment and
maintenance of practicum placements. This initial research attempt has provided a means for
counsellor educators to perhaps more effectively classify potential barriers and to more effectively
consider and develop solutions within each subsystem of the PIS. Because this research presented a
new approach for examining the issue of the practicum placement, and because this research is truly
a first in Canada and just a beginning, there are many more questions and answers to seek.
81
References
Arnett, J. (2001). Clinical and health psychology: Future directions [Electronic Version]. Canadian
Psychology, 42(1), 38-48.
Arnett, J., Nicholson, I., & Breault, L. (2004). Psychology’s role in health in Canada: Reaction to
Romanow and Marchildon [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 45(3), 228-232.
Borders, D., & Bernard, J. (1991). Curriculum guide for training counseling supervisors: Rationale,
development, and implementation [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision,
31(1), 23p.
Bradey, J. & Post, P. (1991). Impaired students: Do we eliminate them from counselor education
programs? [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(2), 100-109.
Burge, E. (1994). Learning in computer conferenced contexts: The learner’s perspective. Journal
of Distance Education, IX (1), 19-43.
Canadian Counselling Association (2005a). CCA Accreditation standards for counsellor education
programs at the master’s level. Retrieved April 8, 2005 from
http://www.ccacc.ca/CACEPstds.htm.
Canadian Counselling Association (2005b). Certification of Canadian Counsellors. Retrieved April
8, 2005 from http://www.ccacc.ca/cocc.htm.
Canadian Psychological Association (2001). Companion Manual to the Canadian Code of Ethics
for Psychologists, 3rd edition, In C. Sinclair & J. Pettifor (Eds.), Ottawa, ON: Canadian
Psychological Association.
Canadian Psychological Association (2002a). Accreditation standards and procedures for doctoral
programmes and internships in professional psychology, fourth revision.131 pp. Retrieved
November 14, 2004 from: http://www.cpa.ca/documents/Accreditation_standards2002.pdf.
82
Canadian Psychological Association (2002b). Psychology specific analysis of the report of the
Royal Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada.15 pp. Retrieved February 20,
2005 from http://www.cpa.ca/documents/Romanow_summary.pdf.
CanLearn (2004). Canadian student loans & Canadian scholarships – CanLearn, Retrieved April 26,
2005 from http://www.canlearn.ca/index.cfm?langcanlearn=EN.
Commission on the future of health care in Canada (CFHCC) (2002). Building on Values: The
future of health care in Canada, [Electronic Version], Roy Romanow (Commissioner); Final
Report, 2002, 392pp. Retrieved November 29, 2004 from: http://www.hc-
sc.gc.ca/english/pdf/care/romanow_e.pdf.
Dobson, K. (2002). A national imperative: Public funding of psychological services [Electronic
Version]. Canadian Psychology, 43(2), 65-75.
Dobson, K., & Meyen-Hertzsprung, M. (2000). Diversity training: conceptual issues and practices
for Canadian clinical psychology programs. Canadian Psychology, 41(3), 184-191.
Dobson, K., Johnston, C., Mikail, S., & Hunsley, J. (1999). Empirically supported treatments in
psychology: implications for Canadian psychology [Electronic Version]. Canadian
Psychology, 40(4), 289-302.
Enochs, W. & Etzbach, C. (2004). Impaired student counselors: Ethical and legal considerations for
the family. The Family Journal: counseling and therapy for couples and families, 12(4), 396-
400.
Frame, M. & Stevens-Smith, P. (1995). Out of harm’s way: Enhancing monitoring and dismissal
processes in counselor education programs [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education &
Supervision, 35(2), 9p.
83
Freeman, B. & McHenry, S. (1996). Clinical supervision of counselors-in-training: A nationwide
survey of ideal delivery, goals, and theoretical influences, Counselor Education & Supervision,
36(2), 144-159.
Gaubatz, M. & Vera, E. (2002). Do formalized gatekeeping procedures increase programs’ follow-
up with deficient trainees? Counsellor Educator and Supervision, 41, 294-305.
Gauthier, J. (2002). Facilitating mobility for psychologists through a competency-based approach
for regulation and accreditation: The Canadian experiment [Electronic Version]. European
Psychologist, 7(3), 203-212.
Goodyear, R. & Bernard, J. (1998). Clinical supervision: lessons from the literature. Counselor
Education & Supervision, 38(1), 6-23.
Hiebert, B. & Uhlemann, M. (1993). Counselling Psychology: Development, Identity, and Issues. In
K. S. Dobson & D. J. G. Dobson (Eds.), Professional Psychology in Canada (pp.285-312).
Toronto, ON: Hogrefe & Huber.
Humphreys, K. (2000). Beyond the mental health clinic: New settings and activities for clinical
psychology internships [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 31(3), 300-304.
Johnston, E., & Stewart, D. (2000). Clinical supervision in Canadian academic and service settings:
The importance of education, training, and workplace support for supervisor development
[Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 41(2), 124-130.
Jordan, K. (2002). Clinical training of graduate students: The need for faculty to balance
responsibility and vulnerability. The Clinical Supervisor, 21(1), 29-38.
84
Kaplan, D., Rothrock, D., & Culkin, M. (1999). The infusion of counseling observations into a
graduate counseling program [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision,
39(1), 66-76.
Keilin, G., Thorn, B., Rodolfa, E., Constantine, M., & Kaslow, N. (2000). Examining the balance of
internships supply and demand: 1999 Association of psychology postdoctoral and internships
centers’ match implications [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 31(3), 288-294.
Kerl, S., Garcia, J., McCullough, C., & Maxwell, M. (2002). Systematic evaluation of professional
performance: legally supported procedures and process. Counselor Education & Supervision,
41, 321-332.
Knapp, S. & Keller, P. (2001). Professional associations’ strategies for revitalizing professional
Psychology [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32(1), 71-
78.
Kurpius, D. & Gibson, G. (1991). Ethical issues in supervising counseling practitioners [Electronic
Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(1), 48-56.
Lalande, V. (2004). Counselling Psychology: A Canadian Perspective. Counselling Psychology
Quarterly, 17(3), 273-286.
Levant, R., Reed, G., Ragusea, S., DiCowden, M., Murphy, M., Sullivan, F., Craig, P., & Stout, C.
(2001). Envisioning and accessing new roles for professional psychologists [Electronic
Version] Psychology, 32(1), 79-87.
Markert, L., & Monke, R. (1990). Changes in counselor education admissions criteria [Electronic
Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 30(1), 48-58.
85
Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with
quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Nagpal, S. & Ritchie, M. (2002). Selection interviews of students for master’s programs in
counseling: An exploratory study. Counselor Education & Supervision, 41, 207-218.
Peake, T., Nussbaum, B., & Tindell, S. (2002). Clinical and counseling supervision references:
Trends and needs [Electronic Version]. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice &
Training, 39(1), 114-125.
Peterson’s Guides, Inc. (2005). Peterson’s Gradline [Electronic Resource]. Restricted to authorized
users; SilverPlatter International, Norwood: Mass. Retrieved April 4, 2005 from
http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/start.ws?customer=c3983&databases=PG
Pitts, J. (1992). Organizing a practicum and internship program in counselor education [Electronic
Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(4), 196-208.
Pitts, J., & Miller, M. (1990). Coordination of clinical supervision in practicum and internship
programs. Counselor Education & Supervision, 29(4), 291-300.
Rennie, D. (2000). Grounded theory methodology as methodical hermeneutics: Reconciling realism
and relativism. Theory and Psychology, 10(4), 481-502.
Roe, R. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist? [Electronic Version]. European
Psychologist, 7(3), 192-202.
Romanow, R. & Marchildon, G. (2003). Psychological services and the future of health care in
Canada [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 44(4), 283-295.
Romanow, R. & Marchildon, G. (2004). History, politics, and transformational change in Canadian
Health care: A rejoinder [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 45(3), 239-243.
86
Schulz, W. (2000). Counselling Ethics Casebook 2000, Ottawa, ON: Canadian Counselling
Association.
Schwitzer, A., Gonzalez, T., & Curl, J. (2001). Preparing students for professional roles by
simulating work settings in counselor education courses [Electronic Version]. Counselor
Education & Supervision, 40(4), 308-320.
Sexton, T. (2000). Reconstructing clinical training: In pursuit of evidenced-based clinical training
[Electronic Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 39(4), 218-228.
University of Calgary (2004). Educational Technology Database Survey Kit.
Ward, C. & House, R. (1998). Counseling supervision: A reflective model [Electronic Version].
Counselor Education & Supervision, 38(1), 23-34.
Woodard, V., & Yii-Nii, L. (1999). Designing a prepracticum counselor education programs
[Electronic Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 39(2), 134-145.
87
Appendix A
CCA Accreditation Standards for counsellor education programs at the master’s level
For the Supervised Practice requirements
D. Supervised Practice
Clinical instruction includes supervised practice completed within a student’s
program of study. Practicum requirements are considered to be the most critical
experience aspects of the program.
1. During their training, students must complete an initial 100-hour supervised
practicum. The purpose of this practicum is to foster the development of
counselling skills under supervision. The practicum will include:
a. 50 hours of direct service with clients, including experience in
individual counselling (minimum 40 hours) and group work (minimum
10 hours);
b. weekly interaction with an average of one hour per week of individual
and/or joint (two students and one supervisor) supervision;
c. an average of one and one half hours per week of group supervision
based on video recording and case studies that is provided on a regular
schedule over the course of the student’s practicum by a program
faculty member or a supervisor under the supervision of a program
faculty member; and
d. evaluation of the student’s performance throughout the practicum
including a formal written evaluation after the student completes the
practicum.
88
e. Faculty supervisors are responsible for the supervision of no more than
five practicum students during any term.
f. Supervision of practicum students is credited by the university as a
significant part of the faculty member's normal workload.
2. Students must complete a final 400 hour supervised practicum:
a. Of the 400 hours of supervised practicum, a minimum of 200 hours is
spent in direct client contact.
b. Of the 200 hours spent in direct client contact, a minimum of 160
hours is spent in individual counselling.
c. Of the 200 hours spent in direct client contact, a minimum of 40 hours
is spent in group work.
d. The practicum should provide the opportunity for the student to
become familiar with a variety of professional activities in addition to
direct service (e.g., record keeping, supervision, information and
referral, team work, in-service and staff meetings);
e. The practicum should provide an opportunity for the student to
develop program-appropriate audio and/or videotapes of the student’s
interactions with clients for use in supervision;
f. The practicum should provide the opportunity for the student to gain
supervised experience in the use of a variety of professional resources
such as assessment instruments, technologies, print and multimedia,
professional literature, and research; and
89
g. There should be a formal evaluation of the student’s performance
during the final practicum by a program faculty member in
consultation with the site supervisor.
3. For their practicum experience, students are placed in settings compatible with
their career goals and their program of studies.
4. Opportunities are provided for students to develop professional relationships
with staff members in their practicum settings.
5. The practicum supervisor's role is clearly identified and a specific time for
supervision is allocated.
6. Practicum supervisors employ a combination of the following methods in
discussing the student's counselling sessions: direct observation, review of
audio tapes, review of video tapes, client reactions, and peer reactions,
7. Practicum experiences received off-campus are supervised by site personnel
who have, at minimum, a master’s degree in counselling; significant
(minimum two years of pertinent professional experience) counselling
experience; reputed competence; and knowledge of the program’s
expectation, requirements, and evaluation procedures for students.
8. The program faculty provides orientation, assistance, and consultation to
supervisors.
9. Field personnel who assume major responsibility for the supervision of a
student's practicum experience are assigned no more than two students at a
given time unless the field supervisor is released from other work
responsibilities.
90
10. Doctoral students who serve as practicum supervisors:
a. have completed counselling practicum experiences equivalent to those
within the Master’s program;
b. have completed or are receiving training in counselling supervision;
and
c. are themselves supervised by qualified program faculty with a faculty
/student ratio of 1:5.
Source and adapted from: Canadian Counselling Association (2005a). CCA Accreditation standards
for counsellor education programs at the master’s level. Retrieved April 8, 2005 from
http://www.ccacc.ca/CACEPstds.htm.
91
Appendix B
The Invitation to Participate Invitation to Participate in Research on Student Practicum Placements in Counsellor Education
Counsellor educators and individuals who work in agencies or organizations that provide practicum placements or supervision for counselling students are invited to participate in research regarding the current Canadian context for counselling student practicum placements. Successful practicum placements are essential to counsellor education, however, many issues can prevent the placement of students, such as a shortage of practicum sites or new privacy policies. Likewise, many organizations rely on practicum placements and may find it difficult to know how to acquire students to do practicum placements in their organizations. The results of this research will be of value to all counsellor education programs and agencies/organizations in Canada who can apply this knowledge in their placement processes and training programs. The results may also have implications for policy development.
If you are interested in participating in this research, please click on the appropriate button below.
COUNSELLOR EDUCATORS
INDIVIDUALS IN AGENCIES OR ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE COUNSELLING PRACTICUM
PLACEMENTS PROCEED PROCEED
If you have any questions, please contact me by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (403) 220-7573. Thank you.
Vivian Lalande, PhD, C.Psych. Associate Professor Division of Applied Psychology Faculty of Education
92
Appendix C Informed Consent
Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education
INFORMED CONSENT
INVESTIGATORS Dr. Vivian Lalande, Division of Applied Psychology, University of Calgary
Heather L. A. Demish, Graduate Student, Campus Alberta Applied Psychology Initiative
This consent screen is only part of the process of informed consent. It should give you the basic idea of what the research is about and what your participation will involve. If you would like more detail about something mentioned here, or about information not included here, please contact Vivian Lalande at (403) 220-7573 or at [email protected]. Please take the time to read this screen carefully and to understand any accompanying information. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND WHAT IT INVOLVES You have been invited to participate in this study because of your professional knowledge in counsellor education. In this study, you will be asked to complete a questionnaire about your knowledge of counselling practicum placements. We will also ask you to provide some demographic information about your program, such as the number of counselling practicum placements and the number of counselling graduate students you place each year, as well as possible admission goals. Collecting this information will allow us to provide a better understanding of the current Canadian context for counselling practicum placements. A second part of this research involves a survey of organizations and individuals who offer counselling practicum placements to identify relevant information from their perspectives as well. The objectives of the research include: 1. To better understand the needs, barriers and recommendations regarding practicum placements from the perspective of counselling education programs. 2. To better understand the types of practicum placements available, policies, procedures and possible issues of organizations that could place counselling practicum students. 3. To summarize the results from these two perspectives in terms of implications for Canadian counselling education programs regionally and nationally. The results of this research will be of value to all counsellor education programs in Canada that can draw on these results in their practicum placement courses. It may also indicate areas for future policy development for agencies that value counselling practicum students and can
93
utilize the results to facilitate placements. The results may have implications for other professional training programs and lead to the identification of specific policy recommendations. Survey participants can indicate on the survey whether they prefer to have their responses linked with their organizations, or whether they would prefer to remain anonymous in the presentation of results of the research. EXPECTED TIME COMMITTMENT We expect that it will take approximately 45 minutes for you to complete the survey. DATA ANALYSIS Your responses to the questionnaires will be combined with those of other participants in the study and the resulting data will be analyzed on a group rather than on an individual basis. You can indicate in the survey whether you agree to have the results linked to the name of your organization. If you do not agree, your participation in this survey will remain confidential and anonymous. YOUR RIGHTS AS A PARTICIPANT If you agree to participate, you should know that your are free not to answer any specific items or questions. Participation in this research will not cause any risk or discomfort to the participants. You may also withdraw from the study at any point without penalty (if you choose to withdraw, we will destroy your data immediately to maintain your anonymity). All information you do provide (including information that could identify you) will be kept confidential and anonymous unless you indicate otherwise. Your anonymity will be guaranteed in two ways. First, we will not be tracking IP addresses. Second, your data will be assigned an arbitrary participant number and any identifying information will be deleted from the surveys. All materials will be password-encoded and only authorized persons will have access to these data. Electronic files of the data may be kept indefinitely but can in no way be linked back to you. You may request a summary of this research, if you are interested, by sending an e-mail to [email protected]. By clicking the SUBMIT button, I fully understand the information regarding participation in the research project and agree to participate as a subject. In no way does this waive your legal rights nor release the investigators, sponsors, or involved institutions from their legal and professional responsibilities. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time. Your continued participation should be as informed as your initial consent, so you should feel free to ask for clarification or new information throughout your participation. If you have further questions concerning matters related to this research, please contact:
Heather L. A. Demish, Graduate Student Dr. Vivian Lalande
94
Campus Alberta Applied Psychology Initiative Division of Applied Psychology
University of Calgary 2500 University Drive. N.W. Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4 (403) 220-7573 [email protected] [email protected] If you have any questions concerning your participation in this project, you may also contact Mrs. Patricia Evans, Research Services Office, Room 602, Earth Sciences at the University of Calgary at (403) 220-3782.
SUBMIT
95
Appendix D Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education Survey
Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education Survey
* You are required to answer the questions preceded by an asterisk. Participant Information * 1. Name of University: * 2. Address of University: 3. Name of practicum coordinator (optional): * 4. Number of counselling graduate students placed each year:
2001
2002
2003
2004 (expected) * 5. Do you intend to change the number of graduate students admitted each year?: Yes No * 6.If yes, what is your admission goal and estimated date for achieving this goal?:
* 7. Please check specialties in your academic department:
SCHOOL COUNSELLING
COUNSELLING PSYCHOLOGY
CAREER COUNSELLING
COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY
REHABILITATIVE PSYCHOLOGY
HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY
96
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY
APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY OTHER (please list):
* 8. What is the required number of client hours for student practica per week?:
* 9. How many weeks in length is the practicum placement?:
* 10. How many hours of supervision are required weekly?:
11. What qualifications or experience are required for supervisors of practicum students?:
12. If you have criteria by which you approve practicum sites, please list them below:
Securing Practicum Placement Sites and Types of Placements * 13. Do you have ongoing agreements with organizations or agencies for practicum placements?:
Yes No 14. Please check the processes by which you acquire practicum sites for your students:
You approach individuals in agencies each year to arrange practicum placements
You receive brochures or information from agencies/organizations each year describing the nature of their training programs and application processes for practicum placements
97
Historically, there are set agreements (formal or informal) with agencies to place practicum students
You advise students to approach potential practicum setting for information/applications OTHER (please list):
15. Are there preferred practicum settings where you try to place students but have difficulty finding placements?:
Yes No 16. If the answer to the previous question is Yes, please check the types of settings that you would like to be more available for practicum placements: Schools:
Elementary
Junior High
High School
Technical Post-secondary settings:
Colleges
Universities Community agency settings:
Hospitals
Non-profit clinics
Private clinics OTHER (please list):
17. What types of client issues do these agencies serve?:
98
18. Many practicum sites offer a variety of services and have a mandate to serve particular client groups. Please check the types of services or client groups that you find difficult to place students in:
Individual Counselling
Educational
Career
Couples/Family
Specialized (e.g., sexual abuse, addictions, etc.)
Group Counselling OTHER (please specify):
19. If you require practicum students to participate in psycho-educational groups, what types of groups are these?:
20. What specific types of counselling experiences do you expect your students to partake in?:
Intakes
Assessments
Crisis Intervention
Psychoeducational Activities
Testing OTHER (please list):
99
21. If you checked testing, please list the types of tests you would like students to utilize during training:
22. What types of testing experience do you require students to have?:
Administration of tests
Interpretation of tests 23. Please list any other counselling activities required for training but for which you have difficulty obtaining practicum placements:
Nature of Practicum Placements and General Information It is generally agreed that developing highly competent practitioners in counselling psychology requires high quality training in a practicum. This section addresses related issues which may impede or enhance this process for students and educators. * 24. What is the percentage of students that you are able to successfully place in practica every year?:
90-100% of the time
80-90% of the time
70-80% of the time
60-70% of the time
50-60% of the time
40-50% of the time
30-40% of the time
100
20-30% of the time
10-20% of the time
0-10% of the time 25. Please comment on any factors or reasons that prevent successful placements, such as policies, lack of qualified supervisors, competition with other programs, etc.:
26. What is the process for assisting students who are not placed or experience difficulty in finding practicum placements suitable to their interests?:
27. In general, how would you describe most of the practicum placements in terms of student satisfaction?:
highly satisfied
moderately satisfied
only somewhat satisfied
not satisfied at all 28. What factors contribute to this identified level of satisfaction?:
Videotaping and Policies 29. High quality practicum placements utilize videotape reviews of counselling sessions by the student's supervisor. Please describe any organizational or government policies you are aware of regarding videotaping of clients and reviewing of videotapes:
30. Please add any recommendations you have regarding procedures or policies that would facilitate
101
obtaining practicum sites in organizations or agencies in general in your region:
Closing Comments 31. Please add any additional comments regarding existing factors that enhance the placement of students in practica:
32. Please provide any additional comments regarding this survey or practicum placement experiences:
Personal Preference Options 33. Do you prefer to have your University name associated with the survey results?:
Yes No 34. Do you agree to have the name of your University reported in the research results as one of the participants, but not linked to the data presented?:
Yes No Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please submit the completed survey by clicking on the button below.
Submit
102
Appendix E
First 18 Themes and Ideas
1. Numbers of students admitted and graduated – Accreditation.
2. Program resources – Accreditation.
3. Accreditation standards – Accreditation.
4. Practicum placement settings and activities and expectations of practicum – Quality and
Quantity of Placement Sites and Accreditation.
5. Required practicum hours – Accreditation and Quality of Site.
6. Supervisor qualifications, criteria and training - Quality and Quantity of Supervision.
7. Site approval - Quality and Quantity of Sites and Accreditation.
8. Barriers in types of placements– Quality and Quantity of Sites, Quality and Quantity of
Supervision, Agency policy, Government Regulations and Policies.
9. Provincial Health care policies – Government Regulations and Policies.
10. Varying practicum activities – Quality and Quantity of Site and Accreditation.
11. Student satisfaction – Quality and Quantity of sites, Quality and Quantity of Supervision at
site (from site and faculty supervisors), interpersonal dynamics.
12. Videotaping – Agency policies and Government Regulations and Policies.
13. Contacting counsellors and supervisors in community – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator.
14. Privacy laws, minors, consent forms – Government Regulation and Policies and Agency
Policies.
15. Recommendations: raise floor of practice, registry, one coordinator – Quality and Quantity of
Supervision, Quality and Quantity of Sites, Faculty/Practicum Coordinator, Accreditation.
103
16. Time consuming to place students, one person – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator
17. Interdisciplinary competition – Agency Policies.
18. Faculty role in coordinating practicum placements – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator.
104
Appendix F
Resulting Five Higher Order Themes and One Category
1. Government Regulations and Policies
• Provincial health law allowing social workers to work in mental health areas – limiting
access to addictions, mental health service (barriers).
• Competition amongst related disciplines for practicum placements (inferred).
• Provincial privacy policy and laws which state young offenders cannot be seen in videos.
2. Agency Policies
• Some agencies have policies that favour social workers.
• Competition amongst related disciplines for practicum placement settings (inferred).
• Some settings don’t allow videotapes to leave the agency.
3. Quality and Quantity of Placement Setting
• Criteria by which counsellor educators approve a placement setting for practicum.
• Site supervisors must meet counselling program criteria.
• Criteria for agencies that offer broad base of counselling services for individuals.
• Preference and criteria for various counselling activities, client types and settings.
• Criteria for agencies to provide some group work.
• Criteria that agencies provide required client hours for accreditation.
• When limited, students end up in acceptable placements, but not preferred.
• When agencies can provide lots of clients with lots of personal counselling activities, this
impacts student satisfaction.
• Registry with site information as a recommendation.
• Lack of available settings in region.
105
• Lack of settings with qualified and trained supervisors.
• Lack of quality settings with lack of trained supervisor’s impacts student satisfaction.
4. Quality and Quantity of Supervision
Quality of Supervision
• Supervisor criteria must be met for site approval.
• Willingness to engage in supervisory process.
• Lack of qualified and trained supervisors as a barrier.
• Interpersonal dynamics between supervisor and student impacting student satisfaction.
• Supervisor personal qualities impacting student satisfaction.
• Quality of supervision impacts student satisfaction.
• Faculty supervisor support important for student satisfaction.
• Interim solution – send faculty to conduct practicum site supervision.
• Raise the floor of practice as a recommendation.
Quantity of Supervision
• Willingness to engage in supervisory process requires time.
• Impacts student satisfaction – students don’ like canceled appointments and they like when
supervisors spend time with them.
5. Faculty/Practicum Coordinator
• Faculty become directly involved in assisting students find practicum placements when there
is difficulty.
• Faculty contact past supervisors and people they know.
• Faculty persists until placement is found, sometimes an acceptable placement, but not a
preferred one.
106
• Time consuming and full time job for faculty to seek and maintain high quality practicum
placements.
• One person recommended assisting in facilitating high quality practicum placements –
practicum coordinator.
Accreditation as a separate category for one respondent
• Decreasing numbers of students admitted because current program resources can’t handle.
• Impacts number of expected client hours at practicum (increased).
• Site approval- must be able to provide student with client hours required for accreditation.
• With accreditation – hope to have one practicum coordinator.