Web viewThe word connotes a capacity to ... A collab- orative between the University of Georgia School Coun- seling faculty and the Clarke

dIAnA gruMAn Western Washington University MArY LEE nELSon University of Wisconsin–Madison

XXI SuPerVISIon oF ProFeSSIonal SChool CounSelorS

310 Ch 21 Supervision of School Counselors

IntroduCtIon

It is rare to find a professional who emerges from agradu- ate training program and feels entirely prepared for thework that lies ahead. Inevitable gaps exist between thegraduate school–based training and internship practice, and thepersonal and professional demands of the “real world.” timeand experience may be needed to integrate and apply priortraining experiences to professional practice. For example,research within the teacher education field suggests that itis not until a teacher’s third year of teaching thathe or she is prepared to implement many of themethods introduced during the teacher training programs becausehe or she is too busy simply “surviving.” Similarly, whena student leaves a counselor training program to embark ona career in the schools,he or she is only partiallytrained to provide competent, comprehensive services(Matthes, 1992; Page,Pietrzak, & Sutton, 2001). In part, the road throughtheinduction period will becomeless rocky throughtime on the job.time is needed, for instance, to understand the uniqueneeds of the school and community in which one works. timeis also required to establish trust with colleagues bothinside and outside the school. In addition, time is needed tolearn how to navigate the politics of the buildingand districtincluding styles of leadership and competing agendas asone tries to find one’s place in a team of educators.In addition to the initial tasks that will be masteredthroughtime on the job, other tasks facing school counselors willrequire considerable effort. In fact, numerous authors have stressedthat these efforts should span a practitioner’s entire professional career(Brott & Myers, 1999; Skovholt & rønnestad, 1992). Forexample, counseling skills introduced during the graduate trainingprogram may need constant refinement. Knowledge obtainedduring graduate school can quickly becomeoutdated. no matter howmany years of experience, counselors may also encounter newtypes of cases or crisis situations that are baffling,

ethically challenging, and stress provoking. In addition tothese individual challenges, school counselors who are proceedingdown the path toward professional competency face a unique setof contextual challenges. First, pressing social problemsintensify and fade in a very short period, requiring schoolcounselors to stay abreast of current issues impacting theirstudents. For example, while gang involvement may provokea high level of panic in one year, the impact ofproliferating meth labs in a community may eclipse theproblems that gangs pose in the following year. Second,methods of treatingpeople with problems are in aconstant state of evolution. Counselors must seek outcontinual skill development regarding such things as medi- cationsfor children’s psychiatric disorders and best practices inreducing violence in the schools.A final challenge isthat school counselors work in the ever-changing politicaland socialcontext of schools.Politi- cally, national and local reform efforts toimprove the system of education inevitably shape and reshapethe priorities of all those personnel working within thewalls of the school. Effective school counselors must understandand attemptto stay aligned with the new priorities anddirections of their buildings and districts. Socially, thepopulation of citizens in the united States is becomingincreasingly more diverse,

with projections estimating a shift for European Americans from majority to minority status over the next 50 years (Sue & Sue, 2003). School counselors who have not already examined their prejudices, biases, and culturally embedded identities must make cultural awareness and action a priority in order to effectively meet the needs of students and their families (Paisley & McMahon, 2002). A final concern about professional development for school counselors is that skill delivery in the training program is learned rather quickly, but timing and judgment in the use of skills takes much longer to acquire (Holloway & Neufeldt, 1995). Meyer (1978) found that, without supervision, skill levels decrease after training. Crutchfield & Borders (2002) were concerned with discover that practicing counselors scored in the subtractive range on a test of empathetic responding—a basic skill we might assume they had acquired at a certain level of mastery. Likewise, Granello (1997) found that, compared with their counterparts in mental health, community, and marriage and fam- ily counseling, who increased cognitive development with training, school counselors demonstrated a trend toward regressive cognitive development as they progressed in training. of most concern is a 10-year follow-up survey of school counselors who were rated by supervisors and teachers as low, average, and high in effectiveness (Wiggins, 1993). Contrary to the notion that school counselors, in general, will naturally develop greater competence

with years of experience, results indicate that only 12 of the 193 evalu- ated counselors received a higher rating after 10 years on the job. In the sample, 33 counselors received lower ratings and 148 received the same effectiveness rating. Without a concerted effort to address these individual and contextual challenges, numerous authors have warned that practicing school counselors face a number of professional risks, including a regression in skills, stagnation, and burnout (Crutchfield & Borders, 1997; Herlihy, Gray, & McCollum, 2002; Meyer, 1978; Wiggins, Wilkerson, & Bellini, 2006). Given the many challenges, it seems clear that, as they continue to work toward proficiency across their professional lives, professional school counselors will need to access many sources of development and support. Pio- neering researchers Skovolt and Rønnestad (1992) proposed that counselor development is a multiyear process involving many different influences, wherein counselors greatly benefit from supervision, particularly early on. The process of moving from novice to skilled requires feedback from clients, peers, and more experienced professionals. Skovolt and Rønnestad suggested that with careful attention to training and supervision, proficiency may take a minimum of ten years. How do school counselors best tackle the wide-reaching need for ongoing training, supervision, and support throughout their careers?

The purpose of this chapter is to review what is known about supervising the journey of school counselors as they move from novice counselors fresh from training programs to more experienced professionals. We will examine the theoretical base and research findings surrounding on- the-job professional development and school counselor supervision. We will also examine the research on potentially supportive practices that may help counselors move smoothly toward competence and effectiveness. Finally, we will review the latest innovations regarding professional development and future directions.

TheORY

The Role of Supervision in Counselor Development The development of counseling expertise is a fuzzy process. It is not linear or straightforward, and in the case of school counseling, it usually feels like “learning on the fly.” So many circumstances arise daily in the life of a school counselor that it would be impossible to write a textbook or a series of textbooks that could address every potential challenge. Supervisors can play a vital role in assisting new professionals to manage the uncertainty inherent in the school counselor role. In fact, research on stages of counselor development tells us that supervisors exert a strong influence on new professionals’ conceptualizations about their work, decisions about how to practice, and development of a professional identity (Skovholt & Rønnestad, 1992). Counseling students and early professionals relies on supervisor expertise—either in vivo or in memory— well into their first few years of practice. Because learning to be an expert demands an understanding of how to manage ambiguity and complexity, developing professionals are thought to pass through a pre- dictable set of stages. In counseling, this progression has been described as the integrated developmental model, or the IDM (Stoltenberg, McNeill, & Delworth, 1998). Accord- ing to the IDM, Level one supervisees have limited training, or at least limited experience, in the specific domain in which they are

being supervised. Both motivation and anxiety are high. Supervisees are focused on acquiring skills; they want to know “the correct” or “best” approach with their students and other clientele. At Level one, supervisees are dependent on their supervisors. They are highly self-focused, but with limited self-awareness, and they are apprehensive about evaluation. Thus, they need structured education, positive feedback, and little direct confrontation. At Level Two, supervisees are transitioning from being structure-dependent to being structure-independent. They

Ch 21 Supervision of School Counselors 311

experience fluctuating confidence. Although functioning more independently, they may experience conflict between autonomy and dependency, much as one does in adoles- cence. This conflict can manifest as pronounced resistance to supervisors and superiors. With regard to awareness, supervisees at Level Two have a greater ability to focus on and empathize with their students; however, “balance” is still an issue. In younger supervisees, the problem may become manifest in role confusion and enmeshment with their students and students’ families. Supervision can be somewhat turbulent in this stage. Supervision of the Level Two counselor may require supervisors to recognize the resistance and/or enmeshment as developmental in nature and to work to facilitate the supervisee in his or her growth toward autonomy. The Level Three supervisee has achieved a degree of autonomy and tends to focus more on a personalized approach to practice, as well as on the use and understanding of “self” in counseling. Motivation is consistent; occasional doubts about effectiveness will occur, but will not be immobilizing. A solid belief in one’s own professional judgment has developed as the supervisee moves into independent practice. Supervision tends to be more collegial, as differences between supervisor and supervisee expertise diminish. Level Three supervisees return to being self-aware, but with a very different quality than at Level one. Supervisees at this level are able to remain focused on the students while also stepping back to attend to their own personal reactions to the students and using this awareness in deci- sion making about students. Stoltenberg et al. (1998) proposed a second phase to Level Three development: Level Three, Integrated (Level 3i). At the integrated phase of Level Three, the supervisee is able to apply developing knowledge and awareness across domains of work. Thus, a school counselor at this level would feel confident across tasks such as developing guidance curricula; interacting with parents; interacting with administrators, teachers, and other school personnel; and mastering the technicalities of scheduling and advising practices. Though not completely seasoned, the supervisee at this phase also feels confident in assessing student needs and developing collaborative interventions to address them. Supervisees at this level are able to identify their strengths and weaknesses and can make good use of supervisors who assist them in this process and help them to identify sources of continuing education.

Continuous professional Reflection: The Key to Developmental progress Though counselor development may seem to progress along a linear pathway, counseling professionals occasion-

ally encounter situations that challenge their current procedural models of how to handle situations and result in crisis-like experiences. A good example of such a situation is feeling confident about knowing how and when to make a report to child protective services regarding the abuse of a child. you have had several experiences of doing so and you have even developed a relationship with some- one in the agency upon whom you can rely. A situation arises with a student who confides in you that her father has beaten her on several occasions and threatened to kill her and her siblings if she tells. She has no observable symptoms of abuse, and other school personnel have told you that protective services have investigated the home previously but could not get clear evidence from any of the children that abuse was occurring. you fear that reporting the student’s allegations to protective services might result in further harm to the student. This concern disrupts your procedural knowledge about how to address allegations of child abuse, and you experience the crisis of having encountered an unfamil- iar “shade of gray” with respect to child abuse reporting. At times like this, supervisors can be extremely helpful. They can provide needed “inside information” about how these squeaky situations are handled in the school or in the district, they can help the counselor with cognitive dis- sonance and fears about negative outcomes for the student, and they can provide needed support throughout the process. With new knowledge and experience with managing a complex, challenging situation, the developing counselor can again relax and feel confident because he or she has developed another level of informational and procedural understanding. Unfortunately, however, calm is only tem- porary in the life of a school counselor. The complexity of the job ensures that new crises will erupt and that wise supervisors will be necessary to provide brainstorming, information, and support. It takes complex skills to think through complex problems. optimal development of expertise relies on an attitude of openness and willingness to reflect on one’s learning process (Neufeldt, 1999; Neufeldt, Karno, & Nelson, 1996). This process of continuous professional reflection (Skovholt & Rønnestad, 1992) involves observing one’s work, as well as one’s thoughts and feelings about decisions that go into the work. Given the contextual challenges facing school counselors, such as the diversification of the popu- lation, reflectivity must be practiced continuously to provide responsive and ethical services. Reflectivity is a process one may undertake after completing a task (much like debriefing after a practice counseling session or viewing and discussing a taped session with a supervisor). Schön (1983) referred to this process as “reflection on action.” Reflectivity can also take place while


one is in the process of doing a task—a kind of “thinking on one’s feet.” Schön referred to the latter as “reflection in action.” When professionals have developed reflective skills, they are armed with the capacity to process problem situations more quickly and seek productive courses of action. Professionals who learn reflectivity skills are less prone to “premature foreclosure” of development (Skovholt & Rønnestad, 1992); that is, they are less likely to get stuck in brittle, rigid ways of thinking and working that can ulti- mately lead to dissatisfaction

and burnout. Through careful feedback and questioning, supervisors can be helpful in assisting counselors to develop reflective skills that will last a lifetime. Reflectivity is both a skill and a propensity. The word connotes a capacity to identify areas of one’s work that need to be examined, to engage in thorough processing of these situations, and to identify courses of action based upon engagement with them. Reflectivity also implies capacity for self-examination, including consideration of the impact of one’s behavior on others and identification of more productive ways of relating. A good supervisor does more than simply share information or provide skills training. He or she provides a sounding board for the developing counselor, offering encouragement for the counselor to wrestle with problems. A good supervisor provides an opportunity for the developing counselor to engage in self-examination in a safe and supportive relationship.

The Supervision Needs of School Counselors Skovholt and Rønnestad’s (1992) work illustrated how professional counselors continue to draw on supervision experiences well into their careers; however, those authors did not specifically investigate the experiences of school counselors, who may or may not benefit from standard forms of clinical supervision. The use of clinical supervi sion has been the most widely discussed method of facili- tating professional development for school counselors. Supervision, in general, has been defined as an intensive, interpersonally focused, one-to-one relationship in which one person is designated to oversee the work of others with the express purpose of improving performance and enhancing professional development (Feldstein, 2000; Henderson & Lampe, 1992; Loganbill, Hardy, & Delworth, 1982). Clinical supervision, specifically, often refers to a relationship focused on direct service delivery or enhancing the clinical knowledge and skills for working with individual students, groups, or in consultation with parents or teachers (Roberts & Borders, 1994). The focus on clinical supervision for school counselors most likely stems from the profession’s roots in therapy and clinical practice. As Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) remarked, “supervision is

embedded in our beliefs about what constitutes training in psychotherapy” (p. 212). While supervision may be an essential element in ensuring that counselors become competent and developed professionals, a number of persistent barriers to providing quality clinical supervision in the schools have been identified, including a lack of funding and a lack of time to conduct supervision (Crutchfield, McGarty, Pennington, Richardson, & Tsolis, 1997). An additional barrier, pointed out by Sutton and Page (1994), is that counselors themselves may not seek out clinical supervision because they lack awareness of why supervision may be helpful and are not sure how to obtain it. Moreover, school counselors may anticipate that traditional clinical supervision may not provide them with the skills and knowledge they need to operate within a school setting; thus, they may feel sty- mied about how to acquire the help they truly need. These findings raise the question: Given observed barriers to the provision of clinical supervision for school counselors, are there are other avenues for development and support that may meet school counselors’ professional needs? Further, given the demands of school reform efforts such as No Child Left Behind, are school

counselors facing professional development demands that reach beyond the common scope of clinical supervision? In the following sections, we will take a comprehensive look at the research on the many avenues of supervision and professional development available to school counselors.

ReSeaRCh

The need for supervision within the counseling field has been widely recognized for decades (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004). yet the dialogue regarding appropriate supervision and professional development practices for school coun selors was not initiated in journals until the mid 1970s. Referring to the lack of adequate supervision provided to most school counselors, Boyd and Walter (1975) likened the school counselor to a cactus plant, suggesting that “both survive on a minimum of nutrients” (p. 103), and they called for increased attention to school counselor professional development. Since the early writing on the topic, numerous authors have stated concerns regarding inadequate practices and limited research (Barret & Schmidt, 1986; Brott & Meyers, 1999; Crespi, 1998). Professional organizations have also weighed in on the issue. In 1989, the AACD (now ACA) School Counseling Task Force declared a need for counseling supervision of practicing school counselors, concluding that, “proper supervision of school counselors is lacking at best, nonexistent at its worst” (p. 20). Recognizing the lack of research, they also recommended that counselor educators


at the university level take a lead in initiating new research studies. In the years since the AACD report, many articles have been published, but the empirical evidence regarding effective means of supervision is very limited (Agnew, Vaught, Getz, & Fortune, 2000; Crespi, 1998). What can we draw from the existing literature? First, a number of researchers have attempted to draw a link between supervision and job performance. Wiggins and Weslander (1986) found that counselors rated as most effective by their building administrators had higher ratings of job satisfaction, self-esteem, and tolerance for ambiguity than did their less-effective counterparts. Moreover, a recent study by Hal- verson (2000) demonstrated that school counselors willing to pursue ongoing training and supervision demonstrated higher levels of moral development than their counterparts, and that those with higher levels of conceptual development demonstrated greater levels of job satisfaction. Given that we do know that supervision—compared with no supervision—promotes counselor development (Wiley & Ray, 1986), we might be able to hypothesize that adequate supervision may contribute to counselor conceptual development, which, in turn, may promote job satisfaction and greater competence. A number of surveys have made it clear that counselors themselves recognize a need for significant professional support. In a qualitative study of Australian school counselors, participants cited concerns regarding “blind spots,” unchecked prejudices, and being “trapped into . . . using a narrow range of skills” due to professional isolation and lack of supervised practice (McMahon & Patton, 2000). Several surveys also have shed light on how practicing school counselors view their supervision needs. Participants in the Rob-

erts and Borders (1994) survey of school counselors in North Carolina indicated that they wanted counseling supervision to enhance professional growth, provide professional support, and avoid burnout. In a national survey of American school counselors (Page et al., 2001) and a smaller Maine survey (Sutton & Page, 1994), participants’ top two supervision goals included (a) taking appropriate action with clients and (b) developing skills and techniques. Research also has revealed that many school counselors wish they had exposure to clinical supervision, but they do not receive it (Page et al., 2001; Roberts & Borders, 1994; Sutton & Page, 1994). For example, in a national survey, Page et al. found that 67% said they desired some type of clinical supervision, but only 24% were receiving it. This finding also implies that 33% of school counselors feel they have no need for clinical supervision. As corroborating evidence, in their survey of National Certified Counselors (NCCs), Borders and Usher (1992) found that a large number of school counselors reported that they had no need for clinical supervision. They also found that school counselors (39% of the 357 NCCs in the

sample) were different from other counselors in terms of their existing practices and reported need for supervision. Specifically, counselors in the schools received significantly fewer hours of postdegree supervision than community or private practice counselors. They also were more likely to be receiving no supervision and reported wanting supervision less frequently than their peers in other settings did. Finally, the authors reported that, “school-based counselors’ most frequent reason for receiving supervision was that it was a requirement of the work setting” (p. 596) rather than a desire for professional development. How might we explain why some school counselors feel they do not need clinical supervision and others feel they need more of it? It is possible that school counselors, such as those in the Borders and Usher (1992) study, who say they do not need clinical supervision think of it as supervision for traditional psychotherapists rather than as supervision for counselors in schools. Indeed, many traditional clinical supervisors who have not worked in schools may not understand the needs of or complex roles assumed by school counselors. Additionally, school counselors are commonly supervised by administrators or school princi- pals who have little or no counseling experience (Borders & Usher; Mathes, 1992; Roberts & Borders, 1994). Perhaps as a result of negative experiences, the school counselors who lack interest do not think supervision is a worthwhile endeavor. The underlying problem is that the dearth of supervisors with adequate expertise leaves school counselors vulnerable to a lack of potentially valuable support and professional training. on the face of it, reports of limited interest in and poor provision of clinical supervision raise ethical concerns. The ethical code of the American Psychological Association (APA; 2002) states, “Psychologists provide services, teach, or conduct research in new areas or involving new techniques only after undertaking appropriate study, training, supervision, and/or consultation from persons who are competent in these areas or techniques” (p. 4). This mandate suggests that professionals need consultation and supervision when they confront client difficulties that are outside the range of their experience. Second, the ethical code developed by the American Counseling Association (ACA; 1995) strongly suggests that professional counselors participate in ongoing

and regular clinical supervision. In contrast to the specific guide- lines regarding supervision in the ACA codes, the Ameri- can School Counseling Association (ASCA) offers a much broader recommendation. ASCA focuses on professional development rather than taking a specific stand on clinical supervision. Specifically, within the professional responsibil- ities section of the ASCA Ethical Standards for School Coun selors (2004) is the following statement: “The professional school counselor strives through personal initiative to maintain professional competence and to keep abreast of profes-


sional information” (ASCA, 2004, p. 125). The ASCA Ethical Standards also state, “Professional and personal growth are ongoing throughout a counselor’s career” (p. 125). In contrast to the APA and ACA codes of ethics, the ASCA code seems to reflect the reality of counseling in school settings: Because of funding priorities in schools, professional supervision is largely unavailable to school counselors. All ethical codes, however, imply that a counselor is responsible for obtaining ongoing professional consultation. If, as the aforementioned research suggests, few school counselors actually receive clinical supervision as a means of professional development, how do they comply with the ethical standards of their organization? Numerous articles shed light on how school counselors find ways to “maintain professional competence” and grow on an ongoing basis. First, informal networks of counselors in a region, as well as more formalized meetings of district teams, may be vital ways to combat isolation and stress (McMahon & Patton, 2000). These informal and formal networks may be the best way for geographically isolated counselors in rural areas to consult on critical supervision issues. Second, professional development activities provided through workshops and professional affiliations with state or national organizations may be critical components in terms of skills acquisition and program development (Fairchild & Zins, 1986). Coun- selors such as those working in elementary settings with no direct colleagues may breathe new life into their programs by attending workshops with peers who understand the challenges they face. Finally, a compelling argument was made by Barret and Schmidt (1986) that clinical supervision might be successfully augmented by other types of supervision, including administrative and program supervision

pROfeSSIONal DevelOpMeNT pRaCTICeS

prevailing Trends and Recent Innovations In this section, we review current trends and recent innovations in professional development practices. First, we address the contributions to school counselor development that can be made by administrative and program supervision. Second, we address peer group supervision practices and describe some proposed models for conducting peer supervision groups. Finally, we describe university–school counseling collaboratives and professional development schools as broader collaborative efforts to provide supervision and development opportunities for school counselors.

administrative Supervision Administrative supervision has been described as supervision focused on employee job performance and effective-

ness, staff relations, and outreach to parents and other constituents (Henderson, 1994; Roberts & Borders, 1994). Administrative supervision appears to be the most common form received by counselors, given that school prin- cipals and district-level administrators often take a primary role in overseeing the work of school counselors (Schmidt & Barret, 1983; Sutton & Page, 1994). While concerns are frequently cited, several authors have provided a vision of how administrative supervision can be beneficial. one school district in Virginia developed a professional growth program whereby counselors, with the support of administrators, created an individual action plan to tar- get areas for professional development (Kaplan, Geoffroy, Pare, & Wolf, 1992). Progress was documented through written evaluations, observations, self-reports, video tapes, and teacher surveys. Preliminary evaluations indicated that the plans encouraged constructive dialogue between administrators and counselors and helped the counselors identify their strengths and weaknesses. The authors also speculated that, “administrator participation in the process encourages their continued support for [counseling] activities” (p. 168). In Mississippi, mandated job assessments were required starting in 1982 and the Mississippi Counseling Association took a lead role in developing a set of counselor compe- tencies to comply with the new law. Housely, McDaniel, and Underwood (1990) initiated a survey to investigate the impact of the new assessments. They reported that almost half of the counselors reported an increase in clarity of purpose as a counselor, feelings of competence, and feelings of self as a professional. The only significant change (p , .05), however, was in increased organizational skills. They also found that inexperienced counselors reported greater benefits from the assessment process than did experienced counselors.

program Supervision Program supervision is defined as supervision focused on program development, implementation, coordination, and evaluation. Given that school counselors working within the comprehensive contexts of the ASCA National Model (2003) and Developmental School Counseling and Guid- ance programs (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000, 2001) are called upon to develop large-scale preventative education programs, the elements addressed by a program supervisor, such as a lead counselor or district coordinator, may be critical to the success of a school counseling program. Again, rather than dismissing it as “beneath” the professional school counselor’s standards, program supervision may be vital for success, given the programmatic demands on today’s school counselor.


As an example, in a national survey of practicing school counselors, Fairchild and Zins (1986) found that over half of the respondents were collecting program accountability data to enhance their professional development. The researchers reported that counselors used the data in a number of ways including “demonstrating one’s effectiveness to others (75.6%) and improving the quality of services (71%)” (p. 198). of those counselors not collect-

ing accountability data, the greatest percentage (52%) said they were not familiar with the methods for obtaining it. The authors emphasized that counselor training programs “need to play a more instrumental role in ensuring that counselors in training acquire self-evaluation and program evaluation skills” (p. 198). We would also suggest that program administrators take a lead role in guiding counselors through the process of data collection and evaluation. A final example that combines administration and program supervision involves the use of performance evaluations in the restructuring of the Austin (Texas) School District guidance and counseling program (Synatschk, 2002). The 5-year restructuring process began when a team established a well-defined and accepted job description for counselors and created a yearly appraisal system. The appraisal process involved each counselor’s completing a “campus priority plan” based on student needs assessments, reviewing the plan with the school administrator, collecting evidence of work in all areas of the comprehensive guidance model, and participating in a year-end evaluation conference. Though Synatschk did not collect data following the implementation process, she did report anecdotally that administrators gained a great appreciation for the benefits of a comprehensive counseling model.

peer Group Supervision In addition to the one-to-one relationships in clinical supervision models, several authors have nominated peer group supervision as an alternative, cost-effective means of providing supervision to school counselors (Agnew et al., 2000; Benshoff, 1993; Benshoff & Paisley, 1996; Crutch- field & Borders, 1997; Spice & Spice, 1976). Moreover, peer supervision may be experienced by members as more collegial and supportive, as well as less threatening, than clinical supervision based upon the hierarchical structure of the “expert” and “learner” configuration typically found at clinical training sites (Borders, 1991; Crutchfield & Bor- ders, 1997). Though professional ethical codes suggest that supervision should be provided by senior members of the same profession—a mandate that might seem to conflict with the practice of peer supervision—supervision is not a formalized professional activity in most school settings; hence, all school counselors are technically peers—both novice

and seasoned counselors alike. The second author of this chapter has conducted numerous professional development groups for school counselors in which some members were much more senior than others. Moreover, a less experienced school counselor may have expertise in a particular area that more senior counselors do not. For instance, a novice school counselor with experience in the paraprofessional role of psychiatric technician may know more about psychotropic medications than other school personnel and thus be able to advise more senior counselors about a student’s medication side effects. one way to ensure the quality of peer supervision is to have counselors with expertise in particular areas take the lead when a consultation is requested within their area of expertise. If no expertise pertaining to a particular problem exists in a consult group, a professional with experience in that area can be brought in as a guest consultant. Peer group supervision can be organized in a number of ways. C. G. Spice and W. H. Spice (1976) described a triadic peer

supervision model wherein counselors met on a weekly or biweekly basis to provide support and consultation to each other. As group members, the counselors served alternately in roles of supervisee, facilitator, and commentator, much in the same fashion as counseling students work in class as they are learning basic skills. These groups decide on their own membership, structure, and meeting times, based on supervision needs and interests such as particular theoretical orientations, grade levels served, and interpersonal attributes. Borders (1991) proposed a structured group supervision format that offered multiple suggestions for participant roles, as well as group activities, including case presentation and recommendations, role playing, providing constructive feedback, and viewing case presentations from different theoretical orientations. Though the Borders model was generic and not limited to school counseling peer supervision groups, it provided detailed rationales and strategies for organizing and participating in peer group supervision and is a “must read” for any professional counselor group wishing to pursue collaborative peer supervision. More recently, Benshoff and Paisley (1996) provided a format for nine-week structured dyadic peer supervision meetings. In their model, structured activities included examination of appropriateness of roles and expectations for counselors in participants’ individual schools, discus- sions of needed changes in school counseling services at each participant’s school, and ongoing review of counseling audio or videotapes. Early participants in the Benshoff and Paisley model indicated strong satisfaction with their experiences. Though the model was time-limited and designed for peer supervision dyads, recommended activities could easily be adopted and adapted as needed by collaborative peer supervision groups.


Crutchfield and Borders (1997) compared the relative effectiveness of the Borders (1991) and Benshoff and Pais- ley (1996) models and found that, regardless of format, participants expressed satisfaction and increased counseling self-efficacy as a result of their participation. Addition- ally, a qualitative examination of the effectiveness of the Borders model also yielded promising results (Crutchfield et al., 1997). Though more research is needed on the effectiveness of peer supervision, we strongly recommend that practicing school counselors make a serious effort to either join or initiate regular peer supervision meetings, whether in dyadic or group format.

University–School Counseling Collaboratives & professional Development Schools Collaborative professional development efforts between counselor education departments and school districts seem to provide support, renewal, and ongoing learning to professional school counselors, as well as counselor educators (Blackman, Hayes, Reeves, & Paisley, 2002; Hayes, Paisley, Phelps, Pearson, & Salter, 1997; Thomas, 2005). A collaborative between the University of Georgia School Coun- seling faculty and the Clarke County School District has been ongoing since 1992. School counselors and counselor educators meet for 3 hours monthly at the university campus to discuss mutual concerns, share information, and participate in professional trainings. A qualitative program evaluation of this effort revealed that participants found the collaborative to be a source of personal and professional renewal

and support, professional development, and sense of community (Blackman et al., 2002). School counselors revealed that this type of participation shattered their sense of isolation and contributed greatly to a sense of validation that they were doing a good job. Similar opportunities for ongoing support and training may be available through professional development schools, wherein a college or school of education partners with a school to provide collaborative education and training to school personnel, faculty, and education students (Clark & Horton-Parker, 2002). Splete and Grisdale (1992) described a professional development academy for school counselors in 28 districts in oakland County, Michigan. Academy participants attended a full day of training per month for 12 months. Those who wished to receive continuing education credit for participation were able to do so. Needs assessments at the beginning of each academy year identified training content that would be specific to practicing counselors’ current needs. Evaluations of the oakland Academy were uniformly positive, with participants indicating that academy participation increased their motivation, perceived counseling efficacy, and professional

sophistication (Waidley & Pappas, 1992). Subsequently, academies for school counselors based upon the oakland Academy model have been established in several Michi- gan counties. Though research has not yet established the relationship between self-efficacy and professional competency, one can hypothesize that the combination of experienced self-efficacy and motivation would enhance outcomes in school counseling.

fUTURe DIReCTIONS

Clearly, there is a voiced need for increased supervision for school counselors. Evidence also points toward the benefits of ongoing professional development for school counselors in terms of sense of community, enhanced self- efficacy, experiences of professional support, validation for good work, and burnout prevention. Moreover, ethical codes of both ACA and ASCA emphasize the importance of regular supervision or pursuit of professional development opportunities. our ongoing challenge as a profession continues to be how to provide these opportunities and to evaluate the outcome of our ongoing efforts. In this section, we summarize the critical issues we have addressed with regard to both practice and research on supervision of practicing school counselors and make recommendations for how professionals at all levels can contribute to counselors’ ongoing development and provision of optimal services to students.

Implications for practice In their survey, Borders and Usher (1992) found that a majority of practicing counselors would like to have some form of supervision, and most would like supervision to be provided at their place of employment. Borders and Usher called for the training of more supervisors to meet the professional training needs of all postdegree counselors, including school counselors. Goodyear and Bernard (1998) contended that, ideally, supervisors of any profession should be senior members of the same profession who are actively pursuing their own professional development and who are trained supervisors. Likewise, Page et al. (2001) found that school counselors wished to be supervised by senior

school counselors who were also trained supervisors. Given current funding limitations in American schools, it is highly unlikely that many districts will be able to provide such experts to supervise their counselors on a regular basis. only the fortunate few will be able to avail themselves of such services. In addition, we recognize that many schools do offer school counselors excellent opportunities to consult with colleagues and other school person-


nel such as psychologists, nurses, occupational therapists, and speech therapists through participation in student intervention team meetings. It is possible, however, for institutions such as school districts and universities to provide professional development for credit, as the oakland County, Michigan, and neighboring districts have demonstrated. The creation of professional development schools has demonstrated how schools and universities can partner together to address common critical concerns. Though research has shown that peer supervision groups and professional development efforts are effective in the sense that they can enhance motivation and self- efficacy, the field has yet to demonstrate what kinds of professional development and supervision opportunities are more efficacious than others or that represent “best practices.” That is a goal for ongoing research efforts. Based upon the findings of the studies we have reviewed in this chapter, however, we would like to make the following recommendations: Counselor education programs should become familiar with outreach and continuing education units on their campuses for the purpose of offering for-credit, continuing professional education courses for school counselors. Continuing professional education courses might involve ongoing supervision in group format or systematic training in peer supervision formats. Counselor education programs should offer coursework in supervision to students in their programs, to postdegree school counselors, or to both. Ide- ally, this coursework should be provided by professional school counseling supervisors and should involve training on mentoring counselors within school settings. The professional training of school counselors should emphasize the importance of obtaining ongoing supervision during professional employment and practicing counselors’ responsibility for getting that supervision. Such an emphasis should be a part of the ethical training of all school counselors. School counseling professionals should take it upon themselves, as an ethical obligation, to pursue ongoing supervision and professional development in the form of coursework, professional supervision, and peer supervision throughout their careers.

Implications for Research Numerous authors have pointed out the dearth of research on school counseling supervision (Agnew et al., 2000;

•

•

•

•

Bernard & Goodyear, 2004; Crespi, 1998). Moreover, Ber- nard and Goodyear addressed the need for more research on the effectiveness of supervision, especially for school counselors. Research on school counselors is difficult to conduct because of the bureaucracy one must negotiate to get adequate sample sizes. Any given school often has so few counselors that many schools must participate in a large-scale data collection effort. This is one reason that survey research on school counselors is common. Qualita- tive methods also lend themselves to small samples, and numerous widely cited studies on counselor development and supervision process exist. More work is needed, however, to document the types of supervision that contribute to ongoing professional school counselors’ development and the efficacy of their work. We have identified the types of supervision that may be available to school counselors: (a) administrative supervision, (b) program supervision, and (c) clinical supervision. We have also recommended that professional school counselors participate in some form of peer supervision on a regular basis. An appropriate agenda for research on postdegree supervision would compare the relative contributions that each of these types of supervision makes to school counselor development and efficacious work. Both quantitative and qualitative methods would be useful in this effort.

CONClUSION

Existing knowledge on the work lives of practicing school counselors suggests that there is an overall need for more supervision and professional development opportunities. Counselors who do not receive adequate postgraduate developmental supervision evidence greater burnout and stagnation. Moreover, without ongoing professional input, counselors—particularly those who work in isolation in one or more schools—can be at risk for unknowingly violating ethical principles. Peer group supervision and participation in professional development workshops can enhance school counselors’ self-efficacy, motivation, and sense of community. Though research has yet to document which professional development opportunities for school counselors are most efficacious, we believe that practicing school counselors are ethically obliged to pursue supervision and development activities throughout their careers. Further, counselor education programs in the United States should take a stronger role in supporting the work of school coun-


selors by providing ongoing professional development opportunities.

Documents

Web viewThe word connotes a capacity to ... A collab- orative between the University of Georgia School Coun- seling faculty and the Clarke