Perceived Role of the Guidance Counselor
The role of the school counselor has been deemed confusing and misleading not just for the different personnel that comprises the school but most importantly, the school counselors themselves. There have been various responsibilities that are entailed to the profession of a school counselor, some of which are alligned to those standards set by other counselor professionals in all different fields and some are responsibilities that have been eventually acquired by the school counselors themeselves due to the inefficiency of the school administration to fill school personnel that completes their roster of manpower.
One may even find these roles totally varying from the true scope of responsibilities that professonal counselors have. Often than not, school counselors are diverted to assuming responsibilities that are out of their line of professional scope due to various reasons. And this straying of responsibility further leads to the inefficiency of the school to provide an effective counseling programs and services for their students. However, still there are questions regarding the scope of responsibility the school counselor can provide their students.
This is due to the fact that school counselors indeed play an integral part of a student’s well-being within its residency in the academe. ovide at least 3 research hypotheses that will direct your proposed study. As part of your response discuss what are the core conceptual/theoretical underpinnings and relevant research that support these hypotheses. In your response include citations and discussion of specific theories/theorists and the research base that directly influence the formulation of your research hypotheses.
The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) has been the topmost contributor to the study of a school counselor’s effectiveness in the education community. ASCA has devised means on how to evaluate the school counselor’s knowledge and beliefs in their responsibilities (Hatch, Chen-Hayes, 2008). Also, the organization came up with programs that provides school counselors better understanding of their duties in the community. For some academes, local governing bodies are held responsible and accountable to the welfare and being of school counselors.
However, for some, ASCA is the sole governing body that is looked upon as the professional group that could assist school counselors with their professional needs. British Columbia, although has the British Columbia School Counsellor Association (BCSCA) that binds the practicing school counsellor professionals within the area, still has no governing body that is held responsible to dictating the duties and responsibilities of school counsellors within the area.
There have been various basis on the most defined duties and responsibilities of school counsellors within the British Columbia and general. This basis is a collective data gathered from different integral units that have made significant contributions to defining the role of the school counsellors. These data is a collection of existing research such as the ASCA role statements, ASCA’s National Model, Transforming School Counseling Initiative and the BC Ministry of Education Special Education Role of the School Counsellor.
This research highlights the different hypotheses on the perceived roles of the School Counsellor in British Columbia Catholic and non-Catholic schools. Ho1: School counsellors in British Columbia, both Catholic and Non-Catholic, are solely responsible to their student’s development by assisting them through the achievement of their goals. However, this responsibility is deemed directed under the supervision and leadership of the principal.
Ho2: School counsellors in British Columbia ,both Catholic and Non-Catholic, are solely responsible to their student’s development by assisting them through the achievement of their goals and holds full autonomy through leadership, advocacy and systemic change in counselling programs and activities that advance student achievements. Ho3: Administrators and teachers in Catholic schools have different perceptions and expectations of the school counsellor than those in non catholic schools.
These hypotheses revolves around the notion that school counselors, school administration including school personnel, teachers, and principals has a direct effect to the responsiblities posed to the school counselors. Also, the school counsellors’s role are now being differentiated in terms of their affiliation to their school’s bacground; whether they are practicing their profession in a Catholic or non-Catholic school has a direct effect to their duties and responsibilities towards the community. The variables considered in this study are the school counselors and the school administration such as the teachers, and the principal.
This research further looks upon all these hypothesis one by one. Hypothesis 1 School counsellors in British Columbia, both Catholic and Non-Catholic, are solely responsible to their student’s development by assisting them through the achievement of their goals. However, this responsibility is deemed directed under the supervision and leadership of the principal. The first hypotheses concurrs that the school counselor’s responsibility is soley direted to the students alone. This is to say that the students development is the only responsibility that school counsellors are held liable on.
This is in contrast to some conceptions that school counsellors are more than just student-centered, but also a a resource for the community composed of the school administrators and teachers. Apparently, school nowadays needs a lending hand from the school counsellor’s due to the lack of capacity of these school officials to fulfill duties within the school that are left unattended due to insufficient school personnel. It is to fulfill their responsibility to the students which consitute of facilitating, the fullest develoment of every student (Aluede, Imonikhe, Akpaida, 2004).
This development is viewed in terms of enriching the students emotional, personal, intellectual, psychomotor, and vocational resources. The school’s means of achieving such goal may be deemed sometimes misleading and insufficient. Programs which promote and pursue such goals are being developed by all different personnels in the school. For instance, a higschool teacher who’s prfession is to teach mathematics may find himself pursuing activities and programs that assist students in resoving their personal issues. Often than not, issues that are beyond academic concerns also become one of the concerns of the school.
Aside from the fact that the school is a venue for the intellectual upliftment of every student, it is also a hub of welfare. And the academic community views welfare in subject matters concerning the other aspects of a students life which are beyond the four corners of a classroom also needs to be taken care of. All the side matters which is way beyond the capacity of one school personnel should be delegated efficiently within the school as an organization. Thus, matters dictated above are now viewed as matters which are to be the concern the guidance counsellor.
The school counsellor, according to ACSA, revolves around the four components of its recommended delivery system: school guidance curriculum, responsive services, individual student planning, and system support (Chata & Loesh, 2007). The school counsellor, accochata and loesch futurerding to ACSA, is a significant actor in the school as a well-mechanized organization. He/she implements a counselling program for the school which comprises of comprehensive attention to the enhancement of students achievement. This student achievements are considered to be in the scope of leadership, collaboration and advocacy.
Implementing a counselling program is not a stroll in the park nor is a responsible that can be autonomously handled by school counsellors. The principal has been considered to have the highest and most authority in an academic institution. Just like any other commander-in-chief in any other organization, the principal is the visionary and holds a certain degree of power on how the school should be driven so as to achieve its goals. This authority that the principal have for the school, however, is in question as to its influence in the implementation of the duties and responsibilities of the institutions’ personnel.
This leads to the ongoing dilemma there is about the confused role of the school counsellor. Literature contributions argue that most of the responsibilities of the school counsellor has been imposed and driven by the principal. The school principal is deemed to be having quite an enormous influence in the environment of their schools (Chata & Loesh, 2007). Their motivations are the ones that shape the school’s foundations and what they deem to be most significant is what keeps the institution in its feet.
Therefore, it has been analyzed that the relationship of the principal’s beliefs on what the school counsellor’s role should be heavily affects the pressing concerns of the counsellors. For instance, some school principals deem school counsellors to be responsible of the following; (1) school counsellors are School counsellors in British Columbia ,both Catholic and Non-Catholic, are solely responsible to their student’s development by assisting them through the achievement of their goals and holds full autonomy through leadership, advocacy and systemic change in counselling programs and activities that advance student achievements.
held liable to the records of the students thus is responsible for its maintainance, (2) school counsellors are tasked to be in charge in the scheduling of the new students as well as their registration, (3) and they are also assigned to administer examinations relating to aptitude, achievement, and cognitive capacity of the students (2007). However, ACSA conitnues to believe that all the afformentioned duties are beyond the true and definitive roles of the school counsellor. ] On the vantage point of the school counsellors themselves, they consider the principal as an integral part of their profession.
They know that having the support and recognition of the principal as well as other key school administrator is highly important to the success of their profession and their performance (Zalaquett, 2004). Alschata and Loesch furthers that there is a big need of support from the principals in terms of the resources that school cousellor needs. Without the presence of the principal’s support in the school counsellor’s endeavours, it will be a burden for counsellors to practice their profession fully and implement projets and programs effectively within the school.
The idea of the interdependence of both the principal and the school counsellor to the needs and wants of one another calls for the notion that the school counsellor’s duties and responsibilities depends upon the principals perception. Thus, the school counsellor cannot stand alone and be mutually exclusive in its approach towards its profession. It is highly important that the duties and responssibilities be outlined by the principals themselves for this type of principal-counsellor relationship.
In the British Columbia, school counsellors’ role has been outlined by BCSCA to be focusing on each and every individual student of the school in methods designed by the counsellor that has an appoach that can be in individual, in group, or in class-work. However, all these functions require time and effort which needs cooperation and consent within the proper school officials. School counsellors may need to intervene with a class schedule and disrupt other existing set classes or school schedule in order to fully execute such plans.
Of course, this kind of planning needs to be in accordance to the principal. Without the approval of the whom, progarams cannot be carried through. However, we cannot neglect the fact that principal’s conceptions are not universal. There are principals that think differently on the role of their school counselors. This differences in view leads us to the possibility that school counsellors may be given the right amount of freedom in their respective schools. This specific possibility is discussed further in the second hypothesis Hypothesis 2
School counsellors in British Columbia ,both Catholic and Non-Catholic, are solely responsible to their student’s development by assisting them through the achievement of their goals and holds full autonomy through leadership, advocacy and systemic change in counselling programs and activities that advance student achievements. Sovereignity in the profession of the school counsellor is highly important to a certain extent. There are specific programs and functions that a school counsellor should learn to be accusotomed to by their own without the influence or the participation of any other school personnel or administrator.
Such programs requires full authority and dominion of the school counsellor themselves without having to consult with the school administrators and the school principal. Being a school counsellor requires heavy attention to the welfare of each of their students. Just like any other practicing counsellor in any other field other than that of the counsellor profession in a school setting, it is impertive that a workable relationship should be established between the counsellor and their clients.
Often than not, this kind of profession in the school setting has a very high demand due to the volume of clients a certain counsellor have considering these clients are the students who are in their most fragile age. It is highly taxing and needs certain level of cooperation from other school colleague. The advantage of having to be independently functioning as a school counsellor without minding much of the consent of the school principal, is being able to function completely based on the standards imposed by ACSA.
Since there have been numerous claims that the influence of school administrators and colleagues heavily disrupts the true responsibility of a counsellor, it is highly an advantage for counsellors to hae a degree of autonomy in their profession. The disadvantage, however, is that school counsellors must often cope with undrealistic expectations of other school staff members (Farwell, 1963). This is to say that school counsellors are more prone to being viewed as a person functioning professional in isolation as the counsellor is not linked with any other colleague within the school organization but the students alone.
Moreover, expectations by their colleagues are set high due to the independence they have in the school. For instance, colleagues may view the counsellor as a person who cures individuals. This expectation can be equated to laying the responsibility to the school counsellor in alleviating the issues of the school in issues of the truants, the dropouts, the borderline psychot, the underachiever, and the neurotic child (1963).
All these are responisibilities heavily burdened to be the responsibilities solely directed towards the school counsellor. If the school is in bad condition, then the blame will be on the independently working professional school counsellor. As a hypothesis, however, these advantages and disadvantages are still under reservation as respondents in this research such as the teachers and the principals in British Columbia still needs to be questioned on what they think are the responsibilities of a school counsellors.
Also, these respondents have to be questioned on the pressing issues that faces the school and which of these issues needs to be resolved by the community as a whole and which are the ones to be focused on by the school counsellor alone. Expectedly, there are quite variances on the answers of the respondents. This leads us to the third hypothesis which is the existence of the differences of the conceptions ofSample Essay of PapersOwl.com