Comprehensive guidance and counseling programs and the development of multicultural student-citizens.

The ultimate responsibility for education is a civic not a private one. (Selbourne, 1994, p. 216)

Education not only makes democracy possible; it also makes it essential. (Galbraith, 1997, p. 71)

There is a chronic failure to provide reasoning and citizenship skills among all students. (Fraser, 2001, p. 330)

A consistent element in the social-moral montage of U.S. schooling is the attempt to cultivate "good" student-citizens (Anderson, Avery, Pederson, Smith, & Sullivan, 1997; Pangle & Pangle, 2000). For instance, notable 18th-century pundits such as John Adams, Benjamin Rush, and Noah Webster (see, e.g., Fraser, 2001, for a historical perspective) strongly promoted this goal. Even though the external impetus for citizenship education appeared to wane during the turbulent 1960s and 70s, contemporary authors and policymakers on all sides of the political spectrum remain convinced that school curriculum and pedagogy should, in part, aid students to engage in and contribute to society's democratic processes (Gutmann, 2000; National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). Similarly, in a recent article on the future direction of the school counseling profession, Sink (2002) recommended that counselors should be more closely involved in this agenda.

This article addresses the valuable role comprehensive guidance and counseling programs (CGCP) can play in developing multicultural student-citizens. More specifically, after contextualizing citizenship education in relationship to the advancement of the school counseling profession, I provide a rationale for including this domain within CGCPs. Second, the concept of multicultural citizenship is defined and clarified. Third, various characteristics of multicultural student-citizens are enumerated. Finally, I offer practical implementation strategies for school counselors.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT--SCHOOL COUNSELING AND CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

Reminiscent of various disciplines over the past century, school counseling in the United States has gradually evolved in three general stages (e.g., Gysbers & Henderson, 2000, 2001; Herr, 2001; Myrick, 1997). Summarized briefly, the initial phase (1910s to 1950s) deployed a "position" approach, whereby guidance personnel (i.e., mostly vocational and classroom teachers) dispensed vocational and career information to high school students with the goal focused largely on job preparation and maintenance (Gysbers & Henderson). Interestingly, while citizenship education was not a component of the guidance curriculum and students' psychosocial and psychoeducational concerns received only minimal attention in schools, moral "fitness," patriotism, and civic duties were overtly fostered primarily by social studies teachers through school-wide and classroom rituals (Anderson et al., 1997; Risinger, 1996). Furthermore, during the two world wars and the Korean conflict, school personnel encouraged students to be good citizens, but school counselors' specific roles in the process appear to be undocumented.

During the second stage (approximately 1960s to 1980s), a "services" or pupil-personnel model was instituted (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001; Herr, 2001). Secondary-level counselors and other guidance personnel (e.g., nurses, attendance officers, teachers) provided psychoeducational support and reactive services to students at risk for school failure or those experiencing personal-social difficulties. While school counselors were also offering educational and career guidance to the college- or university-bound, social studies teachers continued to provide civics lessons in their classrooms (Riley, 1997, Risinger, 1996). As in the previous stage, since classroom guidance did not target citizenship formation, school counselors presumably had little influence on nurturing these skills in students.

By the late 1970s and early 1980s, several prominent school counseling and career education researchers (e.g., Norman Gysbers, Donald Dinkmeyer, Edwin Herr) maintained that a philosophical reorientation in the profession was badly needed. The antecedents for these clarion calls are well documented in multiple publications (e.g., Dinkmeyer & Caldwell, 1970; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000, 2001; Herr, 2001; Myrick, 1997; Paisley & Borders, 1995; VanZandt & Hayslip, 2001). As a result, the CGCP movement emerged as a viable alternative to a "services" orientation.

For those who are unacquainted with this programmatic approach, a CGCP is a competency-based programmatic approach (Johnson & Whitfield, 1991) which attempts to be multisystemic, collaborative, developmental, prevention-minded, and educative (Borders & Drury, 1992; Campbell & Dahir, 1997; Clark & Stone, 2000; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000, 2001; Henderson & Gysbers, 1998; Keys & Lockhart, 1999; Myrick, 1997; Neukrug, Barr, Hoffman, & Kaplan, 1993; Olson & Perrone, 1991; Paisley, 2001; Paisley & Benshoff, 1996; Paisley & Hubbard, 1994; Paisley & Peace, 1995; Thompson, 2002). By the late 1990s, this programmatic view had become the most widely used organizational framework for the profession (Sink & MacDonald, 1998), endorsed by the American School Counselor Association (ASCA, 1997, 1999a, 1999b; Campbell & Dahir; Dahir, 2001; Dahir, Sheldon, & Valiga, 1999; Wittmer, 2000a, 2000b) and numerous state school counseling organizations. Despite the paucity of nationwide efficacy studies, empirical research conducted in Missouri (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000; Lapan, 2001; Lapan, Gysbers, & Petroski, 2001) and Washington (Sink & Robinson, 2002) has yielded promising results. Other recent studies on CGCPs revealed that the program implementation poses major challenges for K-12 counselors (Sink & Yillik-Downer, 2001) and numerous state models lack credible documentation of their theoretical underpinnings (MacDonald & Sink, 1999).

While many state and district CGCPs plainly assert or imply in their mission or purpose statements that one of their central outcomes is to facilitate the advancement of "good" or "productive" citizens (e.g., Coats, Ash, & Dorsey, 1998; Hatch, 2000), evidence indicates that citizenship education, like character formation, is a severely neglected developmental domain (MacDonald & Sink, 1999). As alluded to previously, a careful search of the education literature also revealed meager evidence that school counselors are formally assisting classroom teachers with citizenship development. Two recent dissertations attempted to incorporate some aspects of citizenship education into their school counseling-related studies with only mixed results (Cassell, 1995; Swen, 2000).

CGCPS AS AN EDUCATIONAL LINK TO MULTICULTURAL CITIZENSHIP DEVELOPMENT

The need for increased citizenship education in U.S. schools has received considerable attention over the past two decades. For instance, the Center for Civic Education (Calabasas, California; see Web site: http://www.civiced.org/) was established in 1981 with the expressed mission to promote citizenship education in the nation's K-12 schools. This organization helps educators cultivate enlightened, competent, and responsible citizens (Rosen, 2000). In an effort to do so, researchers/scholars associated with the Center produce and distribute citizenship education curricula and materials to school personnel.

Correspondingly, Robert Battistoni (1997), speaking in defense of citizenship education, challenged schools to graduate persons of character who are more responsive to the needs of the community, more able to contribute to society, and more civil in their expressed attitudes and behavior. These propositions resonate well with the earlier remarks made by Mustaine and LaFountain (1993) on the future of school counseling, where they argued for a more holistic view of the profession and education in general. Successful schools, in their perspective, should facilitate the competencies commensurate with productive student-citizens (e.g., good decision-making, conflict-resolution, and team-building skills).

The mission statements of many district- and state-level comprehensive programs also reflect this broader educative orientation. For instance, reiterating Washington State's CGCP mission statement, the overall aim of Highline School District's (1997) school counseling program is as follows:

   All students will receive educationally based comprehensive counseling and
   guidance support to realize their potential as responsible, productive, and
   healthy citizens contributing to a democratic society in a changing world
   [italics added]. (p. C-1)

A similar goal was presented in Utah's Comprehensive Guidance Program (1998) purpose statement:

   Provide in all districts and schools throughout Utah a comprehensive
   student services system, designed to offer comprehensive guidance,
   prevention, intervention, crisis and referral services for individual
   students, and families. Such services will assist students in becoming
   healthy, respectful and contributing citizens [italics added].

Like school counselors in general, CGCP leaders have not been held accountable for encouraging the attributes of citizenship and seem to do little to intentionally foster this aim (MacDonald & Sink, 1999). It is my contention, however, these comprehensive programs are one of the most important frameworks from which qualities of citizenship education can be instituted. To realize this goal, the first step is to propose a working definition of citizenship education that is well researched and flexible enough to be adapted by program leadership teams.

MULTICULTURAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION DEFINED AND ELUCIDATED

The perspective used here was drawn from current educational literature that reconceptualizes citizenship education from its more "traditional" (i.e., a narrow focus on the political rights and duties of a citizen) and incomplete renderings (Anderson et al., 1997; Clark, 1999) to what has been called multicultural citizenship (Kymlicka, 1995; also see Banks, 1997, 1998, 2001; Kaltsounis, 1997; Parker, 1996, for detailed discussions). Although the notion of "multiculturalism" as a socio-political construct is the subject of scholarly debate (e.g., Fuller, 1995; Lind, 2000), there is obvious common ground between multicultural education and citizenship education (Kaltsounis). This integrated approach is consistent with the contemporary positions espoused by Lee (1995, 2001) in his articles on diversity and school counseling, and in the American School Counselor Association's (1999a) position statement on multicultural counseling. To summarize the latter document, school counselors, operating within the context of a CGCP, should facilitate student development and enhance the total school and community environment through the understanding and appreciation of cultural diversities.

Subsequently, Banks (2001), one of the seminal writers in multicultural education, embedded this construct into citizenship education. He posited the following:

   Because of growing ethnic, cultural, racial, and religious diversity
   throughout the world, citizenship education needs to be changed in
   substantial ways to prepare students to function in the 21st century.
   Citizens in the new century need the knowledge, attitudes, and skills
   required to function in their ethnic and cultural communities and beyond
   their cultural borders and to participate in the construction of a national
   civic culture that is a moral and just community that embodies democratic
   ideals and values ... Students also need to acquire the knowledge and
   skills needed to become effective citizens in the global community. (p. 6)

This form of multicultural citizenship education is obviously many-sided (Cogan, 1999), embracing disparate levels of community (local and global) as well as individual differences, various task identities, and socio-political realities (Parker, 1996). In general, the orientation also seems to resolve the tensions in U.S. citizenship education (Cogan; Kaltsounis, 1997), for it attempts to unify various standards in civic education within the context of school reform (e.g., Citizenship Committee, 1983; Cogan, 1996, 1999; National Standards for Civics and Government, 1994; Riley, 1997).

CHARACTERISTICS OF MULTICULTURAL STUDENT-CITIZENS

Multicultural citizens are, in general, able to function well in their own culture, nation, and within the global community (Banks, 2001). Yet, specific characteristics of such a citizen vary in part across a spectrum of writers (e.g., Banks; Cogan, 1999; Dondero & McCoy, 1996; Meyer, 1996; Schaps & Lewis, 1998). Schaps and Lewis proposed, for example, three essential qualities of this broader view of a citizen. Students would develop a (a) deep regard for self and others, (b) personal commitment to core American values (e.g., justice, caring, fairness, responsibility, compassion), and (c) civil and considerate spirit when interacting with others dissimilar to oneself. Subsequently, Banks suggested that "good" multicultural student-citizens would learn to take humane and democratic social and civic actions to help change their communities and nation.

Perhaps the most useful way to recast the discussion is to work from two seminal studies (Anderson et al., 1997; Cogan, 1999). First, in an investigation that surveyed a random sample of American social studies teachers (N = 361) on their views regarding citizenship education, Anderson et al. reported several important findings. Across the four derived teacher perspectives, including the (a) cultural pluralists and (b) critical thinkers (both closely aligned with the aims of multicultural citizenship education), and (c) legalists and (d) assimilationists (two views that mirror the "traditionalist" orientation), there were several essential beliefs that could be readily integrated into a CGCP. A comprehensive approach to multicultural citizenship education should (a) promote tolerance and open-mindedness, (b) address controversial issues which encourage higher order thinking, (c) emphasize civic involvement (e.g., service learning), and (d) address the topic of social values (i.e., the fundamental values of the American society).

Subsequently, Cogan's (1999) research systematically questioned 182 experts/scholars across the citizenship education continuum to determine whether some consensus could be found among a host of possible citizen characteristics. These eight in descending order of importance were reported:

1. The ability to look at and approach problems as a member of a global society.

2. The ability to work with others in a cooperative way and to take responsibility for one's roles and duties in society.

3. The ability to understand, accept, and tolerate cultural differences.

4.The capacity to think in a critical and systemic way.

5. The willingness to resolve conflict in a nonviolent manner.

6.The willingness to change one's lifestyle and consumption habits to protect the environment.

7. The ability to be sensitive toward and to defend human rights (e.g., rights of women, ethnic minorities).

8. The willingness and ability to participate in politics at local, national, and international levels. (pp. 76-77)

The results from both investigations encompass many of the characteristics discussed in related citizenship education literature discussed earlier and are summarized as Grade 12 student competencies. (See Table) Where suitable, these outcomes could be woven into existing CGCP competencies, under perhaps the personal-social, educational, and career domains. Moreover, the competencies could be revised so that they are more developmentally appropriate for K-8 students.

Various commonalties seem to emerge among the key features of CGCPs and multicultural citizenship education. Like comprehensive programs, multicultural citizenship stresses the need for collaboration, shared responsibility, and interdependence at various levels of society, including educational and community settings (Banks, 2001; Battistoni, 1997; Dondero & McCoy, 1996; Porter, Epp, & Bryant, 2000; Rowley, 2001; Schaps & Lewis, 1998). To create a civil society, and more narrowly, a school that is a caring community of multicultural student-citizens (Sink, 2000; Sink & Rubel, 2001), opportunities must be provided for all educators, students, families, and influential community members to effectively work together to achieve CGCP competencies. Finally, CGCPs and multicultural citizenship education use systemic and developmental constructs to support them. Several ways school counselors can practically infuse multicultural citizenship education into their CGCPs are now presented.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

Initially, school counselors need to review existing CGCP (student) competencies to ascertain whether any of them are aligned with the characteristics of multicultural citizenship development (e.g., Anderson et al., 1997; Banks, 2001; Cogan, 1999; Remy, 1980). Very often CGCPs, perhaps unwittingly, focus on student outcomes that intersect nicely with those of multicultural citizenship education. For example, in the personal and social domain, CGCPs target effective communication and conflict resolution skills (e.g., Campbell & Dahir, 1997; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000, 2001; Myrick, 1997; Wittmer, 2000b), reflecting those proposed by major citizenship education writers (e.g., Cogan; Meyer, 1996). Similarly, in the educational domain, CGCPs attempt to foster higher order thinking and reasoned discussion, which would reflect salient elements of multicultural citizenship programs (Anderson et al.; Cogan). Nonetheless, supplementary performance-based and developmentally appropriate competencies may need to be included to explicitly address issues such as civic involvement, socio-political issues, diversity, and character development (MacDonald & Sink, 1999). Those offered here and in several of the previously mentioned articles are useful starting points.

Second, school counselors in partnership with classroom teachers should peruse the citizenship education literature examining it for practical activities and existing programs (e.g., Clark, 1999; Risinger, 1996; Rosen, 2000), which can be adapted for large group guidance curriculum. Since "hands on" experiences appear to be constructive teaching-learning strategies to promote aspects of citizenship education (Banks, 2001; Barber, Higgins, Smith, & Ballou, 2000; Meyer, 1996), counselors and teachers could collaboratively provide opportunities for active learning, including, for example, role-playing, simulations, project-based learning, and debates over controversial issues (e.g., Johnson, 1997; MacDonald, 1996; Westheimer & Kahne, 1998). School counselors can readily access a host of relevant multicultural citizenship education materials available at The Center for Civic Education. Additionally, guidance activity books that are related to the topic are widely available. For example, Peyser and McLaughlin's (1997) book, Character Education Activities for K-6 Classrooms, offers many elementary classroom activities that can be incorporated into social studies, health, and language arts lessons that target good citizenship and allied topics (e.g., responsibility, cooperation, character education). In short, to provide widespread exposure to and application of multicultural citizenship curriculum, experientially based guidance activities are recommended.

A third proposal involves the developmental feature of CGCPs. For multicultural citizenship education to be effective, The Center for Civic Education, in its report on civic education in America, recommended that this form of learning should be consciously reproduced in schools, starting with Grades K to 2 and proceeding through high school (Risinger, 1996). More recently, Niemi and Chapman (1999) and Rosen (2000) posited that elementary through secondary schools' pedagogy could informally model and augment prescribed curriculum by other styles of participatory learning. As such, school counselors and other relevant parties, as part of the CGCP, should ensure that students have exposure to small and large group guidance lessons on aspects of good multicultural citizenship. The following are sample ideas:

1. Guide students through an engaging and respectful process that helps generate school and classroom rules as well as the school code of conduct (cf. Schimmel, 1997).

2. Foster good social skills to enhance civil class room interaction and discussion, where a range of opinions can be safely voiced.

3. Teach students how to serve on student councils where issues of diversity and multiculturalism are openly addressed.

4. Assist pupils to locate and use relevant information (i.e., helping them to be more informed about their community and its diversity).

5. Work with students on how to make effective oral and written presentations to "authority figures" (e.g., school leaders and community leaders) from a range of backgrounds.

6. Assign older students with diverse backgrounds and positive social skills to be mentors for those younger students with limited exposure to religious, cultural, and ethnic differences.

7. Encourage dynamic representatives from diverse backgrounds to interact with pupils in a variety of forums that discuss important multicultural civic issues (e.g., discrimination, participatory democracy, underrepresented people groups in office).

As students mature, multicultural citizenship education should move from concrete outcomes and structured tasks used in elementary schools to those that might be called transitional objectives and activities in middle schools. During the high school years, the guidance competencies and activities should be transformational in nature, preparing students for realistic life roles in a multicultural society. For example, by the third or fourth grade, children should be able to talk about multicultural citizenship ideas (e.g., What does it mean to show "tolerance" or "intolerance"?) and act out consistently a simple performance (e.g., giving a complement or showing eye contact when another child is speaking). Transitional tasks are those that combine structured performances with higher levels of reasoning (e.g., role-playing a scripted dialogue with a peer from a different ethnicity). In the late teen years, students should be able to not only discuss and role-play complex situations, but also act in a civil manner in "real-world" situations. For instance, when high school seniors attend a public forum on a particular issue, they should be able to listen carefully to all sides, assert their perspective in a respectful manner, and acknowledge the validity of differing viewpoints (Schaps & Lewis, 1998; Spady, 1994).

Finally, to encourage a systemic approach to citizenship development, CGCPs ought to make stronger connections with parents and community members (Cogan, 1999). In Niemi and Chapman's (1999) summary of a 1996 National Center for Education Statistics' study of civic development (N = 4,212 American high school students and their parents), two salient findings were reported: (a) Parental involvement and modeling were important components in fostering citizenship characteristics; and (b) sustained community service projects for students appeared to be positively related to several dimensions of civic development (e.g., increased political knowledge and a higher level of confidence in the ability to speak at public meetings).

To engage parents and guardians in the process, I recommend that administrators team up with school counselors and other educators in creating a volunteer system that provides meaningful social-civic activities (e.g., mentoring, small group instruction, one-on-one interaction, job shadowing, field trip chaperones). The Parent Teacher Association could be involved as well as other civic-minded service organizations (e.g., Rotary International). Additionally, community-school round-tables could be developed, where people of color, for instance, who are also parents or guardians, explore with students vital issues affecting school and community life.

CLOSING REFLECTIONS

In this article, I advocate for school counseling personnel to take seriously the charge to develop productive student-citizens written into or implied from most CGCP mission statements. Although there are numerous ways to inculcate various characteristics of citizenship, I suggest here, given America's highly pluralistic society, that a multicultural orientation is a feasible position to adopt. Even in areas where students have few contacts with different ethnic groups, the dimensions of multicultural citizenship outlined here can be beneficial to all pupils. Many students, for example, leave rural communities to attend college or seek employment in diverse settings. These most likely will require a broader perspective on the world and more finely honed social-civic skills.

Multicultural citizenship education can be harmonized with comprehensive guidance and counseling programs through a variety of workable steps:

* Modify current student competencies to include those multicultural outcomes presented in the Table and in other resources (e.g., Cogan, 1999; Northside Independent School District, 1994; Remy, 1980).

* Use large group guidance lessons as a conduit for active engagement with issues related to multicultural citizenship. (Collaboration with all school personnel is essential.)

* Initiate the multicultural citizenship formation process early, starting with kindergarten or first grade.

* Elicit parental and community involvement in developing a broad-based coalition of supporters of multicultural citizenship education.

Because they already face a multitude of responsibilities, resistance from school counselors is to be expected and openly processed (Sink & Yillik-Downer, 2001). Yet, if members of the profession desire to remain focused on all of comprehensive guidance and counseling program's major goals, this developmental "domain" should no longer be neglected. Noble CGCP mission statements must be translated into deliberate programming and measurable student outcomes. It is my hope that the principles, sample competencies, and activities offered in this article will assist school counselors to realize this important aim. Over the long run, students should benefit as well. They will become effective multicultural citizens, contributing more positively to their local communities and to society.

The author expresses his appreciation to Ms. Heather Robinson Stroh for her research assistance.

References

American School Counselor Association. (1997). The professional school counselor and comprehensive school counseling programs (Position statement). Retrieved April 11, 2002, from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content. cfm?L1=1000&L2=9

American School Counselor Association. (1999a). The professional school counselor and cross/multicultural counseling (Position statement). Retrieved April 11, 2002, from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.cfm?L1=1000& L2=26

American School Counselor Association. (1999b). The role of the professional school counselor (Position statement). Retrieved April 11, 2002, from http://www. schoolcounselor.org/content.cfm?L1=1000&L2=69

Anderson, C., Avery, R G., Pederson, P.V., Smith, E. S., & Sullivan, J. L. (1997). Divergent perspectives on citizenship education: A Q-method study and survey of social studies teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 333-364.

Banks, J. A. (1997). Educating citizens in a multicultural society. New York: Teachers College Press.

Banks, J. A. (1998). The lives and values of researchers: Implications for educating citizens in a multicultural society. Educational Researcher, 27, 4-17.

Banks, J. A. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 5-16.

Barber, B. R., Higgins, R. R., Smith, J. K., & Ballou, J. (2000). Measuring citizenship project high school study: Final report to the Ford Foundation. Detroit, MI: The Ford Foundation.

Battistoni, R. M. (1997). Service learning as civic learning: Lessons we can learn from our students. In G. Reeher & J. Cammarano (Eds.), Education for citizenship (pp. 31-49). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Borders, L. D., & Drury, S. M. (1992). Comprehensive school counseling programs: A review for policymakers and practitioners. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 487-498.

Campbell, C. A., & Dahir, C. A. (1997). Sharing the vision: The national standards for school counseling programs. Alexandria, VA: American School Counselor Association.

Cassell, J. R. (1995). Improving self-control in upper elementary students through a program of character, civic, and social education. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova Southeastern University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED386634)

Citizenship Committee. (1983). Standards and position statements: Essential characteristics of a citizenship education program. Retrieved October 5, 2000, from http://www.ncss.org/standars/positions/essential.html

Clark, M., & Stone, C. (2000). The developmental school counselor as educational leader. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (2nd ed., pp. 85-81). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Clark, T. (1999). Rethinking civic education for the 21st century. In D. D. Marsh (Ed.), Preparing our schools for the 21st century (pp. 65-87). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Coats, R. Q., Ash, M., & Dorsey, C. J. H. (1998). Washington state guidelines for comprehensive counseling and guidance programs from kindergarten through community and technical college. Olympia, WA: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Cogan, J. J. (1996). Crisis in citizenship education in the United States. International Journal of Social Education, 11, 21-36.

Cogan, J. J. (1999). Multidimensional citizenship as educational policy for the millennium: Putting research into practice. Momentum, 30, 73-82.

Dahir, C. A. (2001). The national standards for school counseling programs: Development and implementation. Professional School Counseling, 4, 320-327.

Dahir, C. A., Sheldon, C. B., & Valiga, M.J. (1998). Vision into action: Implementing the national standards for school counseling programs. Alexandria, VA: American School Counselor Association.

Dinkmeyer, D. C., & Caldwell, E. (1970). Developmental counseling and guidance: A comprehensive school approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dondero, M., & McCoy, E. (1996). R.I.C.E.--four values for civics education. Momentum, 27, 20-23.

Fraser, J.W. (2001). The school in the United States: A documentary history. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fuller, K. (1995). The voices of rhetoric and politics in social epistemology: For a critical-rationalist multiculturalism. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 25, 512-522

Galbraith, J. K. (1997). The good society: The humane agenda. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.

Gutmann, A. (2000). Why should schools care about civic education? In L. M. McDonnell, P. M. Timpane, & R. Benjamin (Eds.), Rediscovering the democratic purpose of education (pp. 73-90). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.

Gysbers, N. C., & Henderson, P. (2000). Developing and managing your school guidance program (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Gysbers, N. C., & Henderson, P. (2001). Comprehensive guidance and counseling programs: A rich history and a bright future. Professional School Counseling, 4, 246-256.

Hatch, T. (2000). Comprehensive school counseling and guidance program: The implementation year. Moreno Valley, CA: Moreno Valley Unified School District.

Henderson, P., & Gysbers, N. C. (1998). Leading and managing your school guidance program staff: A manual for school administrators and directors of guidance. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Herr, E. L. (2001). The impact of national policies, economics, and school reform on comprehensive guidance programs. Professional School Counseling, 4, 236-245.

Highline School District Comprehensive Counseling and Guidance Program. (2000). Highline, WA: Highline School District.

Johnson, D. W. (1997). Academic controversy. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 5(6), 1-4.

Johnson, S. K., & Whitfield, E. A. (Eds.). (1991). Evaluating guidance programs: A practitioner's guide. Iowa City, IA: The American College Testing Program and the National Consortium of State Career Guidance Supervisors.

Kaltsounis, T. (1997). Multicultural education and citizenship education at a crossroads: Searching for common ground. Social Studies, 88,18-22.

Keys, S. G., & Lockhart, E. J. (1999). The school counselor's role in facilitating multisystemic change. Professional School Counseling, 3, 101-107.

Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. New York: Oxford University.

Lapan, R.T. (2001). Results-based comprehensive guidance and counseling programs: A framework for planning and evaluation. Professional School Counseling, 4, 289-299.

Lapan, R.T., Gysbers, N. C., & Petroski, G. F. (2001). Helping seventh graders be safe and successful: A statewide study of the impact of comprehensive guidance and counseling programs. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 320-330.

Lee, C. C. (1995). School counseling and cultural diversity: A framework for effective practice. In C. C. Lee (Ed.), Counseling for diversity: A guide for school counselors and related professionals (pp. 3-17). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Lee, C. C. (2001). Culturally responsive school counselors and programs: Addressing the needs of all students. Professional School Counseling, 4, 257-261.

Lind, M. (2000). Politics after ideology. New Leader, 83,19-21.

MacDonald, G., & Sink, C. A. (1999). A qualitative developmental analysis of comprehensive guidance programmes in schools in the United States. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 27, 415-430.

MacDonald, M. (1996). Civic education of, by and for the students. Momentum, 27, 8-11.

Meyer, J. R. (1996). Citizenship development education: An imperative. International Journal of Social Education, 11, 1-20.

Mustaine, B. L., & LaFountain, R. M. (1993). Some thoughts on the future of school counseling. Guidance and Counselling, 8, 30-39.

Myrick, R. D. (1997). Developmental guidance and counseling: A practical approach (3rd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.

National Standards for Civics and Government. (1994). Calabasas, CA: Center for Civic Education.

Neukrug, E. S., Barr, C. G., Hoffman, L. R., & Kaplan, L. S. (1993). Developmental counseling and guidance: A model for use in your school. The School Counselor, 40, 356-362.

Niemi, R. G., & Chapman, C. (1999). Making students good citizens. The Education Digest, 65, 36-40.

Northside Independent School District. (1994). Comprehensive guidance program framework. San Antonio, TX: Author.

Olson, M. J., & Perrone, P. A. (1991). Changing to a developmental guidance program. The School Counselor, 39, 41-46.

Paisley, P. O. (2001). Maintaining and enhancing the developmental focus in school counseling programs. Professional School Counseling, 4, 271-278.

Paisley, P. O., & Benshoff, J. M. (1996). Applying developmental principles to practice: Training issues for the professional development of school counselors. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 30, 163-169.

Paisley, P. O., & Borders, L. D. (1995). School Counseling: An evolving specialty. Journal of Counseling and Development, 74, 150-153.

Paisley, P. O., & Hubbard, G.T. (1994). Developmental school counseling programs: From theory to practice. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Paisley, P. O., & Peace, S. D. (1995). Developmental principles: A framework for school counseling programs. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 30, 85-93.

Pangle, L. S., & Pangle, T. L. (2000). What the American founders have to teach us about schooling for democratic citizenship. In L. M. McDonnell, P. M. Timpane, & R. Benjamin (Eds.), Rediscovering the democratic purpose of education (pp. 21-46). Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.

Parker, W. C. (1996)."Advanced" ideas about democracy: Toward a pluralist conception of citizen education. Teachers College Record, 98,104-125.

Peyser, S., & McLaughlin, M. (1997). Character education activities for K-6 classrooms. Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Porter, G., Epp, L., & Bryant, S. (2000). Collaboration among school mental health professionals: A necessity, not a luxury. Professional School Counseling, 3, 315-322.

Remy, R. C. (1980). Handbook of basic citizenship competencies: Guidelines for comparing materials, assessing instruction, and setting goals. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Riley, R.W. (1997, February).The importance of civic education: "National standards for civic education." Teaching PreK-8,27,6.

Risinger, C. F. (1996). Citizenship education in the curriculum: An ERIC/CHESS sample. International Journal of Social Education, 11, 120-122.

Rosen, L. (2000). Elementary school civic education gets good citizens started. The Education Digest, 65, 19-22.

Rowley, W. J. (2001). Expanding collaborative partnerships among school counselors and school psychologists. Professional School Counseling, 3, 315-322.

Schaps, E., & Lewis, C. (1998). Breeding citizenship through community in school. The Education Digest, 64, 23-27.

Schimmel, D. (1997). School rule-making and citizenship education. The Education Digest, 63, 40-44.

Selbourne, D. (1994). The principle of duty: An essay on the foundations of civic order. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame.

Sink, C. A. (2000). Modeling collaboration through caring communities of learners. Professional School Counseling, 3(5), ii-iii.

Sink, C. A. (2002). In search of the profession's finest hour: A critique of four views of 21st century school counseling. Professional School Counseling, 5, 156-163.

Sink, C. A., & MacDonald, G. (1998). The status of comprehensive guidance and counseling in the United States. Professional School Counseling, 2, 88-94.

Sink, C. A., & Robinson, H. L. (2002). Can comprehensive school counseling programs make educational difference in Washington state's elementary schools? Manuscript in preparation, Seattle Pacific University.

Sink, C. A., & Rubel, L. (2001). The school as community approach to violence prevention. In D. S. Sandhu (Ed.), Faces of violence: Psychological correlates, concepts, and intervention strategies (pp. 417-437). Huntington, NY: Nova Science.

Sink, C. A., & Yillik-Downer, A. (2001). School counselors' perceptions of comprehensive guidance and counseling programs: A survey of national trends. Professional School Counseling, 4, 278-288.

Spady, W. G. (1994, March). Choosing outcomes of significance. Educational Leadership, pp. 18-22.

Swen, S. F. (2000). Participation in a peer helpers program: Students' perception of school climate and personal growth. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, SA. (UMI No. 04194209)

Thompson, R. A. (2002). School counseling: Best practices for working in the schools (2nd ed.). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Utah's Comprehensive Guidance Program. (1998). Utah student services initiative for all K-12 students--Purpose statement. Retrieved June 30, 2001, from http://www.usoe.k12.ut.us/yap/ssi.htm

VanZandt, Z., & Hayslip, J. B. (2001). Developing your school counseling program: A handbook for systemic planning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (1998). Education for action: Preparing youth for participatory democracy. In W. Ayers, J. A. Hunt, & T. Quinn (Eds.), Teaching for social justice: A democracy and education reader (pp. 1-20). New York: Teachers College.

Wittmer, J. (2000a). Developing school guidance and counseling: Its history and reconceptualization. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (2nd ed., pp. 2-13). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Wittmer, J. (2000b). Implementing a comprehensive developmental school counseling program. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (2nd ed., pp. 14-34). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

RELATED ARTICLE: Summary Competencies of a Multicultural Student-Citizen within the Framework of a Comprehensive Guidance and Counseling Program.

By Grade 12, students will demonstrate

* An understanding and appreciation for their own culture and the cultures of others.

* Critical thinking in the exploration of sociocultural and political ideas.

* An ability to reason about issues from local, national, and global perspectives.

* An understanding of important American values (e.g., justice, tolerance, responsibility).

* An understanding of the basic rights of all human beings as embodied in the Bill of Rights.

* The ability to express appropriately an opinion on important social and political issues while listening and respecting the views of others.

* The ability to cooperate/collaborate with others in school and community settings.

* How to resolve interpersonal conflicts peacefully.

Christopher Sink, Ph.D., NCC, LMHC, is a professor and chair, Department of School Counseling and Psychology, Seattle Pacific University, WA. E-mail: [e-mail]