Expanding the developmental school counseling paradigm: meeting the needs of the 21st Century student.

Since the late 1970's, school counseling programs have been based on a comprehensive developmental model supported by various stage theories of human development (Borders & Drury, 1992; Paisley, 2001). With this transition to a developmental model, services became more preventative in focus, with an emphasis on assisting all students with mastery of appropriate developmental tasks.

Dinkmeyer and Caldwell's (1970) seminal work, Developmental Counseling and Guidance: A Comprehensive School Approach, provided early direction for establishing developmental guidance programs. They articulated several key philosophical principles as guidelines for program development: (a) developmental guidance should be an integral part of the overall educational process and consistent with the school's mission and philosophy; (b) developmental guidance is for all students; c) teachers must be a part of the program delivery system; (d) programs function best when planned as a continuous set of services that help the student accomplish tasks that lead to effective cognitive and affective development; (e) programs include direct counseling, appraisal, and group guidance services as well as the indirect service of consultation; and (f) programs focus on and encourage students' assets.

Later work by Myrick (1997) and others (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000; Wittmer, 2000) continued to support these principles, with additional emphasis on the need for an organized, planned, and sequential guidance curriculum. Gysbers and Henderson also moved the profession forward from thinking of school counseling as a set of developmental services to a broader emphasis on comprehensive developmental programs. Johnson and Johnson (1982) advocated that programs be organized around specific outcomes, further defined as student competencies. Gysbers and Henderson (2000) affirmed this approach. Most recently, the American School Counselor Association articulated National Standards for School Counseling Programs in support of students' academic, career, and personal/social development (Campbell & Dahir, 1997).

Theoretically Based Developmental Programs

During the past 30 years, a developmental orientation has become a highly desired, core characteristic of school counseling programs. With this in mind, two important questions emerge as programs enter the 21st Century: (a) Have school counseling programs effectively transitioned to theoretically based developmental programs? (b) Are programs as currently conceptualized and implemented accomplishing their mission of positive development for all students? Unfortunately little research exists to answer unequivocally these questions.

Transition

MacDonald and Sink (1999) found mixed results in the capacity of state-level, comprehensive developmental school counseling programs to address adequately the developmental benchmarks stated in program mission and goal statements. Constructing programs that assist students in attaining critical developmental milestones appears to be harder than initially imagined. All of the program models in the MacDonald and Sink (1999) study sought to assist all students in their pursuit of well-established developmental tasks. Program development in the personal/social domain received the strongest support, with fewer programs having components that adequately addressed academic and career development. Although many programs intended to address identity development, results revealed a weak connection between this intention and actual program components, particularly in the area of cultural identity. MacDonald and Sink (1999) posited that the absence of a sound understanding of developmental theory on the part of program authors or practitioners, or confusion regarding the difference between scope and sequence and the core theoretical principles that lead to healthy development, could account for these discrepancies.

Collecting data from state departments of education program descriptions rather than from individual districts and schools produced some methodological limitations. Nonetheless, the findings indicate how school counseling programs may need to be modified if school counselors are to effectively serve students, schools, and families. These findings are especially relevant given the fact that elementary and secondary students--particularly those students who experience personal social, and academic difficulties--can benefit tremendously from developmental programs (Paisley & Peace, 1995). Outmoded counselor education or outright neglect of developmental principles may partially be responsible for the shortcomings, yet there may be an even more difficult task at hand. The ability of program developers and practitioners to accurately integrate developmental theory into the role and function of the school counselor may be a more complex task than previously considered.

Today's school counselor is occupied with a number of responsibilities. Even within well-delineated and well-executed comprehensive programs, counselors are relied upon to deliver an increasing number of services, some of which may not be directly related to the counseling program's mission (Hardesty & Dillard, 1994; Napierkowski & Parsons, 1995). In times of high stakes testing, pressure to accelerate academic achievement can inhibit program implementation. The limited flexibility and availability of the one professional who, by virtue of his or her education, is uniquely qualified to assume a more influential role in the education and development of students becomes a major shortcoming. Program components and entire programs become further compromised when program principles do not emanate from a well-crafted foundation which facilitates learning and promotes optimal development.

Positive Development for All Students?

Evidence of well-designed and well-implemented outcomes-based program evaluations are almost nonexistent in the field of school counseling. Whiston and Sexton (1998) reviewed school counseling outcome research conducted from 1988 to 1995. They concluded that, in general the activities performed by school counselors have a positive impact on student achievement, career planning, and social skills, but they drew this conclusion cautiously due to the serious methodological limitations found in most studies. Borders and Drury (1992) referenced several well-designed studies from before 1988 of classroom guidance interventions that demonstrated positive effects for classroom behavior and attitudes toward school. They also cited several studies of counseling interventions that indicated students who received counseling performed better academically and exhibited positive attitudes and behavior. Their review failed to identify study limitations. Others have suggested that classroom interventions have limited long-term effects with at-risk populations (Webster, 1993; Weissberg, Caplan, & Harwood, 1991). Weaknesses included limited scope and duration, poor implementation, failure to account for contextual factors, and lack of integration with other interventions. Although school counseling programs have taken steps in the right direction, some have recommended that the comprehensive developmental model needs to be reconceptualized to meet the needs of the diverse student populations of the 21 Century (House & Martin, 1998; Keys, Bemak, & Lockhart, 1998). In contrast to the positive, albeit cautious, outcomes cited above, some research has indicated that the current scope of comprehensive developmental school counseling programs is less effective among students of color and students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds (Lapan, Gysbers, & Sun, 1997). Given the disproportionate number of students of color and students who come from low socioeconomic backgrounds, who are also underachieving (Miller, 1995; U.S. Department of Education, 2001), it can be inferred that some school counseling programs have made a limited impact on the real needs of the students.

School counseling has evolved over time as a result of changing social, economic, and political conditions (Borders & Drury, 1992). Nevertheless, the profession has not always been included in school reform efforts (Herr, 1984; House & Martin, 1998; Taylor & Adelman, 1996). Recent work supported by the DeWitt Wallace-Reader's Digest Fund has brought school counseling programs into closer alignment with ongoing school reform by urging the connection of programs with the primary mission of schools--the education (hence academic achievement) of students (House & Martin, 1998). Evidence thus indicates that there is room for improvement for current school counseling programs, particularly when it comes to providing services for certain populations and services that contribute to the academic mission of schools.

This article reexamines the direction of school counseling programs for the 21st Century in light of these concerns. Specifically, this article expands the parameters of the present-day development school counseling model by (a) describing a development-in-context paradigm for responding to the needs of urban youth, (b) exploring the ecological implications an urban environment has for urban education and healthy development, (c) positing what is missing in current developmental school counseling programs, and (d) recommending changes for school counseling practice in the 21st Century.

Development-in-Context Communities and neighborhoods within urban areas have long been adversely affected by numerous social ills in the form of unemployment, high crime, substance abuse, teenage pregnancy, and illiteracy. Many urban schools are located in neighborhoods that have multiple individual and community factors that place residents at risk for violent deaths, juvenile arrest, abuse and neglect, substance abuse, and poverty. Young people who grow up in this context come to school with numerous critical developmental needs that are far different from the needs of students who grow up in less stressful environments. For some students, personal characteristics, conditions of life, and situational circumstances, and the interaction these qualities have with each other, make it more likely that development and education will be less than optimal (Gordon & Yowell, 1999). Often these contexts do not provide the individual with sufficient life-giving and sustaining knowledge (Madhubuti, 1993). In reality, high juvenile arrests, teen violent deaths, school assaults, and seriously deficient academic achievement levels reinforce the magnitude of need for a view of development that includes an understanding of context leading to a multifaceted approach to problem solving.

Gordon and Yowell (1999) posited that being at risk of failure refers not simply to the characteristics of the person, but more importantly to the interaction of personal characteristics and the context in which the person lives. From this perspective, it is the failure or incapacity of the developmental environment to support the needs of the developing individual that more heavily influences who might be at risk. Similarly it can be said that resilient youth are shaped by an environmental context that facilitates positive youth development and health-promoting competence (Bogenschneider, 1996).

Culture is an overarching component of context and a critical influence on human development. Belief systems, attitudes, dispositions, language systems, and skills are culturally determined. Culture both describes and explains human activity (Gordon & Yowell, 1999).

In rethinking which developmental models make the most sense as foundational pillars for comprehensive developmental school counseling programs, attention to context and culture is important. The rich cultural diversity of many urban areas coupled with the contextual issues of high degrees of mobility, high incidence of anonymity, conflicting lifestyles in close proximity, a concentration of material resources, ease of communication and geographic mobility, and the coexistence of fluidity and rigidity in institutional and personal behavior (Gordon & Armour-Thomas, 1992) make it clear that stage models alone are insufficient to capture the multidimensional factors that impinge on the development of urban youth.

Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological paradigm is a useful conceptual framework for understanding development in an urban context. If fact, he described an ecological orientation to development as a focus on "development-in-context" (p. 12). This approach differs sharply from the more traditional stage theories because of the importance it places on the relationship between the individual and the individual's immediate environment, and the way in which this relationship is influenced by the larger physical and social mileau. Bronfrenbrenner suggested that the emphasis is

   not on the traditional psychological processes of perception, motivation,
   thinking, and learning, but on their content--what is perceived, desired,
   feared, thought about, or acquired as knowledge, and how the nature of this
   psychological material changes as a function of a person's exposure to and
   interaction with the environment. (p. 9)

Development then from an ecological perspective is defined as" the person's evolving conception of the ecological environment, the person's relation to it as well as the person's growing capacity to discover, sustain, or alter its properties" (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 9).

Bronfenbrenner (1979) characterized the ecological environment as a "set of nested structures, each inside the next, like a set of Russian dolls" (p. 3). The individual exists at the core of this structure, surrounded by four concentric levels: (a) microsystem (focuses on relationships among persons within the day-to-day environment such as family, school, classroom, and peer group), (b) mesosystem (the interrelationship among the various microsystems; for example, the interrelationship between the school and the family), (c) exosystem (linkages to the larger institutions of society such as government, religious organizations, educational system, social welfare system, and healthcare system), and (d) macrosystem (overall cultural system or norms; common beliefs; social expectations; economic, social, and political policies).

Approaching development from an ecological perspective allows for (a) an assessment of the individual, the environment, and the individual's adaptation to the environment, and (b) the potential for change in the individual and the environmental systems and structures that surround the individual. From this perspective, change for the individual is closely connected to change in the environment. Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological model provides a structure for conceptualizing, organizing, and intervening in the environment that surrounds the individual.

Rethinking Urban Education

Facilitating awareness of self early in life enhances an individual's ability to adapt well to multiple contexts in the future. In this contemporary era of school reform, many local school systems struggle with the issues of academic underachievement (Arroyo & Rhoad, 1999), school drop/push out (Ponciano, 1989), youth violence and aggression (Sugai, Sprague, Horner & Walker, 2000), and substance abuse (Maxwell & Wallisch, 2000). This is especially prevalent in urban areas where large numbers of students must face diverse cultural norms and the socioeconomic conditions of poverty. These issues, while not new, may be exacerbated by the misconception of the social ecology of modern living.

Gordon and Armour-Thomas (1992) noted that urban education consists of formal and informal transmissions of attitudes, culture, knowledge, and techniques that have merged within the modern city-state-nation or urban society. This definition is different from a more traditional perspective that views the education of inner city children as solely that of addressing the problems of low status people. Furthermore, given that 75% of people in the United States in 1990 lived in metropolitan areas compared to only 36.9% in 1900 (U.S. Census Bureau, 1990), and due to global urbanization via technologically advanced telecommunications and modern travel, urban diversity affects life well beyond the city limits. The world becomes a smaller place as the common characteristics of urban living have an immediate effect on the entire global community in the 21st Century. Therefore, the reconceptualization of urban education and urban school counseling has the potential to impact schools and learning well beyond the areas which have typically been considered urban, otherwise known as inner-city environments.

Gordon and Armour-Thomas (1992) noted that urban areas are inhabited by human beings who over time have migrated from living among relatively isolated groups sharing similar cultural conceptual frameworks to living arrangements that can be characterized as pluralistic and diverse. Today's metropolitan areas are inhabited by groups of people who typically live in homogeneous sub-groups and like their predecessors share similar cultural norms. The difference between urban inhabitants and their rural or nonurban ancestors is the presence of both homogeneous and heterogeneous cultural characteristics. From an ecological perspective, the mesosystem experiences (i.e., interactions among family, school, and peer environments) of a 10-year-old child growing up in the rural south in the early 1900s were fairly consistent when compared to the inconsistent heterogeneous environmental stimuli experienced by a 10-year-old living today in a metropolitan city. The life of the contemporary youth is marked by both similar and different cultural influences at home, in school, in the media, and among friends.

A person's ability to navigate between these various cultural contexts is a critical developmental asset from which other developmental tasks emanate. From this perspective, the essential task of educating young people and preparing them to be productive citizens of the future takes on new meaning. A reexamination of the challenges of the modern city-state-nation exposes the need for more sophisticated approaches to preparing young people to thrive and contribute to their society in meaningful ways. The failure of traditional education and school counseling approaches to address the needs of urban populations demonstrates this principle (Lapan et al., 1997; Shujaa, 1994).

Gordon and Armour-Thomas's (1992) conceptualization of urban living also noted that life within any environment that is marked by diversity is replete with contradiction. Modern humans, urban dwellers in particular, are simultaneously in constant contact with harmonious and disharmonious cultural influences. A fundamental by-product of urban living is inconsistency. The lack of congruence between cultural norms across the ecological environment produces additional barriers to be overcome. A key to overcoming these obstacles is to possess an authentic awareness-of-self as an occupant and active participant in multiple contexts with the ability to act on each context in order to bring about change.

Learning to deal with the paradoxical phenomenon of contradiction is a missing critical component of education (Gordon & Armour-Thomas, 1992). The ability to deal successfully with contradiction must stem from an awareness of self-in-context. The close proximity of multiple, diverse subgroupings existing within a given population requires that the individual develop heightened adaptability skills in order to successfully negotiate individual and group needs. The ability to make decisions about personal interests, including the needs of the particular cultural subgroup to which one belongs, must be grounded in a fairly accurate perception of context.

The awareness of self-in-time and self-in-space in relation to others is important. This Adlerian (Adler, 1931.) perspective places a primary emphasis on the individual's ability to conceptualize their social environment so as to access a healthy identity, an awareness of self-in-context. This is a primary developmental task and a prerequisite for successful adaptation to subsequent developmental levels leading towards optimal human development.

Traditional models of school counseling do not readily offer learners the opportunity to develop contextual awareness. Existing developmental programs focus on developmental stage theory while giving little attention to the context in which development must take place. This shortcoming is not limited to non-mainstream learners but is more exacerbated among those whose conceptual systems are incongruent with the hegemonic pedagogy. Students of color, for example, in addition to facing the challenges encountered at school by all students, must also negotiate the sometimes contradictory cultural practices of the school. For a number of African-American students, the pursuit of academic excellence is looked upon as stigmatism to be avoided (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986). The conflict between academic achievement and social acceptance among peers leads to an oppositional attitude toward school. Ogbu and Simons (1998) attributed this resistance to historically, and continually, limited access to educationally relevant capital. Specifically, because educational achievement is believed to be sanctioned by the same hegemonic social order that is responsible for oppression and the limited access to necessary capital, the pursuit of validation through achievement is seen as a means of "selling-out" one's heritage and Black identity.

In order to bridge the gap between the individual, the environmental context, and the acquisition of critical developmental constructs, awareness of self-in-context must be fostered throughout all phases of development. As young people develop, it is important that this contextual awareness be integrated within a variety of learning experiences (Ibrahim, 1992).

Recommendations for Transforming School Counseling

If school counselors are to develop and implement programs that reflect a development-in-context paradigm, several philosophical changes are necessary in the conceptualization and organization of school counseling programs. The following section outlines seven guiding principles for transforming urban as well as nonurban school counseling programs in the 21st Century.

Developing Awareness of Self-in-Context as a Program Priority

Facilitating an awareness of self-in-context needs to be a central focus of comprehensive developmental school counseling programs (Ibrahim, 1992, 2001). It should permeate all aspects of the role and function of the contextually oriented school counselor. Whether through individual or group counseling, parent and teacher consultation, collaboration, or classroom guidance, it is suggested here that students should be given opportunities to enhance their awareness of the multiple contexts that impact their lives. Identity development is a critical asset for optimal development in a multicultural society (LeCapitaine, 2001). Identity refers to the meaning the individual assigns to the self in the broader context of life. Identity development is facilitated by experiences that emphasize self-awareness as well as learning how the person views him or herself, how others view the person, how these perceptions influence personal decisions, and how awareness of self does not have to be restricted by others' perceptions. From this perspective, identity goes well beyond notions of positive self-image. Developing a critical awareness of self as an actor in and on one's ecological environment becomes more important than simply teaching students to feel good about themselves (Phelps, Taylor, & Gerard, 2001)

According to Ibrahim (1992, 2001), an individual's self-concept can be enhanced through an awareness of (a) the person's cultural history including accomplishments, contributions to society, and past and present interactions among and between cultures; (b) migration patterns and acculturative stress; and (c) significant differences among cultures and an individual's ability to differentiate between the values and practices of his or her own culture and the common cultural practice in many public institutions such as the school. Identity development as it relates to gender is also important (Ibrahim, 1992, 2001). Awareness of gender differences, beginning at an early age, promotes consciousness of contextual expectations and aids the ability to resolve conflicts that result from internal and external expectations of how males and females should interact in their environment.

Given that school counselors in the 21st Century will be working in increasingly culturally diverse school communities, it will be important for school counseling programs to explicitly address dimensions related to self-awareness, culture, and gender. It is suggested here that the facilitation of cultural- and gender-identity development can also promote broader personal growth and enhanced empathy. Awareness of self-identity from a cultural and gender perspective in relation to ecological context could be an important first step in addressing cultural conflict.

Use of a Systemic-Ecological Framework for Problem Solving

Traditionally, school counselors have been taught primarily to use counseling paradigms that emphasize change for the individual as a result of individually focused interventions. Individual counseling predominates as a frequently used strategy. Many of the problems confronting students in urban schools, however, require a more multidimensional and comprehensive response with interventions that target both the individual and the systems (classroom, school, peer group, family, and neighborhood) surrounding the individual (Collins & Collins, 1994; Fine, 1992; Keys & Lockhart, 2000; Lerner, 1995). If school counselors are to maximize the effect of their services, they need to recognize that the environment surrounding the student-client is as much "the client" as the individual or family with whom they work directly (Hershenson, Power, & Seligman, 1989). School counselors in the 21st Century need to use both psychological and systemic-ecological principles when responding to developmental needs.

School counselors who apply principles of systemic-ecological change to the problem conceptualization and strategy development processes of prevention and intervention view change for an individual as contingent upon change within the system or systems surrounding that individual. Consider for example a recent referral received by a school counselor who works in an urban elementary school. The counselor had seven first-grade boys referred for improper sexual activity. It seems the boys were touching girls inappropriately and crawling under desks to look underneath girls' dresses and skirts. The school counselor responded by convening a meeting of the boys' parents or other family members. The school counselor was surprised by the reaction of some family members, who found amusement in the behavior and boasted about their children's manliness. Although interventions that target directly the child could help clarify appropriate boundaries and norms of behavior for the child, it is clear from this example that efforts aimed at the child alone would not be sufficient. Although this is not always possible, the child is best helped when the school and family are consistent in their messages about appropriate behavior. In this particular case, the family's belief system about appropriate male behavior, attitudes about how males and females relate with one another, and skills for establishing norms and expectations for appropriate behavior are important areas for the school counselor to address.

Implementing a systemic-ecological framework suggests that the school counselor also understand and be able to assess how different levels of systems and subsystems influence an individual's development. In a typical school counseling program, a school counselor spends the majority of time implementing interventions at the microsystem level. Counseling and consultation services occur at this level as well the implementation of broader classroom and school-wide programs designed to impact peer group culture, school climate, and the organizational structure of the classroom and school.

Recently, the DeWitt Wallace-Reader's Digest Fund's National Initiative for Transforming School Counseling (House & Martin, 1998) identified advocacy as an essential role for school counselors. House and Martin have described social advocacy as an approach "based on the belief that individual and/or collective action must be taken to right injustices or to improve conditions for the benefit of an individual or group" (p. 284). They are not the first to suggest counselors adopt an advocacy position. Earlier work by Lee and Sirch (1994) encouraged counselors to perceive themselves as catalysts for social change and to work for systemic change on behalf of their clients. Writing from a community counseling perspective, Lewis, Lewis, Daniels, and D'Andrea (1998) also supported this position. Gordon (1999) offered further support by emphasizing that school counselors should engage in "active efforts to influence the persons or groups who have the power to make necessary and relevant changes in the conditions that determine the course of a student's life" (p. 117).

Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological model defines the systems and subsystems that are target areas for interventions by school counselors implementing an advocacy role. Consider again the example of the seven first graders who were referred to the school counselor for sexual harassment. Viewing the problem from a systemic-ecological perspective, the school counselor can begin to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the problem and intervention plan. At the microsystem level, the school counselor might (a) consult with the family as previously suggested, (b) implement classroom instructional lessons on what constitutes appropriate behavior between boys and girls, or (c) consult with the teacher to create more effective procedures for the teacher to use in responding to the boys' inappropriate behavior. Considering issues beyond the context of the school will reveal broader ecological factors which may have a significant impact on how this problem could best be resolved. For example, what if the behavior that is considered to be inappropriate in school is viewed as a survival skill from the perspective of the family? What if the family accepts and reinforces this type of behavior because it indicates to them that the child is not weak or viewed as a "punk" by others? Here the students may need help working on ways to resolve a conflict that results from contradictory perspectives on appropriate behavior. This can be brought about by first being made aware of the contextual differences between school and other environmental contexts. Secondly, helping the boys become aware of appropriate macho behavior versus self-defeating and disrespectful behavior towards females may help resolve the conflict. What if, when trying to confer with family members, the school counselor discovers a reluctance on the part of some family members to come to school to confer? What if previous experiences in school have left families feeling powerless, intimidated, or apathetic? Or what if when consulting with the classroom teacher, the counselor discovers that the teacher has a discriminatory attitude toward the families, believing that the students' behavior is the natural result of parental lack of interest in their children. In addition to working with the children, attitudinal changes through contextual awareness on the part of the teacher will also be necessary. Building trust and developing a more effective relationship between the school and the family (i.e., awareness of and interventions focused at the mesosystem level) will be an important prelude to work at the microsystem level.

Shift Toward an Indirect Services Model

School counselors provide two types of services to students: direct and indirect. Direct services refer to activities the counselor undertakes that affect and involve the student directly with the counselor. This typically includes counseling and classroom guidance activities. Indirect services are those that indirectly affect the student, usually as a result of the counselor's direct work with a significant other (e.g., a teacher or family member) in the student's life. Indirect services include consultation, collaboration, advocacy, and program coordination. A shift toward an indirect services model does not negate the importance of counseling and classroom guidance. Rather, it brings more balance to the equation by suggesting that indirect services should not be given less time or priority, and in some cases should be given more priority. The emphasis here is not more services, but different services.

Placing importance on indirect services goes hand-in-hand with a systemic-ecological model for problem solving. Systemic interventions function as an indirect service to the student. Improved outcomes for students are a school counselor's ultimate goal. Achieving such outcomes often comes indirectly from growth and change in the systems that surround the student. This is particularly so in situations where the problems are complex and require multiple solutions which involve different ecological levels.

In an environment where high stakes testing influences much of what occurs in schools, school counselors find it increasingly difficult to have access to students during instructional time. Administrators and teachers can agree that social-emotional factors contribute to academic success, yet still be reluctant to release students from instructional time for social-emotional interventions. This reluctance to release students is particularly compelling in urban schools where higher concentrations of students often fall well below acceptable levels for reading and math achievement. Pressure is often intensified by the potential for state or private takeover of under-performing schools. Counselors who adopt an indirect services approach could potentially spend more time working with the significant others in students' lives than with students directly. If one believes that changing a system's goals, organizational structure, and operational procedures is a better predictor of lasting change than the practice of changing people (Kurpius, 1985), then consultation services that focus on changing the nature and functioning of a system--be it a school, classroom, or family system--could provide the most promising potential for prevention.

Use of Collaboration to Achieve Comprehensive Programs

School counseling programs are characterized as comprehensive because programs are intended to address all aspects of a student's development--academic, personal/social, and career--by providing a full range of services. The National Standards for School Counseling Programs (Campbell & Dahir, 1997) reinforce this position. The principal focus of comprehensive programs is primary prevention with services and program activities geared toward assisting all students in the mastery of developmental tasks.

A program's organizational structure is another distinguishing feature that characterizes a program as comprehensive. This includes having (a) an explicit mission; (b) specific goals and objectives which are often articulated as student competencies; and (c) an organized, sequential curriculum. Programs are also considered to be comprehensive to the extent that they are integrated within the larger educational enterprise.

The movement away from viewing school counseling as a collection of fragmented services toward school counseling as a comprehensive program is an important transition in the history of the profession (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000). The question remains, however, are comprehensive programs as currently defined adequate to address the needs of urban students? Some have suggested that what is meant by "comprehensive" needs to be redefined and expanded in order to provide more effective programs (Adelman & Taylor, 2001; Keys et al., 1998). It is well documented that successful prevention programs need to (a) address a full range of development needs, (b) encompass interventions at different ecological levels, (c) develop more than one type of skill or behavior, (d) engage the contexts within which the student grows and develops, and (e) integrate various services provided across institutions and service providers in order to provide a continuum of services (Adelman & Taylor, 2001; Dryfoos, 1990; Keys & Bemak, 1997; Lerner, 1995; Weissberg et al., 1991). Adelman and Taylor (2001) have further articulated that comprehensive programs need to address barriers to learning through six clusters of activities: (a) classroom-based efforts to enable learning, (b) direct services to students and families, (c) crisis intervention, (d) support for transitions, (e) involvement of family members in schooling, and (f) outreach to develop community involvement.

What does this expanded vision of comprehensive programs mean for school counselors? How can school counselors in the 21st Century reorient their programs toward a more multifaceted approach to development and problem solving? Engaging in a more fully developed collaborative role and taking a proactive approach in developing institutional mechanisms that support collaboration are important steps.

Most school counselors would agree that they function collaboratively with school faculty and staff, family members, and those to whom they make referrals for outside-of-school assistance for identified students. Collaborative relationships in schools are usually characterized by shared knowledge and joint goal setting and planning, generally around the needs of a specific student. It is our supposition that school counselors do not engage in the type of extensive collaborative program development with colleagues, family members, agency representatives, and members of the community that is needed for comprehensive programs in the 21st Century. In fact, recent research has indicated that school counselors who are in the design and planning phase of program development reported concerns about limited collaboration, as did counselors who were relatively new to their positions (Sink & Yillik-Downer, 2001).

Given the complexity of needs facing schools and school counseling programs, school counselors cannot function in isolation from the broader community (Hobbs & Collison, 1995). Only by creating linkages with resources and services within and outside of the school can school counselors begin to create truly comprehensive programs. To this end, school counselors need to provide leadership within their buildings for creating new mechanisms to support collaborative program planning, implementation, and evaluation. Some have characterized such entities as a school-family-community mental health team (Keys & Bemak, 1997) or a resource-coordinating team (Adelman & Taylor, 2001). Such teams place a great emphasis on program integration with other service providers and community programs than the traditional school counseling advisory committee.

Alignment of Counseling Program Goals with School Improvement Goals

Schools are in the business of education. Schools in the 21st Century are under enormous pressure to demonstrate that students achieve academically at acceptable levels with often less than optimal resources to commit to the task. Through site-based management, a recent school leadership style that has emerged as an outcome of recent school reform efforts, more and more decision making power about budget allocation resides at the school level. Principals hire staff and faculty based on the resources they feel will best meet the needs of the students in their schools rather than in response to policy mandates from a central office. Depending upon the jurisdiction and the jurisdiction's interpretation of site-based management, principals could have the authority to employ or not employ a school counselor. In some instances, principals have opted for reading teachers or social workers. School counselors in the 21st Century need to align their program goals with the school improvement goals of their particular school as a way of explicitly communicating to principals and others the value of their programs. Without such an alignment, school counselors will find it increasingly difficult to receive support for their efforts.

The Dewitt Wallace-Reader's Digest Transforming School Counseling Initiative has supported such an alignment (House & Martin, 1998). Reynolds and Hines (2000) have assembled one of the best demonstrations of school counselors applying this principle. The Vision-to-Action model described by Reynolds and Hines uses a collaborative school-family-community team to oversee a step-by-step whole school, systemic change process that is outcomes based and data driven. The school counselor is an integral part of the school's planning process for responding to students' academic needs. Each school defines its own achievement goals based on data specific to that school. Some systems refer to the type of collaborative team suggested by Reynolds and Hines (2000) as a School Improvement Team. Unfortunately, school counselors are not always represented on such teams.

Adelman and Taylor (2001) have provided another useful conceptual framework for aligning school counseling program goals with the larger institutional goal of academic achievement. They described a three-component model for school reform and systemic change: (a) an instructional component or direct facilitation of learning and development; (b) an enabling component or addressing barriers to development, learning, and teaching; and (c) a management component or governance and resource management. School counselors need to be involved in each component through classroom guidance, consultation, direct counseling services, program management, and team participation. As more schools and school systems recognize the need for interventions that dissipate barriers to learning and as schools begin to include such programs as a part of overall school improvement plans, school counselors will have a natural avenue for aligning their program goals with the goals of the larger system.

Use of Evidence-Based Best Practices

As mentioned earlier, school counselors are charged with developing comprehensive developmental programs, and these programs need to be multidimensional to effectively respond to the complexity of needs presented by today's students. Building a successful prevention program requires many steps, including assessing needs, assessing current risk and protective factors, examining existing resources, establishing goals, and selecting targets for intervention. After completing these initial steps, school counselors, along with their planning teams, will need to determine program components. This part of the planning process needs to be informed by evidence-based best practices--those prevention strategies and programs that have been determined to be effective based on substantive research and evaluation (Western Regional Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies, 2001). School counselors who are knowledgeable about evidence-based best practice models can be an important resource to their schools. Use of such practices should help school counselors demonstrate program efficacy.

With all of the complexities of an urban community, it will be important for school counselors and their planning teams to adapt the practice model they choose to the social ecology of their school. To just insert a best practice model without "customizing" for the specific needs of a school community may not fully capitalize on the model's prevention potential. Questions to be asked include: Does this practice model fit with what the program is trying to accomplish? Does the practice model fit with the needs and values of the school community? and How might the interventions associated with this model need to be adapted to respond to the contextual features of this community? For example, in schools where there is concern about high levels of aggressive behavior, anger management and problem solving are important skills for young people to develop. To teach these skills separate from an understanding of the contextual application of these skills could be shortsighted. Anderson (1999) described the code of the street as a central influence in identity development for some African-American youth. Teaching positive social skills without engaging the reality of what it means to grow up in an environment where respect is accrued through a willingness to fight fails to fully engage critical contextual issues. Students may be able to demonstrate in the classroom that they have learned skills in the abstract, yet fail to apply those same skills on the street.

Knowledge of technology and use of the Internet will greatly enhance the school counselor's ability to identify best practice models. School counselors will find the Western Regional Center (2001) to be a good resource. This site identifies best practice models according to different categories of interest: (a) risk factor, (b) contextual domain (community, family, school, peer/individual), (c) type of prevention strategy (universal, selected, and indicated), (d) ethnicity, (e) rural, and (f) age. A review of programs identified on this site as best practices with African-American youth yielded several models that specifically address identity, cultural awareness, and bicultural skills, with interventions across different levels or subsystems. The American Psychological Association provides a database of reviews of preventive interventions at Prevention Connection: Promoting Strength, Resilience, and Health in Children, Adults, and Families (http://www.oslc.org/spr/apa/ home.html), and the National Mental Health Association (Barton, Hopkins, McElhaney, Heigel, & Salassi, 1995) has a printed directory of evidence-based model programs.

Use of Outcome-Based Evaluation

School counseling programs have come under increasing pressure to document effectiveness. Historically, school counselors have been expected to demonstrate program accountability (Aubrey, 1982; Crabbs & Crabbs, 1977). Many counselors and school systems use methods that collect information related to time and task, or basically the services delivered and the amount of time counselors spent delivering those services. School counselors in the 21st Century not only need to document what they do, but also the contributions they make to positive outcomes for students. If, in fact, enhancing student development is viewed as an important part of the mission of the school and the school's counseling program, school counselors need to be able to demonstrate that their programs have enhanced the academic, personal/interpersonal, and career development of students. In order to do so, school counselors need to be "trained and consistently supported to become reflective, investigative practitioners" (Lapan, 2001, p. 297).

Although research is a core requirement in counselor education programs and basic research skills are important to the program evaluation process, when asked to rate 23 counseling-related tasks on the basis of importance to effectiveness on the job, school counselors rated research skills as least important (Miller, 1998). School counselors need to become comfortable with methods of collecting program evaluation data, ways to analyze and interpret data, and ways technology can assist in these processes and in the communication of results. Use of computerized statistical packages, spreadsheets, and database management are some of the important technological skills for the 21st Century counselor.

School counselors will also need to become familiar with some of the newer methods for developing and designing evaluations. The use of logic models has emerged recently as a method for constructing program evaluation plans (McLaughlin & Jordan, 1999). In building a logic model, school counselors ask: What are the goals of the program? What services and activities will the program provide? Who will participate in the program? How will these activities lead to the expected outcomes? and What are the program's long- and short-term expected outcomes? (Western Regional Center, 2001). Methods for assessing outcomes need to be identified in the planning stage.

School counselors work at an exceptionally busy pace that demands flexibility and the ability to handle multiple tasks simultaneously. Taking time for the collection of evaluation data and the integration of this data into a user-friendly report needs to become a priority task for the school counselor in the 21st Century. How well the school counselor accomplishes this task could have a significant impact on program viability.

Summary

Over the past several decades, the profession of school counseling has undergone a transformation to align the role and function of the school counselor more closely with the needs of students. The profession has gone from providing a set of loosely aligned services to operating from a comprehensive model designed to facilitate the positive development of all students. In addition to the profession itself, this transformation has had a positive effect on many students and their families.

Although the profession has made great strides, attention must now be directed toward seeking solutions to the limitations presented by the current comprehensive, developmental model. As comprehensive programs seek to facilitate the development of all students, extant literature indicates that this goal is somewhat elusive, particularly for students of color and those who have little access to educationally relevant capital. It has been suggested here that this limitation is due to the failure of program models to take into account contextual factors which can hinder or promote healthy development. Developing an awareness of self-in-context is both an important program focus and program outcome for all students. In addition, it has been suggested that a development-in-context paradigm has implications for school counseling programs that serve students beyond the parameters of what is typically defined as an urban community.

References

Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2001). Framing new directions for school counselors, psychologists, & social workers. Los Angeles: Center for Mental Health in Schools.

Adler, A. (1931). The practice and theory of individual psychology. Paterson, NJ: Littlefield-Adams.

Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: Norton.

Arroyo, A., & Rhoad, R., (1999). Meeting diverse student needs in urban schools: Research-based recommendations for schools. Preventing School Failure, 43, 145-154.

Aubrey, R. (1982). Program planning and evaluation: Road map of the 80s. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 17, 52-50.

Barton, H., Hopkins, K., McElhaney, S., Heigel, J., & Salassi, A. (1995). Getting started: The NMHA directory of model programs to prevent mental disorders and promote mental health. Alexandria, VA: National Mental Health Association.

Bogenschneider, K. (1996). An ecological risk/protective theory and building prevention programs, policies, and community capacity to support youth. Family Relations, 45, 127-138.

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

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

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

Collins, B., & Collins, T. (1994). Child and adolescent mental health: Building a system of care. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 239-243.

Crabbs, S., & Crabbs, M. (1977). Accountability: Who does what to whom, when, where, and how? The School Counselor, 25, 104-109.

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

Dryfoos, J. (1990). Adolescents at risk: Prevalence and prevention. New York: Oxford University Press.

Fine, M. (1992). A systems-ecological perspective on home-school intervention. In M. Fine & C. Carlson (Eds.), Family-school intervention: A systems perspective (pp. 1-17). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. (1986). Black students, school success: Coping with the burden of "acting white." Urban Review, 18, 176-206.

Gordon, E. (1999). Perspectives on counseling and other approaches to guided behavior change. In E. Gordon (Ed.), Education and justice: A view from the back of the bus (pp. 104-118). New York: Teachers College Press.

Gordon, E., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Urban education. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia o/educational research (6th ed., pp. 1459-1470). New York: American Educational Research Association.

Gordon, E., & Yowell, C. (1999). Cultural dissonance as a risk factor in the development of students. In E. Gordon (Ed.), Education and justice: A view from the back of the bus (pp. 34-51). New York: Teachers College Press.

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

Hardesty, E, & Dillard, J. (1994). The role of elementary school counselors compared with their middle and secondary school counterparts. The School Counselor, 29, 83-90.

Herr, E. L. (1984). The national reports on reform in schooling: Some missing ingredients. Journal of Counseling and Development, 63, 217-220.

Hershenson, D., Power, P., & Seligman, L. (1989). Mental health counseling theory: Present status and future prospects. Journal of Mental Health

Counseling, 11, 44-69.

Hobbs, B., & Collison, B. (1995). School-community collaboration: Implications for the school counselor. The School Counselor, 43, 58-65.

House, R. M., & Martin, P. J. (1998). Advocating for better futures for all students: A new vision for school counselors. Education, 119, 284-291.

Ibrahim, F. A. (1992, April). Identity developmental from a culture and gender perspective: A psychoeducational perspective. In F. Ibrahim (Chair), Identity development from a culture and gender perspective. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the American Counseling Association International Conference, Baltimore, MD.

Ibrahim, F. A. (2001, March). Urban school counseling: Developmental guidance and identity development from a culture and gender perspective. In A. Green (Chair), The development of an urban school counseling program. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the American Counseling Association International Conference, San Antonio, TX.

Johnson, C. D., & Johnson, S. K. (1982). Competency based training of career development specialists or" let's get off the calf path". Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 32, 327-335.

Keys, S. G., & Bemak, P. (1997). School-family-community linked services: A school counseling role for changing times. The School Counselor, 44, 255-263.

Keys, S. G., Bemak, F., & Lockhart, E. (1998). Transforming school counseling to serve the mental health needs of at-risk youth. Journal of Counseling and Development, 76, 381-388.

Keys, S. G., & Lockhart, E. (2000). The school counselor's role in facilitating multisystemic change. Professional School Counseling, 3, 101-107.

Kurpius, D. J. (1985). Consultation interventions: Successes, failures and proposals. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 368-389.

LeCapitaine, J. (2001). Promoting personal and psychological development: Of what good is it to graduate the mind but lose the person? Education, 121, 459-470.

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

Lapan, R., Gysbers, N., & Sun, Y. (1997). The impact of more fully implemented guidance programs on the school experiences of high school students: A statewide evaluation study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 292-302.

Lee, C. C., & Sirch, M. L. (1994). Counseling in an enlightened society: Values for a new millennium. Counseling and Values, 38, 90-97.

Lerner, R. (1995). America's youth in crisis: Challenges and opportunities for programs and policies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lewis, J., Lewis, M., Daniels, J., & D'Andrea, M. (1998). Community counseling: Empowerment strategies for a diverse society. Pacific Coast, CA: Brooks/Cole.

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.

Madhubuti, H. R. (1993). Cultural work: Planting new trees with new seeds. In M. Shujaa (Ed.), Too much schooling, too little education: A paradox of Black life in white societies (pp. 1-6). Trenton, NJ: African World Press.

Maxwell, J. C., & Wallisch, L. (2000). Texas school survey of substance use among students on the border, 1998: Grades 4-12. A report to the Texas State Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse. Austin, TX: Texas State Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse.

McLaughlin, J. A., & Jordan, G. B. (1999). Logic models: A tool for telling your program's performance story. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22, 65-72.

Miller, L. S. (1995), An American imperative: Accelerating minority educational advancement. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Miller, T. (1998). Secondary school counselor survey. Alexandria, VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling.

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

Napierkowski, C., & Parsons, R. (1995). Diffusion of innovation: Implementing changes in school counselor roles and functions. The School Counselor, 42, 364-365.

Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 29, 155-188.

Paisley, P. (2001). Maintaining and enhancing the developmental focus in school counseling programs. Professional School Counseling, 4, 271-277.

Paisley, P., & Peace, S. D. (1995). Developmental principles: A framework for school counseling programs. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 30, 85-96.

Phelps, R., Taylor, J., & Gerard, P. (2001). Cultural mistrust, ethnic identity, racial identity, and self-esteem among ethnically diverse black university students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 209-217.

Ponciano, J. (1989, August). Racism and the Hispanic high school dropout. Paper presented at the meeting of the Education/Youth Subcommittee of the Hispanic Agenda Task Force of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Reynolds, S., & Hines, P. (2000, July). Indiana student achievement institute: Guidance centered whole-school reform. Paper presented at the Education Trust Transforming School Counseling Conference, San Antonio, TX.

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

Shujaa, M. (Ed.). (1994). Too much schooling, too little education: A paradox of Black life in White societies. Trenton, NJ: African World Press.

Sugai, G., Sprague, J., Homer, R., & Walker, H. (2000). Preventing school violence: The use of office discipline referrals to assess and monitor school-wide discipline interventions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8, 94-102.

Taylor, L., & Adelman, H. (1996). Mental health in the schools: Promising directions for practice. Adolescent Medicine, 7, 1-15.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1990). Urban and rural population report: 1900 to 1990. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved April 20, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.census.gov/population/censusdata/urpop0090.txt

U.S. Department of Education. (2001). The nation's report card: Fourth-grade reading highlights, 2000: National assessment of educational progress (OERI Publication No. 2001-499).Washington, DC: OERI.

Webster, D. (1993). The unconvincing case for school-based conflict resolution programs for adolescents. Health Affairs, 12, 126-141.

Weissberg, R., Caplan, M., & Harwood, R. (1991). Promoting competent young people in competence-enhancing environments: A systems-based perspective on primary prevention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 830-841.

Western Regional Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies. (2001). Program planning and best practices. Reno: NV: Author. Retrieved March 28, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.unr.edu/westcapt/

Whiston, S. C., & Sexton, T. L. (1998). A review of school counseling outcome research: Implications for practice. Journal of Counseling and Development, 76, 412-426.

Wittmer, J. (2000). Managing your school counseling program: K-12 developmental strategies (2nd ed). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Alan Green, Ph.D., is an assistant professor and Susan Keys, Ph.D., is an associate professor. Both are in the Department of Counseling and Human Services at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Correspondence be sent to Alan Green, 105 Whitehead Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218, E-mail: agreen@ jhu.edu