In search of the profession's finest hour: a critique of four views of 21st century school counseling.

Given the steady progress of the school counseling profession over the years, one would expect to find several publications where the authors have discussed its stage-like trajectory, while concurrently providing insightful recommendations to guide its future direction. As I scanned the literature, a number of such commentaries were found (e.g., Bemak, 2000; Carroll, 1985; Drury, 1984; Forrest, 1984; Hays & Johnson, 1984; House & Martin, 1998; Mustaine & LaFountain, 1993). Quite recently four additional perspectives, meriting further discussion, were published in this journal (Baker, 2001; Green & Keys, 2001; Gysbers, 2001; Paisley & McMahon, 2001). In an attempt to critically review these "focus" articles, my aims are to: (a) contextualize my remarks for readers who are unfamiliar with my professional orientation; (b) comment on the publications' central themes in light of previous literature; and (c) recommend additional salient issues to be considered by school counselors.

A Point of Reference

In 1938, Helen Heffernan (as cited in Froehlich, 1958), an elementary school principal, appeared to suggest that the goal of education was inexorably tied to the work of contemporary school counselors. She stated:

   education must take the child where he is and help him to make increasingly
   more effective adjustments to his environment. The process by which
   education helps children to become happy, wholesome, self-controlled,
   self-directed, and socially minded persons is called guidance. The purposes
   of guidance and the purposes of education are identical because education
   is guidance. (p. 357)

This principal's educational outlook not only reflects, in part, my professional focus, but also is congruent with the developmental theories espoused (and used to support the work of school counselors) by such notable psychologists as Piaget, Erikson, Kohlberg, Maccoby, and others (Parke, Ornstein, Rieser, & Zahn-Waxler, 1994). Given that I work as a university-level counselor educator in a large, diverse, and urban city, I witness file need for school counselors (and educators) to assist students to become adaptable, self-regulated, mature, and healthy learners in a vibrant, pluralistic society.

To this end, however, I believe counselors must operate and be taught within a general organizing framework (i.e., a comprehensive guidance and counseling program). Examples are elucidated in the American School Counselor Association's (ASCA; 1997) position statement on comprehensive counseling programs, the National Standards for School Counseling Programs (Campbell & Dahir, 1997; Dahir, Sheldon, & Valiga, 1998), and Gysbers and Henderson's (e.g., 2000, 2001) publications. Furthermore, I reconceptualize (perhaps, too narrowly) contemporary school counselors as psychoeducational resource specialists within the context of a comprehensive program, where they assist students to reach various developmental outcomes using a wide array of systemic as well as targeted interventions (Sink, 2000). Counselors are not, therefore, the central fixtures in a school counseling program or the chief advocates for students and their caregivers; rather, they are highly educated, collaborative individuals who can effectively coordinate direct and indirect services as well as the available resources (e.g., school and community personnel, funding) required for students to thrive in the school environment and, hopefully, in the community. Obviously then, the consultative role is a significant aspect of the educative process. Succinctly stated, professional school counselors should be competent at mobilizing people in support of students and their caregivers; act as role models for students, staff, and family members; and serve as skilled program managers. Having outlined my perspective on the 21st Century school counselor, in the next section I respectfully critique articles published in the December 2001 issue of Professional School Counseling that focused on the profession.

Connecting and Disconnecting Themes

Interestingly, Gysbers (2001) and Baker (2001) centered their articles on a historical rendering of the profession, while Paisley and McMahon (2001) and Green and Keys (2001) seemed to take more a future-focused orientation. I consider each pair of articles below.

Since Gysbers and Baker have been seminal school counseling researchers for several decades, their longitudinal perspectives are quite informative. They have observed and contributed to the major shifts in the profession. By recounting the profession's evolution, I found myself nodding and largely agreeing with their analyses. For example, these scholars recommended, and appropriately so, that school counselors for years have failed to clearly define themselves; their roles were haphazardly articulated from state to state and school district to school district. Although, this issue continues to be hotly contested in the literature (e.g., Bemak, 2000; Burnham & Jackson, 2000; Coy, 1999; Paisley & Borders, 1995; Studer & Allton, 1996), I concur with both authors when they indicate that the emergence of developmental guidance and counseling in the 1970s and 1980s provided a central organizing structure for counselors and counselor educators to reframe their work.

While Baker (2001) remarked that he is an optimist by nature, Gysbers' (2001) vision of the future seems by comparison a "glass almost full." The former presented a somewhat lengthy inventory of challenges and hindrances to the profession, while the latter author envisioned a promising horizon without really enumerating a concrete action plan. As Gysbers recommended, the need for counselors to be more active in "shaping educational policy" and "expanding legislative authority' is certainly vital. The question remains, however: how do we as professionals, school counselors and counselor educators alike, realistically achieve this goal? Debate on this issue should follow, commencing perhaps with a special issue of this journal.

Because leading scholars have recommended over the years a range of areas for increased attention (e.g., Borders & Drury, 1992; Keys, Bemak, & Lockhart, 1998; Paisley, 2001; Rye & Sparks, 1999), Baker's (2001) list of concerns (e.g., at-risk students, advocacy, reducing nonguidance activities) reminded the profession that it continues to have some "unfinished business." These issues are embedded in Gysbers' (2001) piece as well, but perhaps are given less emphasis. What I did find somewhat "far-fetched," as Baker half-heartedly admitted, was his suggestion to promote the profession using charismatic motivational speakers. For too long, in my view, organizers of state and national conferences have tried to motivate the faithful with these types of presentations. I have watched school counselors become reenergized only to return to their overwhelming duties where the renewed vigor gradually fades. Substance often takes the backseat to style. What the profession needs is not more "possibility thinkers," but more "doers." A cadre of committed practitioners in every state is needed to assert ASCA's long-term agenda to colleagues and to enhance the profession's status in the public sector and in the eyes or other educators. Counselor educators must also contribute their input by building coalitions at the national, state, and local levels among legislators, educational policymakers, and community leaders. Not only must counselor educators collaborate with others outside the profession for the benefit of our constituents, school counseling researchers must also write for front-line practitioners, translating high quality research into effective interventions.

Not surprisingly, Gysbers (2001) and Baker (2001) affirmed the need for the profession to decisively address the issues of diversity and multiculturalism, reinforcing the views of ASCA (1999) and several recent published articles in education and school counseling (e.g., Banks, 2001; Lee, 1995, 2001; MacDonald & Sink, 1999; Sink, Rowley, MacDonald, Jones, & Perrine, in press). The other two articles I consider here also stressed the importance of school counselors achieving multicultural competence and meeting the needs of diverse populations (Green & Keys 2001; Paisley & McMahon, 2001).

In their main theses, Paisley and McMahon (2001) and Green and Keys (2001) directed their attention to some neglected or underdeveloped elements in the profession. In both pieces, the hurdles were clearly elucidated, ranging from issues that Gysbers (2001) and Baker (2001) discussed (e.g., lack of role specificity) to the limitations of developmental theory and school-based technological innovations. Although I agree in principle with the tenor of both articles, I am concerned that Paisley and McMahon and Green and Keys have not fully acknowledged the profession's advancement or its ability to sufficiently address concerns involving technology, diversity, role clarity, and theory. If one reads carefully the special issue of ASCA's journal, The School Counselor, published in 1984 (volume 31), the school counselor was considered "an endangered species" (Drury, 1984, p. 234). Albeit many of the challenges outlined in that volume remain, genuine and significant advances have been accomplished since then.

Let me speak to three concerns raised in these articles that specifically piqued my interest. First, Green and Keys (2001) asserted that the profession should evolve beyond its reliance on traditional developmental theories; instead, a synthesis is required between developmental models and the ecological-systemic approach (Amatea & Brown, 2000; Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Although these authors do not fully elucidate their thoughts in the piece, this is not a new position. Keys and her colleagues have argued for this expanded view of school counseling theory in previous articles (e.g., Keys & Bemak, 1997; Keys et al., 1998; Keys & Lockhart, 1999). Even though I agree with the suggestion that a more holistic and contextual view of school counseling is a beneficial reorientation, I am concerned that an over-emphasis on Bronfenbrenner's ecological model may be too limiting and not entirely justified in view of current educational research and theory (e.g., Brown, Metz, & Campione, 1996; Lambert & McCombs, 1998; Sontag, 1996). Even Piaget's theory of cognitive development does not forsake the social in lieu of children evolving independently of their social-ecological context (Cole & Wertsch, 1996).

The educational psychology literature is replete with socio-developmental approaches, which also incorporate an ecological-contextual framework. Lev Vygotsky's (1978, 1986; Vygotsky & Luria, 1994) sociohistorical psychology, for instance, posited that cognitive growth emerges within the milieu of sociocultural processes (e.g., students' interactions within their families and schools), including the use of tools (e.g., education) and symbols (e.g., language) to mediate culture(s) to students. More recently, his modern-day interpreters (e.g., Bruner, 1996; Davydov, 1995; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 1990; Tappan, 1998; Wertsch, 1985; Wertsch & Kanner, 1992) extended the Vygotskian orientation into critical dimensions of the schooling process (e.g., literacy, math education, emotional development, interpersonal aspects of the teaching-learning process). In short, sociohistorical theory seems to be highly congruent with the ecological perspective, and thus, the latter approach should be extended to incorporate Vygotskian concepts, especially as the profession continues to advocate the widespread implementation of developmentally based comprehensive programs (Dahir, 2001; Sink & Downer, 2001; Sink & MacDonald, 1998).

Similarly, social constructivism has made significant inroads with not only educational theory and praxis (Phillips, 2000a, 2000b; Phillips & Early, 2000), but in the general counseling (Neimeyer, 1995; Sexton & Griffin, 1997) and the school counseling disciplines as well (Forster, 1997). Without providing too much detail, this approach can augment the ecological model of development. Social constructivism (Vygotskian and Deweyan theories being precursors; Palincsar, 1998; Sink, 1997a) does not rely on foundationalists' epistemologies (empiricism, positivism, and behaviorism), where scientific and objective methods are used to generate knowledge. Counseling researchers operating from within a social constructivistic paradigm generally deploy a variety of qualitative and subjective approaches to understand "reality" (Sexton & Griffin, 1997). Setting aside at this time issues of validity, writers from this theoretical camp encourage, for example, multiple beliefs about the nature of reality and acknowledge that educational "truth' (and counseling practices, for that matter) cannot be separated from its sociocultural and communal contexts (Phillips, 2000b; Steffe & Gale, 1995). To summarize, Green and Keys (2001) seemed to favor the ecological model without giving much overt credence to other well-researched sociocultural models of human development. Perhaps, as a profession we can enlarge our developmental theory base, without diminishing its value as a heuristic for understanding students' educational, personal-social, and career needs.

Second, I want to reflect briefly on Paisley and McMahon's (2001) concerns about technology. It is true, ongoing problems with the school-based deployment of technology should not be minimized. However, are these concerns overstated and the usefulness of technology understated? According to recent reviews on this topic, the advantages seem to far surpass the obstacles (Hohenshil, 2000; Sabella, 2000). Hohenshil elucidated several positive aspects to innovative technology not discussed in Paisley and McMahon, including, for example, computer-assisted simulations for counselor education, computer-aided counseling assessment, videotaping in developmental supervision, and using technology for advocacy in school counseling. More specifically, school counselors have benefited considerably by the introduction of various "high tech" innovations. Currently, counselors in many regions of the country are able to conduct computer conferencing, use electronic mail for more efficient communication, implement interactive multimedia instructional software during guidance lessons, access the Internet for information retrieval and sharing, develop information databases, and so on (Sabella, 2000). Rather than viewing the use of technology as largely problematic and inadequate, Hohenshil concluded: "It is obvious that the counseling profession has risen to the challenge of technology and is playing a leadership role in a many areas" (p. 367). As Paisley and McMahon aptly noted, increased preservice and in-service education are needed, and the technology gap is disconcerting, but these difficulties are not insurmountable. Powerful Internet support is about three or four mouse clicks away.

Finally, because each of the writers addressed in some fashion the issue of accountability, the topic warrants further comment. I strongly endorse the positions adopted by Gysbers (2001), Green and Keys (2001), and Paisley and McMahon (2001). In accordance with Lapan's (2001) recommendations for program evaluation, they advocated for results-based assessments and connecting school counseling program data to student learning. Specifically, Green and Keys' emphasis on (a) the alignment of school counseling program goals with school reform goals, (b) the use of evidence-based best practices, and (c) the employment of outcome-based evidence resonates well with the accountability literature (e.g., Daniels & Daniels, 2000; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000; Johnson & Whitfield, 1991; Schmidt, 2000).

In a recent article, House and Martin (1998), echoing the positions of Green and Keys (2001) and Gysbers (2001), called for school counselors to provide evidence that they positively impact student achievement and other relevant outcomes. Bemak (2000) pushed the issue a bit farther. He suggested that by altering school counselors' job descriptions to include this learning outcome, the highly publicized achievement disparity between low income and minority students and other student groups would diminish. Early program evaluation research conducted in Missouri, as referenced in Gysbers' article and elsewhere (e.g., Lapan, 2001), indicates that comprehensive programs can have a positive influence on various student outcomes, including achievement. Even though I consider this to be an important educational aim and preliminary studies are hopeful, I am not convinced that a direct causal link between comprehensive school counseling programs and increased academic performance can be empirically demonstrated. Certainly, correlational and qualitative data can assist counselors in making a provisional case that their programs are efficacious, but without experimental and quasi-experimental data to support the Missouri findings, the profession may be setting itself up for unintended negative consequences (e.g., public and educational criticism). Perhaps, it might be wise at this juncture to back away from holding counselors in some way accountable for raising test scores or grades. Could school counselors focus instead on those student and program outcomes that are more obviously under their control (e.g., personal and social developmental changes, career planning, responsive services, program implementation, school climate)? Personally, I would settle for modest indirect effect sizes in the dimensions elaborated by Lapan under the rubric "summative outcomes." In this section, he suggested that students demonstrate a measure of success (broadly defined) (a) at school and work and in the community, (b) in their life roles (e.g., learner, worker, and citizen), and (c) in their personal well being.

To recap my position, as encouraged by the writers of the four articles and other leading counselor educators (e.g., Borders & Drury, 1992), members of the profession must be accountable to their constituents. The direction of attention, however, should be aimed at those evaluative dimensions in which useful data can be readily garnered. Raising the evaluation bar too high, especially in terms of promising achievement gains, may lead to counselor discouragement and additional public scrutiny. In my view, the practical approaches advocated by Hughes and James (2001) and Schmidt (1984, 2000) are valuable sources to consider in the ongoing pursuit for professional credibility.

Further Themes for Consideration

Before turning to my closing thoughts, I overview here various omitted but important research areas that can positively influence the course of the profession. For instance, the comprehensive guidance and counseling movement, as alluded to by Green and Keys (2001), would profit from broadening its theoretical foundation. In addition, I recommended above several theoretical approaches to investigate. To these, I include the American Psychological Association's (APA) Learner-centered Psychological Principles (Lambert & McCombs, 1998; Marshall & McCombs, 1995). These tenets were predicated

   on the belief that educational practice will improve only when the
   educational system is redesigned with the primary focus on the learner
   within the larger social context and that educators and administrators at
   all levels need to be aware of these principles. (Marshall & McCombs, 1995,
   p. 4)

Furthermore, the APA document merges a disparate and contemporary body of research on the learner and the learning process (Marshall, 1996), while providing guidelines on how to incorporate the affective, cognitive, developmental, and social factors into educational practice. If the profession's goals for school counseling programs are to be aligned with those of educational reform, these principles are extremely useful to review.

Other current educational research foci to consider include students' emotional, spiritual, and citizenship development as well as the communitarian movement in U.S. schools. Space limitations prevent me from tackling these issues more fully, but I attempt to highlight their main points. Over the past several decades, developmental theory has ventured beyond its more "traditional" domains (e.g., cognitive, psychosocial, moral development). Researchers like Denham (1998), Greenspan (1997), and LeDoux (1996) have expanded the psychological literature by exploring the complex relationship between brain functioning and the formation of emotional competence and intrapersonal intelligence (Shepard, Fasko, & Osborne, 1999). While popularizers (e.g., Goleman, 1997) of what has been called "emotional intelligence" may not be altogether empirically sound, this new scientific work has promising implications for education and school counseling (e.g., Saarni, 1999; Salovey & Sluyter, 1997).

With the number of articles on the topic of spirituality published by the American Counseling Association (e.g., Burke & Miranti, 1992, 1995; Kelly, 1995) and the American Psychological Association (e.g., Richards & Bergin, 1997), I find it somewhat baffling that the issue of student spirituality has engendered so little discussion in the school counseling literature. Obviously, it is a controversial subject for public school educators to investigate, but one, in my view, that requires additional coverage and debate. In Sink's (1997b) article on the intersection of spirituality and school counseling, the argument was made that counselors can sensitively explore students' issues of meaning-making (or purpose-in-life), the essence of spirituality, without imposing their values. A similar stance was recently proposed in psychotherapeutic literature (Sperry, 2001). For too long this topic has been considered taboo. It may be time for the profession to take seriously the "inner" world of children and youth.

On a related topic, I wonder if counselors have an important role in promoting citizenship education in their schools. Numerous state and district comprehensive school counseling programs explicitly state (or imply) in their mission statements that one of the central program goals is to assist in the development of "good" or "productive" citizens (e.g., Coats, Ash, & Dorsey, 1998; Hatch, 2000). An inspection of the school counseling literature indicates that citizenship, like character formation, tends to be an ignored developmental domain (MacDonald & Sink, 1999; also see Mustaine & LaFountain, 1993, for a review).

Since comprehensive school counseling programs should foster a positive school climate (Lapan, 2001), the "school as community" research literature may assist counselors with realizing this goal (e.g., Baker, Terry, Bridger, & Winsor, 1997; Battistich, Solomon, Watson, & Schaps, 1997; Battistich, Solomon, Kim, Watson, & Schaps, 1995; Kohn, 1996; Osterman, 2000). The communitarian movement in education weds multiple theoretical models, including social constructivism and a systems-oriented and developmental-ecological approach, in order to create a safe and nurturing school environment (Tolan, Guerra, & Kendall, 1995). Battistich and his colleagues continue to report impressive gains in such dimensions as prosocial behavior and school climate, while also reducing school bullying and other forms of violence (see e.g., Sink & Rubel, 2001, for a review). In short, building a sense of community in our schools seems to be one of those informal objectives school counselors work toward. However, by examining this literature base, counselors have the potential to gain additional methods for developing and maintaining a supportive learning environment.

In Conclusion: Musings for the 21st Century

In my experience, contemporary school counselors are concerned about their relevancy. They desire to maintain and enhance their skills. Many appear to be proficient in the use of technology and see the benefits of program evaluation and collaboration. Yet, as professionals, school counselors need to periodically take a step back and ask themselves difficult questions. Are we effective? What can we do better? How might we improve? Are we weaving the advances in counseling and educational theory and research into the fabric of our daily practice? Perhaps, at times, school counselors are too self-critical (and self-effacing), but their genuine desire to expand their care for children and youth continues to inspire their work. As U.S. society is evolving and quite diverse, school counselors must be adaptable and reflective as well. The writers of the four focus pieces suggested that the profession cannot simply rest, so to speak, on its laurels; rather, school counselors must actively engage in dialogue with their advocates and their detractors, learning what they can about pertinent and effective educational and counseling innovations, and disagreeing respectfully with those notions that depart substantially from the profession's core beliefs and goals. To sum up, the authors and I seem to be encouraging school counselors to remain focused on

* Developing and updating the skills needed to serve all students

* Exploring innovations in educational and counseling theory and practice

* Advocating for themselves and their programs

* Implementing well-designed comprehensive programs

* Collaborating with one another, other school personnel, and with community agencies and programs

* Measuring student and program accomplishments and needs

* Creating a sense of community in their schools

* Demonstrating a high degree of professionalism

After revisiting Principal Heffernan's remarks (offered early on), I remain convinced that guidance and education are inseparable. If her position largely reflects the four authors' views, we are all of one accord--the school counseling profession is charting a meaningful course for students and their significant others. In contrast to the rather pessimistic outlooks of certain prognosticators in the mid-1980s (e.g., Carroll, 1985; Drury, 1984), the profession has made significant strides forward and its future is indeed bright (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001).

References

Amatea, E. S., & Brown, B. E. (2000). The counselor and the family: An ecosystemic approach. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling program: K-12 developmental strategies (pp. 192-203). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

American School Counselor Association. (1997). Position statement: The professional school counselor and comprehensive school counseling programs. Retrieved August 6, 2001 from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/pdf/counsel.pdf

American School Counselor Association. (1999). Position statement: The professional school counselor and cross/multicultural counseling. Retrieved August 6, 2001 from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/ pdf/cross.pdf

Baker, S. B. (2001). Reflections on forty years in the school counseling profession: Is the glass half full or half empty? Professional School Counseling 5, 75-83.

Baker, J. A., Terry, T., Bridger, R., & Winsor, A. (1997). School as caring communities: A relational approach to school reform. School Psychology Review, 26, 586-602.

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

Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Kim, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1995). Schools as communities, poverty levels of student populations, and students' attitudes, motives, and performance: A multi-level analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 627-658.

Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1997). Caring school communities. Educational Psychologist, 32, 137-151.

Bemak, F. (2000). Transforming the role of the counselor to provide leadership in educational reform through collaboration. Professional School Counseling, 3, 323-331.

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.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Brown, A. L., Metz, K. E., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Social interaction and individual understanding in a community of learners: The influence of Piaget and Vygotsky. In A. Tryphon & J. Voneche (Eds.), Piaget-Vygotsky: The social genesis of thought (pp. 145-170). East Sussex, Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Burke, M. T., & Miranti, J. G. (Eds.). (1992). Ethical and spiritual values in counseling. Alexandria, VA: Association for Religious and Value Issues in Education.

Burke, M. T, & Miranti, J. G. (Eds.). (1995). Counseling: The spiritual dimension. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Burnham, J. J., & Jackson, C. M. (2000). School counselor roles: Discrepancies between actual practice and existing models. Professional School Counseling, 4, 41-49.

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

Carroll, M. R. (1985). School counseling--What does the future hold? NASSP Bulletin, 69(485), 2-5.

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.

Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39, 249-255.

Coy, D. R. (1999). The role and training of the school counselor: Background and purpose. NASSP Bulletin, 83(603), 2-8.

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.

Daniels, H., & Daniels, D. (2000). Documenting counseling services: A step-by-step method. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (pp. 292-305). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Davydov, V. V. (1995). The influence of L. S. Vygotsky on education theory, research, and practice. Educational Researcher, 24, 12-21.

Denham, S. A. (1998). Emotional development in young children. New York: Guilford.

Drury, S. S. (1984). Counselor survival in the 1980s. The School Counselor, 31, 234-240.

Forrest, D. V. (1984). Counselor education: Issues for the 1980s. The School Counselor, 31, 381-384.

Forster, J. R. (1997). Reframing guidance and counseling in the schools with a constructivist perspective. In T. L. Sexton & B. L. Griffin (Eds.), Constructivist thinking in counseling practice, research, and training (pp. 141-154). New York: Teachers College.

Froehlich, C. P. (1958). Guidance services in schools. New York: MacGraw-Hill.

Goleman, D. (1997). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.

Green, A., & Keys, S. G. (2001). Expanding the developmental school counseling paradigm: Meeting the needs of the 21st century student. Professional School Counseling, 5, 84-95.

Greenspan, S. I. (1997). The growth of the mind and the endangered origins of intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.

Gysbers, N. C. (2001). School guidance and counseling in the 21st century: Remember the past into the future. Professional School Counseling, 5, 96-105.

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.

Hays, D. G., & Johnson, C. S. (1984). 21st century counseling. The School Counselor, 31, 205-214.

Hohenshil, T. H. (2000). High tech counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 365-368.

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

Hughes, D. K., & James, S. H. (2001). Using accountability data to protect a school counseling program: One counselor's experience. Professional School Counseling, 4, 306-309.

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.

Kelly, E. W. (1995). Spirituality and religion in counseling and psychotherapy. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

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

Keys, S. G., Bemak, F., & Lockhart, E. J. (1998). Transforming school counseling to serve the mental health needs of at-risk students. Professional School Counseling, 2, 381-388.

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

Kohn, A. (1996). Beyond discipline. From compliance to community. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Lambert, N. M., & McCombs, B. L. (Eds.). (1998). How students learn: Reforming schools through learner-centered education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

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

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (Eds.). (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University.

LeDoux, J. (1996). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. New York: Touchstone.

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.

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.

Marshall, H. H. (1996). Clarifying and implementing contemporary psychological perspectives. Educational Psychologist, 31, 29-34.

Marshall, H. H., & McCombs, B. (1995, November). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for the teaching of educational psychology in teacher education programs. Newsletter for Educational Psychologists, 19(1), pp. 4-5, 8.

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

Neimeyer, R. A. (1995). An appraisal of constructivist psychotherapies. In M. J. Mahoney (Ed.), Cognitive and constructive psychotherapies (pp. 163-194). New York: Springer.

Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students' need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70, 323-367.

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

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

Paisley, P. O., & McMahon, H. G. (2001). School counseling for the twenty-first century: Challenges and opportunities. Professional School Counseling, 5, 106-115.

Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. The Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345-375.

Parke, R. D., Ornstein, P. A., Rieser, J. J., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (Eds.). (1994). A century of development psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Phillips, D. C. (2000a). Constructivism and its many faces: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), The expanded social scientist's bestiary (pp. 1-17). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Phillips, D. C. (2000b). Social construction of knowledge. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), The expanded social scientist's bestiary (pp. 187-207). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Phillips, D. C., & Early, M. (Eds.). (2000). Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues: Ninety-ninth yearbook of the national society for the study of education. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University.

Rye, D., & Sparks, R. (1999). Strengthening K-12 school counseling programs: A support systems approach (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Accelerated Development.

Saarni, C. (1999). The development of emotional competence. New York: Guilford.

Sabella, R. A. (2000). School counseling and technology. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (pp. 337-357). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Salovey, P., & Sluyter, D. J. (Eds.). (1997). Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications. New York: Basic.

Schmidt, J. J. (1984). School counseling: Professional directions for the future. The School Counselor, 31, 385-392.

Schmidt, J. J. (2000). Counselor accountability: Justifying your time and measuring your worth. In J. Wittmer (Ed.), Managing your school counseling programs: K-12 developmental strategies (pp. 273-291). Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Sexton, T. L., & Griffin, B. L. (Eds.). (1997). Constructivist thinking in counseling practice, research, and training. New York: Teachers College.

Shepard, R., Fasko Jr., D., & Osborne, F. H. (1999). Intrapersonal intelligence: Affective factors in thinking. Education, 119, 633-642.

Sink, C. A. (1997a). Is constructivism education's cold fusion? Issues in Education: Contributions from Educational Psychology, 3, 263-272.

Sink, C. A. (1997b). Spirituality and faith development of school children. Religion and Education, 24, 59-66

Sink, C. A. (2000). The school counselor as a "psychoeducational resource specialist": Reframing our role for the next century. Professional School Counseling, 3(3), ii-iii.

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

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., Rowley, W. J., MacDonald, D., Jones, J. E., & Perrine, N. (in press). Models of multicultural counseling and psychotherapy: A synthesis for beginning counselors. In D. Sandu (Ed.), Alternative approaches to counseling and psychotherapy. Huntington, NY: Nova Science.

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.

Sontag, J. C. (1996). Toward a comprehensive theoretical framework for disability research: Bronfenbrenner revisited. Journal of Special Education, 30, 319-344.

Sperry, L. (2001). Spirituality in clinical practice: Incorporating the spiritual dimension in psychotherapy and counseling. Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.

Steffe, L., & Gale, J. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Studer, J. R., & Allton, J. A. (1996). The professional school counselor: Supporting and understanding the role of the guidance program. NASSP Bulletin, 80(581), 53-60.

Tappan, M. B. (1998). Sociocultural psychology and caring pedagogy: Exploring Vygotsky's "hidden curriculum." Educational Psychologist, 33, 23-33.

Tolan, P., Guerra, N., & Kendall, P. C. (1995). A developmental-ecological perspective on antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: Toward a unified risk and intervention framework. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 579-584.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. Van Der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99-174). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and social formation of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wertsch, J. V., & Kanner, B. G. (1992). A sociocultural approach to intellectual development. In R. Sternberg & C. A. Berg (Eds.), Intellectual development (pp. 328-349). New York: Cambridge University.

Christopher A. Sink, Ph.D., NCC, CMHC, is a professor at Seattle Pacific University, Department of School Counseling and Psychology, Seattle, WA, a former PSC editor, and long-time member of the editorial board. E-mail: [e-mail]