Incidental counseling: a key to cost-effective systemic change.

Incidental counseling occurs when school staff members respond to students in ways strikingly similar to counseling. Incidental counseling is offered as a simple and effective way for school counselors to engage in systemic change. Two case examples from real school settings form the context for a discussion of how school counselors can begin to build collaborations for maximizing the benefits of incidental counseling.

**********

All schools have members of their staff who have formed meaningful relationships with students, responding to them in ways strikingly similar to counseling. We refer to this as incidental counseling. The range of incidental counseling is extensive including everything from providing information for simple requests, to personal problem solving, to dealing with crises. Although it is not possible to determine how many incidental counseling situations ever come to the attention of school counselors, it is probably safe to say that many remain out of counselors' awareness. Nonetheless, though it may be impossible for school counselors to be aware of all such instances, we believe it is important for counselors to make deliberate efforts to identify and collaborate with staff members who engage in incidental counseling. Knowing about counseling-like occurrences would position school counselors to assist staff members with continuing to build their incidental counseling capacities, thereby contributing to positive systemic change. School counselor-led systemic change for incidental counseling would be beneficial for students, staff members, and the counseling program.

Collaboration and systemic change are two of the four themes in the ASCA National Model[R] (American School Counselor Association, 2005), and we believe that incidental counseling represents a cost-effective way for school counselors and other stakeholders to address student needs. Recognizing and acting on these two themes will, in our estimation, require a paradigm shift for school counselors. The nature of this shift is one in which counselors expand their focus for program intervention beyond the students to include the broader system including the school's staff (Colbert & Magouirk Colbert, 2003; Green & Keys, 2001; House & Hayes, 2002). In their culture-centered model, Colbert and Magouirk Colbert assert, "With an expanded focus to include schoolwide concerns, school counselors can help the entire school to better educate students, substantially increasing the number of individual students helped by counselors' efforts." A primary concern of most schools today is the issue of creating a learning environment with sensitive and caring adults with whom students feel safe and supported by as they participate in the learning process.

Ordinarily, school counseling program collaborations start within a planned framework. That is, the team identifies student needs, determines objectives, selects strategies, and implements a plan (Brown & Trusty, 2005; Stone & Dahir, 2004). However, with incidental counseling, spontaneous strategies oftentimes will have already been implemented--that is, staff members interacting with students in need in a counseling-like manner. By paying attention to the larger system, school counselors could be expected to identify such staff members as potential allies who are capable of reaching certain students in positive ways, ways that even the most skilled counselor might never achieve because of a lack of relationship, time, or even awareness of need.

Given school counselors' typically large caseloads, rather than seeing this as a loss of professional identity or a role threat, we view it as an asset. We believe that counselors can far extend their reach and effectiveness by carefully cultivating and developing this cadre of allies. And, ultimately, it is the students who are the beneficiaries of such practices. Simultaneously, by identifying, nurturing, acknowledging, and helping to build the capacities of the natural counseling skills and talents that these allies contribute to the development of larger numbers of students (as compared to no incidental counseling), counselors can be active leaders in promoting an overall positive school climate.

In the next sections we provide a couple of examples from our own experiences of incidental counseling situations in which staff members responded to students in very constructive and effective ways.

CASE EXAMPLE 1: THE PERSUASIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

This first case example (observed by the second author) comes from an inner-city high school where the administrators and staff were trying to keep the "after-effects" of a physical fight from getting out of hand. The fight involved students and non-student gang members. Security officers were working with the principal and vice principals to keep gang members from entering the building while keeping the students from leaving the building so that serious violence would not erupt. Once the "dust settled" and the crisis had been averted, the principal began giving out tardy passes to some of the students who were upset by the fight and had refused to return to class. Shortly thereafter, the principal returned to his office to continue dealing with another aspect of the situation. Meanwhile, one of the male students involved in the situation stood at the office main desk refusing to give up his cell phone before returning to his classes, which was a school policy.

The principal's administrative assistant called the young man back to her desk and tried persuading him to leave his cell phone in the office. As she was talking with him, a teacher walked up and instructed the young man to leave his phone. He responded by turning in her direction, extending one hand toward her, and saying, "Get out of my face." She turned and walked away.

Meanwhile, the administrative assistant continued talking with the young man, who was using profanity, to which she replied in a calm voice, "I haven't cursed at you and I will not, so please don't curse at me." The student talked about how it was important to keep his phone so that he could help his friends who were depending on him. The administrative assistant said she understood but he also needed to think about the consequences of his actions and the decisions he was making in that moment. She told him he could either give up his phone and go to class or keep it and get suspended. He said he didn't care about being suspended. The administrative assistant then asked him what he wanted to do when he graduated from high school. He replied that he wanted to go to college and make something of himself. The administrative assistant then said, "You shouldn't let other people tell you where you go in life. If you make the wrong decision right now, you won't have control over your life and you might not even graduate. Then how will you go to college?"

The administrative assistant then said that the student needed to look past this particular moment and look 5 to 10 years "down the road." She went on,

   If you give up your cell phone, you can go to
   class and get it back at the end of the day. If
   you don't, it will be taken and your parents
   will have to get involved, and you'll get suspended.
   You have to weigh your options and
   come up with a peaceful solution.

The student then gave the administrative assistant his cell phone voluntarily. The principal stepped out of his office about that time, spoke with the student for a moment, and then gave him a tardy slip to return to class.

The administrative assistant was instrumental in defusing a situation that could have exploded into violence. And, she did it in a way that was respectful to the student. She did not tell him what to do but rather she helped him think beyond his emotional reactivity and select the choice that was best for him.

CASE EXAMPLE 2: A TEACHER'S FEEDBACK

This example (observed by the first author) comes from a situation in which a youngster with special needs was in a regular education classroom. The student was an 11-year-old fifth grader in a language arts class. The teacher was one of the student's favorite teachers. He received special education services due to his oppositional behavior, attention deficits, and mild mental retardation, which were all secondary to a genetic disorder. However, with the assistance of a paraprofessional aide who was assigned to him on a one-to-one basis, the student was included in regular education classes and, with modifications, he participated in the general curriculum.

Although he was academically behind his peers by about 2 years in most subjects, the modifications enabled him to still be an active participant within all his classes. What set him apart from his peers, however, was the gap between their social-interpersonal behaviors and his. He was quite immature and often would stubbornly refuse or openly challenge even seemingly minor requests made by his teachers, his aide, or even his classmates. He liked being with his peers and very much wanted to have friends, but his social-interpersonal behaviors often tended to serve as a barrier to either making or sustaining friendships.

On one particular day he appeared to be having repeated altercations with the girl seated next to him. Although it was not possible to determine what may have started the altercation initially, there were repeated and loud negative comments that the student was directing at this girl until she finally told him, "Stop bothering me!" Shortly thereafter, the class ended and the children began leaving for lunch.

As the student was gathering his materials, the teacher came over, put her arm around him, and gently and quietly told him that when he speaks he often does so too loudly and in a seemingly mean tone of voice. As he listened and then responded to her, she pointed out that the volume and tone of his voice made her feel he was angry with her, which he denied. She asked him to try speaking to her in a quiet voice and he did. She then told him that his classmate might have thought he was angry with her when she told him to stop bothering her. They chatted for a couple more minutes and soon thereafter the student left for lunch.

After lunch, as the children were settling in for their math class, also with the teacher, the student spontaneously apologized to his classmate for being so loud, to which she responded by saying she thought he "was mad" at her. The remainder of the class continued without any further altercations.

The precision with which the feedback from this incidental counseling was delivered while allowing it to remain in context and in close temporal proximity to the actual time of the student's behavior was impressive. Clearly, the trusting relationship and acceptance that the student and his teacher shared allowed her to deliver her message in ways that those without such a relationship probably could not. Although she may have had to repeat such messages to him many more times after that day, the likelihood of his learning those important social interpersonal skills was enhanced by the incidental counseling she provided.

DISCUSSION

In both examples the staff members responded in ways that had positive outcomes. In the first example, the administrative assistant successfully persuaded the student to leave his cell phone in the office. Moreover, the student calmed down and "let go" of the anger and tension associated with the fight. Her incidental counseling prevented consequences such as a permanent disruption in the student's education, that is, he might have tuned out and/or dropped out; or worse, he could have placed his or others' lives in danger. Given that this type of situation regularly occurs in this and many other urban high schools in the United States, it is important to at least acknowledge efforts like those of the administrative assistant.

In our second example, the teacher gave the student feedback that led to his having a positive social exchange with his classmate. Inclusive classroom situations are becoming more common yet they present new challenges because it is difficult for educators to ensure that students with special needs will be accepted and valued by their typical classmates. In this situation the student was clearly having difficulty fitting in with one of his peers. The teacher obviously had taken the time to observe the situation and reflect on how to help him improve his behavior. Thus, when the "right" situation occurred, the teacher took action that led to a positive outcome for the student. The teacher used incidental counseling by drawing on her good rapport with the student to get him to listen to her feedback. As a result, the student remedied a miscommunication cycle with his classmate that most likely would have just continued to create a growing social barrier between them.

In our opinion, these are but two examples of some of the many good things going on in public schools today that are easily overlooked. In our view, attentive school counselors need to identify such situations, reinforce these incidental counselors, and in so doing, enhance the school's capacities by building a true cadre or cohort of allies who demonstrate these skills day in and day out in a school environment.

In the first case study, the second author contacted the administrative assistant and let her know how impressed he was by her ability to do what she did. He wanted to acknowledge that she played an important role in diffusing a potentially explosive situation and to praise her for that. In the second case study, the first author publicly acknowledged the teacher's role at the student's planning and placement team meeting and informed the team how she delicately and impressively handled a very important social situation for this youngster and, in so doing, contributed to his social acceptance within her classroom.

CONCLUSION

Incidental counseling as we have described it may be one way for school counselors to successfully contribute to systemic change. The beauty of this approach is that we are not advocating that school counselors have to do anything really different to promote "big" system change, but instead that just by using many of the counseling skills they already possess they can begin to notice the impressive cadre of incidental counseling allies around them.

Then when a particular student comes to their attention for any number of issues such as truancy, challenging behavior, or failure to follow through on assignments, counselors may be able to call on these allies, some of whom already may have a meaningful relationship with the student or others who have shown the capacities for forming such a relationship, and ask for their assistance. Then using their professional counseling skills and specialized training, school counselors can provide support and guidance to these incidental counselors who become the natural agents of change. In those situations in which no one has formed a particular relationship with a given student, from among all the possible allies whom the counselors have identified, they might ask for their assistance as would be the case with school staff such as the administrative assistant who spontaneously stepped into a natural incidental counseling role with a student whom she knew only as someone who occasionally came to the main office.

By reaching out to the many incidental counseling allies that we believe exist in all schools, it does not mean we are advocating for counselors to give up their role and function. Nor are we suggesting that those doing incidental counseling should be held to the same high standards as certified school counselors. Certainly, there will be students for whom counselors will be the primary psychosocial change agent in the school. And, school counselors still should be the ones who identify when a particular student's needs exceed the capacities of the school's incidental counseling allies as well as their own so that a referral to those with more expertise with such situations can occur (Baker & Gerler, 2004). But, in general, by taking full advantage of the natural abilities of the many allies within the building who are spontaneously engaged in incidental counseling and by collaborating with them, school counselors have the potential to make positive systemic changes without the need for additional resources.

References

American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Author.

Baker, S., & Gerler, E. R., Jr. (2004). School counseling for the twenty-first century (4th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Brown, D., & Trusty, J. (2005). Designing and leading comprehensive school counseling programs: Promoting student competence and meeting student needs. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Colbert, R. D., & Magouirk Colbert, M. (2003). Conceptualizing school counselors' involvement in culture-centered education reform. In P. Pedersen & J. Carey (Eds.), Multicultural counseling in schools: A practical handbook (2nd ed., pp. 3-26). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

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

House, R. M., & Hayes, R. L. (2002). School counselors: Becoming key players in school reform. Professional School Counseling, 5, 249-256.

Earn CEUs for reading this article. Visit www.schoolcounselor.org, and click on Professional School Counseling to learn how.

Stone, C. B., & Dahir, C. (2004). The transformed school counselor. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Orv C. Karan is a professor of education and Robert D. Colbert is an assistant professor with the Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs. E-mail: [e-mail]