Principals' perceptions of elementary school counselors' role and functions.

This study used a 140-item questionnaire to determine how elementary school principals view school counselors in the state of Florida. Responses from 500 elementary school principals revealed that counselors were perceived as having a positive impact on the academic, behavioral, and mental health development of their students," and most principals indicated that they would recommend school counseling to others as a career. Results from this study can inform school counseling training programs on ways they may better prepare students for a career as a professional school counselor.

**********

Research has shown that the support of school principals for counselors' roles is essential to the development, application, and maintenance of counseling programs, as well as to the success of these professionals and their programs (Brock & Ponec, 1998; Niebuhr, Niebuhr, & Cleveland, 1999). School counselors and counselor educators are aware of the strong influence the principal exerts on a school's counseling program and also of the need to make graduating school counselors aware of their future supervisors' views of the counselor's role (Fitch, Newby, & Ballestero, 2001). Establishing a positive working relationship with principals is vital to the success of counselors (Niebuhr et al., 1999; Ponec & Brock, 2000). The teamwork of counselors and principals is a decisive factor in determining the effectiveness of comprehensive school counseling programs (Kaplan, 1995; O'Connor, 2002). For this reason, principal-counselor collaboration should be addressed in training programs (Fitch et al.). Effective principals need to be knowledgeable of the challenges, including legal and ethical issues, that counselors encounter, and about the counselor's roles within the school system (O'Connor; Taylor, 2002).

THE PRINCIPAL'S INFLUENCE

The principal largely determines the role and functions of the counselor within the school (Ribak-Rosenthal, 1994). Principals select and appoint counselors and direct their on-the-job training, which often helps define the counselors' functions (Beale & McCay, 2001; Kaplan & Evans, 1999). When their own administrative positions face excessive demands, some principals use counselors to perform various clerical tasks rather than counseling duties (Ribak-Rosenthal). Moreover, many principals seem to hold a view of the proper role for school counselors that is different from that described in the standards of the counseling profession (Lampe, 1985; Murray, 1995). Research suggests that ignoring the influence of a principal can negatively impact the implementation and maintenance of counseling programs (Ponec & Brock, 2000). Thus, there is a need for a better understanding of principals' perceptions of school counselors.

PRINCIPALS' CONFUSION ABOUT THE COUNSELOR'S ROLE

More than three decades ago, principals suggested that counselors have a primary responsibility to the students in need of service but that they also have a responsibility to the school administration and to society (Hatch, Dressel, & Costar, 1963). Considerable debate within the field regarding this issue led to a school counselor job description that has often included roles and duties that are broad in scope, vaguely defined, and sometimes incompatible with the professional standards developed by national organizations such as the American School Counselor Association (ASCA, 2003). Many attempts have been made to clarify the functions of school counselors. The ASCA National Model[R] (ASCA, 2003) and the ASCA National Standards (Campbell & Dahir, 1997) describe the common body of knowledge and skills guiding the practice of school counseling. Despite ASCA's National Model attempt to clarify the functions of school counselors, it is evident that many differences of opinion still exist among school principals (e.g., Shoffner & Williamson, 2000). This confusion remains an impediment to progress establishing the counselor's role within a comprehensive school counseling program (Ponec & Brock, 2000; Ponce & Dickel, 1991).

SCHOOL COUNSELORS' CONCERNS

Many school counselors perceive themselves as change agents, consultants, crisis managers, and group leaders (Ribak-Rosenthal, 1994). They recognize that having the support of principals, superintendents, and other school administrators is a key element to the success of their performance, and they have expressed the need for support in a variety of ways, including conferences and publications (O'Connor, 2002). Research shows that principals' support can make a difference in the success of counselors in schools (Mayer, Butterworth, Komoto, & Benoit, 1983; O'Connor), and lack of the administrator's support can make the counselor's job extremely difficult (Morgan, 1990).

Current analysis of counselors' perceptions of their own role indicates that they see themselves spending too much time in administrative functions, such as scheduling, disciplinary functions, and clerical duties, and not providing enough services to students (Baggerly, 2002; Baker, 1996; Fitch et al., 2001; Texas Education Agency, 1996). Counselors also perceive that principals actively request them to be involved in administrative functions to the detriment of services provided to students (Texas Education Agency). Research shows that counselors do spend a large percentage of their time in noncounseling/nonguidance duties (Texas Education Agency). Research also has noted that while performing noncounseling duties might be helpful for the school, it diminishes the overall counseling program (Sutton & Fall, 1995). Furthermore, administrative duties are not considered core elements of a counselor's role by ASCA (2003).

The following suggestions have been offered to limit principals' confusion about the counselor's role in school. First, Ponec and Brock (2000) have indicated that research should be conducted determining principals' knowledge and expectations of counselors' roles and duties. Second, Ponce and Dickel (1991) suggested that principals, as the main influence and support of counseling programs, must be educated on the appropriate role and duties of a counselor. Third, Hardesty and Dillard (1994) proposed that school counselors need to demonstrate how their work contributes to the overall school environment and to the development of students by offering greater documentation of the effectiveness and success of school counseling programs. Fourth, Ribak-Rosenthal (1994) suggested that counselors need to become proficient in communicating to principals their professional training and their adherence to professional standards. Finally, Kaplan (1995) suggested that school counselors could strengthen their role in schools by learning and understanding their principal's point of view, and by using these insights to enhance their counseling effectiveness.

PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of principals regarding the role of elementary school counselors in the state of Florida. Areas addressed in this study included the elementary school principals' satisfaction with the school counselors' performance; their perception of the counselors' impact and effectiveness in working with students, teachers, and parents; and their perception of their contribution to the maintenance of a positive school environment. Additional areas of study included the principals' perceptions of the counselors' participation in the administration of state comprehensive assessment testing; the perceived actual time vs. ideal time that counselors invest in specific duties; the student-counselor ratio; and the implementation of ASCA's national program model (ASCA, 2003).

METHOD

Participants

A sample of 1,110 of the 1,660 professional elementary school principals in the state of Florida was randomly drawn from a list provided by the Florida Department of Education for 2002. A total of 500 (45.5%) usable surveys were returned. Respondents included 356 (71.2%) females and 144 (28.8%) males. The majority of the sample (n = 413, 82.6%) identified themselves as White, 59 (11.8%) as African American, 25 (5%) as Hispanic American, and 3 (0.6%) as "other." The average age of the participants was 52 (range = 30 to 70). Their educational degrees included 394 (78.8%) master's, 35 (7%) education specialists, and 69 (13.8%) doctorates. Two participants (0.4%) did not complete this item.

Results indicated that, of these respondents, 184 (36.9%) had been in the position for 1 to 5 years, 139 (27.8%) for 6 to 10 years, and 171 (34.2%) for 11 years or more. Two participants (0.4%) did not complete this item. The school setting in which the participants worked included 167 (33.4%) urban, 225 (45%) suburban, and 102 (20.4%) rural area schools. The average number of students enrolled in their schools was 745 (range = 100 to 12,103), with an average student-to-counselor ratio of 634 (range = 300 to 6,052) to 1. Only 17 (3.4%) schools were reported to have an occupational or career specialist.

Instrument

The 2002 Florida Principals' Survey was developed by modifying the Florida School Counselors' Survey 2000 (Baggerly, 2002). This 140-item questionnaire was adapted to assess principals' perceptions of counselors' roles and functions. The first section of the questionnaire solicited demographic information, such as gender, ethnicity, type of school (urban, suburban, or rural), and counselor-student ratio. These data are reported to describe the sample of respondents. The second section of the questionnaire asked about principals' satisfaction with counselors' performance. It asked for their perception of counselor impact and effectiveness, using questions such as, "How satisfied were you with your school counselor's job performance?" or statements such as, "The school counselor made a significant difference in the behavior/mental health of the students he/she worked with last year." Participants were asked to respond to each of the 10 questions or statements using a 4-point Likert-type scale in which 1 meant "strongly agree" and 4 meant "strongly disagree,"

The third section of the questionnaire included five questions regarding counselors' participation in the administration of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). Participants responded in a way similar to that described in the previous section. The fourth section listed 19 job responsibilities (e.g., individual counseling, consulting with administrators, coordinating community services). Participants were asked to indicate the actual time that counselors spent in each job activity and the ideal time counselors should spend in that activity. Participants were asked to respond using a 4-point Likert-type scale in which 1 meant "much of his/her time" and 4 meant "very little time." In addition, participants were asked what priority that activity should have in the job of the school counselor. Participants were asked to respond using a 4-point Likert-type scale in which 1 meant "very high" and 4 meant "low."

Procedure

In August 2002, a packet was sent to 1,100 randomly selected elementary school principals in the state of Florida. It contained a cover letter explaining the purpose of the study and the confidentiality of responses, a copy of the anonymous survey, and a preaddressed, postage-paid return envelope. All recipients were assigned a code that was included on the return envelope. Participants were asked to return the survey within 4 weeks of receipt. As an incentive to respond, participants were informed that three persons returning completed surveys would be randomly selected to receive $50.00 awards to be used for any academic purpose. A card reminding participants to return the survey was mailed 3 weeks after the initial mailing. A follow-up letter and another copy of the survey were mailed 3 months after the first mailing.

A total of 500 completed surveys were returned for a response rate of 45.5%. Elementary school principals who responded were representative of public school principals statewide regarding gender (71.2% females, 28.8% males), age (mean = 52), and education (78.8% master's degrees, 7% education specialists, 13.8% doctorates).

RESULTS

A primary goal of this investigation was to determine how elementary school principals perceived the role and functions of school counselors. Descriptive statistics and chi-square statistics were used in the analysis of the data. Results are summarized by categories reflecting the principals' perceptions relative to the professional practices and issues addressed in this research.

Satisfaction with Counselor Performance, Perception of Impact, and Effectiveness

Satisfaction. Ninety-two percent (n = 446) of the elementary school principals reported being "very satisfied" or "somewhat satisfied" with the job performance of their school counselors. Only 7.7% (n = 37) reported being "very dissatisfied" or "somewhat dissatisfied."

Impact. More than 70% (n = 343) of the elementary school principals "agree" or "strongly agree" that the counselor made a significant difference in the academic performance of the students he or she worked with. Furthermore, 89.9% (n = 434) of the principals "agree" or "strongly agree" that the counselor made a significant difference in the behavior and mental health of the students he or she worked with.

Effectiveness. Almost three out of four elementary school principals (n = 354, 73.1%) "agree" or "strongly agree" that the school counselor was successful in helping most or all of the students he or she worked with. Almost all of the principals (n = 444, 91.9%) "agree" or "strongly agree" that parents found the counselor effective in helping them with their concerns about students. In addition, most principals (n = 418, 86.7%) "agree" or "strongly agree" that teachers found the counselor effective in helping them with their concerns about their students.

School environment. The majority of the elementary school principals (n = 446, 92.1%) "agree" or "strongly agree" that school counselors contributed to a positive school environment.

Job Stress

Ninety-four percent (n = 391) of the principals responded that the counselor's job became "much more" or "somewhat more" stressful after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Job Recommendation

Most elementary school principals (n = 426, 89.1%) indicated that they would "most definitely" or "probably" recommend that a friend or a child become a school counselor.

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test

Approximately 41% (n = 200) of the counselors were reported to coordinate or share the responsibility of coordinating the FCAT administration. An additional 32% (n = 153) were reported to assist with the FCAT administration. Only 1 in 4 (25%) was not involved with the FCAT administration according to the principals. The median number of hours reported as being invested in the FCAT was 20. Approximately 74% (n = 244) of the counselors received "very little" or "some" clerical support for the preparation, administration, and sorting of the FCAT. Furthermore, 57.4% (n = 182) of the principals reported that the FCAT administration hindered counselors' responses to school needs, with 23% indicating that it affects the counselors' performance "a lot" or "very much." Finally, 69% (n = 201) of the principals indicated that it would be helpful for the school counselor to have a temporary testing coordinator, with 50% (n = 146) indicating that it would help "a lot" or "very much."

Priority of Job Responsibilities

Table 1 presents the average priority score that principals assigned to counselors' selected job responsibilities. The duties assigned the highest priorities were individual counseling; small-group counseling; classroom guidance; consulting with parents; crisis counseling; consulting with teachers; coordinating intervention services (child study teams, special education eligibility meetings, and planning of services as required by Section 504 of the American Disabilities Act [U.S. Department of Justice, 1990]); and consulting with administrators.

Actual Time vs. Ideal Time Spent on Duties

The means of actual time and ideal time that counselors spent in selected duties are presented in Table 1. Elementary school principals were provided with the following choices to indicate perceived time that counselors spent on duties: 1 = "most of his/her time"; 2 = "much of his/her time"; 3 = "some time"; and 4 = "very little time." A mean higher in actual than ideal time indicated that the principal believed that the counselors should spend less time on that duty. A mean lower in actual time than ideal time indicated that the principal believed that the counselors should spend more time on that duty.

Table 1 identifies professional duties for which statistically significant differences were found between actual time and ideal time. Principals believed that counselors should spend more time on the following duties: individual counseling; small-group counseling; classroom guidance; consulting with parents; crisis counseling; consulting with teachers; coordinating community services; academic advising; and career counseling. On the other hand, principals believed that school counselors should spend less time in the following duties: coordinating intervention services meetings and coordinating FCAT.

Ranking of Counselors' Duties

To facilitate the comparison among the principals' priorities, ideal time, and actual time, rankings were generated based on the mean values that principals assigned to each duty within these categories. Table 1 displays the rankings in parentheses. Rankings were very similar for perceptions of priority and perceptions of ideal time. However, clear discrepancies were apparent between the principals' priorities and the actual time that counselors spent on that duty. For example, individual counseling was the top-ranked priority, whereas coordination of intervention services was the top-ranked duty under actual time.

Student-Counselor Ratio

The average student-counselor ratio reported by elementary school principals was 634 to 1 (SD = 33.8). This ratio is two and a half times higher than the 250-to-1 ratio recommended by ASCA (2003).

ASCA Standards

Only 27.8% (n = 133) of the principals believed that the adoption of the ASCA National Standards (Campbell & Dahir, 1997) by the state of Florida would help counselors focus on their relevant job duties. Most principals (n = 162, 33.9%) were unsure; and 27.4% (n = 131) were not familiar with the national standards.

DISCUSSION

Elementary school principals participating in this study held a very positive perception of their school counselors overall. These principals believed that school counselors exert a positive influence on both the behavior and mental health of students; effectively help the majority of the students and families they work with; support administrators and teachers; and contribute to the maintenance of a positive school environment. These results suggest that the contributions of school counselors go well beyond their impact on individual students. These positive perceptions were reported in spite of the recognition of an increase in elementary school counselors' levels of job stress after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This is not a surprising finding. New concerns about national and international violence, a sense of heightened vulnerability, and threats of bioterrorism have had a dramatic effect on the lives of our citizens and our students.

What is relevant about the findings of this study is that, despite all of the additional stress, elementary school counselors have continued to be perceived as having a positive role and making contributions to the school and its stakeholders. Furthermore, almost all of the principals indicated that they would recommend school counseling as a career choice to others, a finding that suggests that in addition to being satisfied with their counselors, principals hold a positive view of the profession.

The principals' responses suggest that they are aware of the importance of the school counselor's duties. Elementary school principals gave the highest priority rankings to job responsibilities pertaining to at least three main counselor roles: counseling, consulting, and coordination (ASCA, 2003; Baker, 1996; Schmidt, 1999). Examples include individual and crisis counseling (counseling); consulting with parents, teachers, and administrators (consulting); and coordinating child study teams (coordination). This finding suggests that principals value counselors' job responsibilities that are in line with the ASCA National Model (ASCA, 2003). Thus, elementary school counselors can use this existing common knowledge to collaborate with principals to further advance what they considered most important for school counselors.

These are important findings because the greater demands and needs of today's public schools call for all professional educators to work together to increase the strength of services for students (Wagner, 1998). In many ways, the principal and the school counselor are perceived as school leaders (Kaplan & Evans, 1999), and it is critical that they collaborate for the benefit of the entire school community (Niebuhr et al., 1999). According to Wesley (2001), they are natural partners who should complement one another in the task of serving students and form a partnership based on knowledge, trust, and a positive regard for what each professional does. Therefore, it is essential for school counselors and school principals to understand and appreciate their roles and responsibilities in order to engage in collaborative work that addresses students' needs and learning objectives (Shoffner & Williamson, 2000).

In addition, counselors and principals increase their chances to collaborate successfully when they feel that their professional contribution is appreciated. By learning that principals do value their contributions, counselors can feel supported by their administration and contribute more effectively to their schools and their students. Furthermore, learning that their administrators value their professional work can enhance the degree of job comfort experienced by counselors. This is especially true at a time of budget reductions and increasing demands. As suggested by Wesley (2001), learning about the positive connotation of the principals' perception of their work can serve as an "antidote" for counselors during times when they feel inadequate or overwhelmed, or when they feel unappreciated or disregarded.

Despite the positive view of counselors, less than one third of the elementary school principals believed that the adoption of the ASCA National Model (ASCA, 2003) by the state of Florida would help counselors focus on their relevant job duties. Previous research has shown that counselors' duties often are incongruous with state and national professional standards, and that this lack of agreement can be a source of frustration for school counselors and a source of conflict between counselors and principals (Kaplan, 1995). However, the current findings suggest that principals have expanded their knowledge of school counselors' roles and responsibilities because they gave high priority to several counselor duties that fall into the main categories of activities embraced by ASCA.

Nonetheless, many elementary school counselors continue to be involved in the FCAT administration. ASCA (2003) considers this duty a noncounseling activity. Counselors have argued repeatedly that FCAT administration has a detrimental impact on their capability to offer services to their students and have criticized school principals for assigning them this task (Baggerly, 2002). Interestingly, the majority of the principals in this study agree with the counselors. It is possible that some principals may have no other option than to assign counselors this task. Also, the average student-counselor ratio reported by elementary school principals is two and a half times higher than the ratio recommended by ASCA. This overload of students may hinder counselors' effectiveness and capacity to increase their participation in high-priority duties. The high student-to-counselor ratio and the time that counselors spend in the administration of the FCAT could negatively affect the implementation of new programs.

The results of this study also indicate that school counselors engage in functions that are not among the top duties ranked by principals or are only remotely related to either their training or their professionally determined roles or activities. Scheduling and participating in disciplinary functions absorb much of counselors' time. Furthermore, it is clear that administrative duties and discipline are not primary functions of school counselors (Schmidt, 1999). ASCA (2003) does not consider these duties core functions of the counselor's role. However, what is more important is that the majority of the administrators value the same activities that counselors value and would like to see counselors becoming more involved in those activities in the future. Principals and counselors could use this existing commonality as a platform for professional collaboration.

Limitations

Several limitations are evident in this study. First, the results of this study reflect the perceptions of 45.5% of the sampled participants. This percentage, although not unusual in survey research, may not accurately reflect the views of the entire population of elementary school principals in the state of Florida. Second, the results of this study are based on a self-report instrument; therefore, participants may have been more inclined to say what they thought the researcher wanted them to say. Third, it is also possible that only respondents with positive perceptions of counselors' roles and functions took the time to complete the survey. Fourth, the respondents to the survey represent elementary school principals from the state of Florida only. To facilitate generalization, future replications of the present study could examine how elementary school principals across the country perceive the roles and functions of school counselors.

Conclusions

The analysis of the principals' perceptions revealed a positive view of elementary school counselors' roles and functions, and a considerable degree of agreement with the ASCA National Model (2003). Counselor educators and administrators can use this information to determine how school counselors currently are being used, and how their potential may be more fully realized. These results can enable school counseling program faculty to design a more effective training program to prepare students for their duties as school counselors. For example, future elementary school counselors can be informed that principals view small-group counseling as a high-priority job responsibility for counselors. Thus, elementary school counselors-in-training and new counselors may seek to receive additional training in small-group counseling techniques. In addition, school counselors could be trained to educate school principals of the fact that small-group counseling requires a team effort to recruit participants and implement the process.

Also, this information can inform school district guidance counseling directors and policy makers, thereby helping Florida schools have more effective counselors and comprehensive counseling programs. In addition, knowing the perceptions of counselors' roles held by these administrators can help counselors anticipate areas of agreement and conflict when they attempt to gain administrative support for their activities and projects. Furthermore, this information can be used to establish better communication and understanding between school counselors and school principals, and to strengthen the team building and collaboration between these key educational leaders.

Table 1. Mean of Ideal Time vs. Actual Time That Elementary School
Counselors Spent on High- to Low-Priority Job Responsibilities,
Rank Ordered According to Priority

Job Responsibility                                   Mean

                                                    Ideal      Actual
                                     Priority (a)  Time (b)   Time (b)
                                        (Rank)      (Rank)     (Rank)

Individual counseling                3.6 (1)       2.9 (1)   2.3 * (3)

Small-group counseling               3.5 (2)       2.9 (1)   2.2 * (6)

Classroom guidance                   3.4 (3)       2.7 (3)   2.1 * (7)

Consulting with parents              3.3 (4)       2.7 (3)   2.5 * (2)

Crisis counseling                    3.1 (5)       2.2 (8)   2.0 * (8)

Consulting with teachers             3.1 (5)       2.6 (5)   2.3 * (3)

Coordinating intervention services   2.9 (7)       2.4 (6)   2.6 * (1)

Consulting with administrators       2.8 (8)       2.3 (7)   2.3 * (3)

Coordinating community services      2.1 (8)       2.0 (9)   1.7 * (9)

Academic advising                    2.0 (10)      1.7 (10)  1.5 * (11)

Career counseling                    1.6 (11)      1.5 (12)  1.3 * (16)

Coordinating student groups, clubs,  1.6 (11)      1.6 (11)  1.5 (11)
assemblies

Coordinating FCAT                    1.5 (13)      1.4 (13)  1.7 * (9)

Career testing                       1.4 (14)      1.3 (15)  1.2 (19)

Administrative duties                1.4 (14)      1.4 (13)  1.5 (11)

Disciplining students                1.4 (14)      1.3 (15)  1.4 (14)

Student registration                 1.3 (17)      1.3 (15)  1.3 (16)

Coordinating SAT, ACT, benchmarks    1.3 (17)      1.3 (15)  1.3 (16)

Miscellaneous (lunchroom duty,       1.2 (19)      1.3 (15)  1.4 (14)
substituting for a class, etc.)

* Significant difference between Actual Time and Ideal Time (chi-square
test significant at p < .05).

(a) Priority scale (Note: survey scores were reversed for analysis):
4 =very high; 3 = high; 2 = moderate; 1 = low.

(b) Ideal Time and Actual Time scale: 4 = most of his/her time;
3 = much of his/her time; 2 = very little time; 1 = some time.

References

American School Counselor Association. (2003). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Baggerly, J.N. (2002). Florida school counselors' survey 2000: Results and recommendations. Florida Educational Research Council Research Bulletin, 33. Retrieved April 24, 2004, from http://www.firn.edu/webfiles/others/ferc/ Default.htm

Baker, S.B. (1996). School counseling for the twenty-first century. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Beale, A.V., & McCay, E. (2001). Selecting school counselors: What administrators should look for in prospective counselors. The Clearing House, 7, 257-60.

Brock, B., & Ponec, D. (1998). Principals and counselors: Creating effective elementary school counseling programs. Educational Considerations, 26, 33-37.

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

Fitch, T.J., Newby, E., & Ballestero, V. (2001). Future school administrators' perceptions of the school counselor's role. Counselor Education and Supervision, 41, 89-99.

Hardesty, P.H., & Dillard, J. M. (1994). Analysis of activities of school counselors. Psychological Reports, 74, 447-450.

Hatch, R.N., Dressel, P.L., & Costar, J.W. (1963). Guidance services in the secondary school. Dubuque, IA: Brown.

Kaplan, L.S. (1995). Principals versus counselors: Resolving tensions from different practice models. The School Counselor, 42, 261-267.

Kaplan, L.S., & Evans, M.W., Sr. (1999). Hiring the best school counseling candidates to promote students' achievement. NASSP Bulletin, 83, 34-39.

Lampe, R.E. (1985). Principals' training in counseling and development: A national survey. Counselor Education and Supervision, 25, 44-47.

Mayer, G.R., Butterworth, T., Komoto, T., & Benoit, R. (1983). The influence of the school principal on the consultant's effectiveness. Elementary School and Guidance, 17, 274-279.

Morgan, G. (1990).The comprehensive guidance model at Hillsboro High School. In N.C. Gysbers (Ed.), Comprehensive guidance programs that work (pp. 157-164).Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Murray, B.A. (1995). Principals: Proponents of high school guidance programs. NASSP Bulletin, 79, 64-68.

Niebuhr, K.E., Niebuhr, R.E., & Cleveland, W.T. (1999). Principal and counselor collaboration. Education, 119, 674-678.

O'Connor, P.J. (2002). Administrative support of counseling programs: Defining it and measuring it. Journal of College Admission, 177, 13-19.

Ponec, D.L., & Brock, B.L. (2000). Relationship among elementary school counselors and principals: A unique bond. Professional School Counseling, 3, 208-217.

Ponec, D.L., & Dickel, C.T. (1991). Administrator's perception of an elementary counseling role: Actual and ideal. The Nebraska Counselor, 27, 20-25.

Ribak-Rosenthal, N. (1994). Reasons individuals become school administrators, school counselors, and teachers. The School Counselor, 41, 158-164.

Schmidt, J.J. (1999). Counseling in schools. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Shoffner, M.F., & Williamson, R.D. (2000). Engaging preservice school counselors and principals in dialogue and collaboration. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40, 128-140.

Sutton, J.M., & Fail, M. (1995). The relationship of school climate factors to counselor self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 331-336.

Taylor, K.R. (2002). Do you know what your guidance counselor should know? Principal Leadership, 2, 59-62.

Texas Education Agency. (1996). Texas school counseling and guidance programs. Final study report. Austin, TX: Author. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429240)

U.S. Department of Justice. (1990). The Americans with Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: Author.

Wagner, T. (1998). Change as collaborative inquiry. Phi Delta Kappa, 79, 512-517.

Wesley, D.C. (2001). The administrator-counselor team. Journal of College Admission, 173, 6-11.

The author would like to thank Dr. Michael Curtis and Dr. Herbert Exum, as well as the editor of Professional School Counseling, for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of this article. This study was supported by a Research and Creative Scholarship grant awarded by the Research Council and the Division of Sponsored Research of the University of South Florida.

Carlos P. Zalaquett, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in Counselor Education, University of South Florida, Tampa. E-mail: zalaquet@tempest. coedu.usf.edu