Students with disabilities: school counselor involvement and preparation.

Legislation has greatly impacted educational opportunities for students with disabilities. Prior to the implementation of Public Law 94-142 (the Education for All Handicapped Children Act [EAHCA] of 1975), many students with disabilities received either no services or inappropriate services in public schools (Smith & Colon, 1998; Zaccaria, 1969). For more than 25 years, however, disability legislation has mandated that public schools provide appropriate educational services to all students with disabilities. As a result, 95% of students with disabilities received services in 1996 (U.S. Department of Education, 1996).

In addition to impacting educational opportunities for students, legislation has increased the involvement of school counselors with students with disabilities. The passage of EAHCA resulted not only in greater numbers of students receiving special services in schools (Parker & Stodden, 1981; Tucker, Shepard, & Hurst, 1986), but also increased involvement of school counselors with students who have disabilities (Korinek & Prillaman, 1992; Sweeney, Navin, & Myers, 1984). More recent legislation, Public Law 101-476 (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA] of 1990), a reauthorization of EAHCA, and Public Law 105-17 (the 1997 Amendments to IDEA) discussed the involvement of individual school personnel with students with disabilities. Williams and Katsiyannis (1998) stated, "A primary implication of the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is the need for all educators to share in the responsibility for services provided for all students including those with disabilities" (p. 17).

Although legislation encourages greater school counselor involvement with students with disabilities, little research has been conducted to examine the actual roles that school counselors perform for those students. Helms and Katsiyannis (1992) found that the elementary school counselors they surveyed in Virginia provided individual, group, and classroom counseling for students with disabilities. The most common counseling issues involved self-concept, social skills, behavior, study skills, and career awareness.

In 1980, the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) developed a position statement concerning school counselor roles with students with disabilities. That statement was revised in 1986 and again in 1993 (Baumberger & Harper, 1999). ASCA adopted two more focused position statements that discuss school counselor roles in relation to working with students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ASCA, 2000) and with students with special needs (ASCA, 1999). In those statements, ASCA suggested that school counselors advocate for students with disabilities in the school and/or community, assist students with disabilities in planning for transitions to careers or to post-secondary institutions, assist with the establishment and implementation of behavior modification plans for students with disabilities, counsel parents and families of students with disabilities, and make referrals to other appropriate specialists for students with disabilities. ASCA also suggested that school counselors provide activities for students with disabilities to improve their self-esteem, provide feedback on the social and academic performance of students with disabilities to the multidisciplinary team, provide individual and group counseling to students with disabilities, provide social-skills training to students with disabilities, serve as consultants to parents and staff on the characteristics and special needs of students with disabilities, and serve on the multidisciplinary team to identify and provide services to students with disabilities.

Given the variety of activities that school counselors might perform for students with disabilities, it is important to ensure that school counselors feel prepared to provide services to those students. It has consistently been suggested that education would help to increase school counselor competence for working with students with disabilities (Foster, 1977; Hosie, Patterson, & Hollingsworth, 1989; Isaacs, Greene, & Valesky, 1998; Margolis & Rungta, 1986; Tucker et al., 1986). Despite the acknowledged need for education to increase school counselor competence, however, most school counselor education programs in the early 1990s did not require either specific coursework related to students with disabilities or practical experiences with those students (Korinek & Prillaman, 1992). Furthermore, Korinek and Prillaman found that while most respondents (68%) indicated that their school counselor education programs would have to be altered to better prepare graduates to work with students with disabilities, only 11% had plans to make changes.

State departments of education and counselor educators have provided input concerning existing and desirable education related to students with disabilities for school counselors (Frantz & Prillaman, 1993; Korinek & Prillaman, 1992), but input from practicing school counselors has only been minimal. The purpose of this research was to obtain feedback from practicing school counselors in order to explore the activities school counselors engage in for students with disabilities and how prepared they felt to perform those activities as well as to examine recent trends in school counselor education related to students with disabilities. The following research questions were explored:

* What activities do school counselors perform for students with disabilities?

* How prepared do school counselors feel to perform activities for students with disabilities?

* What education do school counselors receive related to students with disabilities?

* What is the relationship between the education school counselors receive to work with students with disabilities and how prepared they feel overall to provide services to those students?

Method

Participants

A random sample of 400 members of the American Counseling Association (ACA) who indicated that they were employed in schools (elementary; middle, or high) and had joined the organization after 1995 was generated by and obtained directly from ACA. Because ACA was unable to generate a sample based on graduation year, the author requested a sample based on the year the member joined ACA. It was assumed that a significant number of these individuals had joined the organization during either graduate school or the year after completing their graduate work.

Employment as a school counselor and completion of graduate work between 1994 and 2000 were established as selection criteria. These criteria were established in order for participants to have completed their graduate work after passage of IDEA and to provide time for the integration of relevant content with respect to students with disabilities into the school counselor education programs. Of the 400 surveys mailed, 9 were returned as undeliverable, reducing the total sample size to 391. Of those, 224 (57%) were returned and 100 (26%) were practicing school counselors who completed their graduate work between 1994 and 2000.

The age of the 100 participants ranged from 24 to 60, with a mean of 37.19 (SD = 9.82). Eighty-four percent were female and 16% were male. The ethnic distribution of the participants included African American (3.0%), Asian/Pacific Islander (1.0%), Latino/a or Hispanic (3.0%), Native American (2.0%), White (90.0%), and other (1.0%). Participants worked in elementary schools (28.0%), middle/junior high schools (38.0%), and high schools (34.0%). The years of school counseling experience of the participants ranged from 0 to 9, with a mean of 2.63 (SD = 1.85). Fifty-five percent of the participants were former teachers, and 16% of the participants indicated that they had been special education teachers. Seven percent of participants indicated that they had a disability, and 36% indicated that one of their immediate family members had a disability.

Procedure

A packet consisting of an introductory letter including a description of the study, a coded survey booklet, and a return envelope was mailed to each member of the sample. A reminder postcard was mailed one week later Two weeks after postcards were sent, a follow-up letter and a second survey booklet were mailed to all members of the original sample who had not responded. Participants indicated their informed consent by returning the survey.

Instrument

The School Counselor Preparation Survey-Revised (SCPS-R) is an instrument created by the author to assess the activities school counselors perform for students with disabilities, how prepared they feel to perform those activities, and the education (coursework, practical experiences, or workshops) they received to work with students with disabilities. In order to determine if survey questions were ambiguous, a pilot study was conducted with a random sample of 200 members of the school counseling association of a mid-Atlantic state. The SCPS-R was the end result of modifications that were made based on results of that pilot study.

Based on the definition of children with disabilities in the IDEA Amendments of 1997, "students with disabilities" were defined on the SCPS-R as individuals who would qualify for special education or related services based on them meeting criteria for one or more of the following: autism, emotional disturbance, hearing impairment, specific learning disability, mental retardation, orthopedic impairment, speech/language impairment, traumatic brain injury, visual impairment, or some other health impairment which adversely affects educational performance. Participants were asked to refer to this definition when responding to the survey items.

The first item on the SCPS-R asks participants to indicate the number of students in their total caseload and the number of students with disabilities in their total caseload. In the next two items, participants are asked to use a 6-point Likert-type scale (1 = completely unprepared, 2 = unprepared, 3 = somewhat unprepared, 4 = somewhat prepared, 5 = prepared, 6 = completely prepared) to indicate how prepared they felt overall to provide services to students with disabilities and how prepared they felt to perform 11 different activities for students with disabilities (see Table 1). The fourth item on the SCPS-R lists the same 11 activities and asks participants to place a check beside each activity they performed for students with disabilities.

The list of activities discussed above was generated from the ASCA position statements concerning the roles that school counselors should engage in when working with students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ASCA, 2000) and students with special needs (ASCA, 1999). In addition, because few participants indicated how prepared they felt overall to provide services to students with disabilities, an overall preparation mean was calculated for each participant. This mean was determined based on the preparation ratings for each of the 11 activities.

Items five through nine relate specifically to the education that school counselors received to work with students with disabilities and were developed based on literature addressing education related to students with disabilities (Beattie, Anderson, & Antonak, 1997; Frantz & Prillaman, 1993; Isaacs et al., 1998; Korinek & Prillaman, 1992; Parker & Stodden, 1981). Participants are asked to indicate the number of graduate courses they completed that specifically focused on students with disabilities, the number of graduate courses completed that included discussion about students with disabilities in addition to other course content, and the number of practical experiences (e.g., practicum, internship) completed during graduate school with students with disabilities. They are also asked to report the number of school-sponsored in-service programs they attended since being employed as school counselors that related to students with disabilities. Finally, they are asked to indicate the number of conferences or workshops they attended on their own since being employed as school counselors that related to students with disabilities.

Results

What activities do school counselors perform for students with disabilities? Of the 11 activities listed, 7 were performed by approximately three fourths of the participants (see Table 1). The greatest percentage of participants (82.8%) provided individual and/or group counseling to students with disabilities. Also, the least percentage of participants (40.4%) assisted students with disabilities with transitions.

How prepared do school counselors feel to perform activities for students with disabilities? Participants felt somewhat prepared overall to provide services to students with disabilities (n = 98, M = 4.20, SD = .87). A mean rating of 3.59 (SD = 1.32) indicated that participants felt the least prepared to assist students with disabilities in planning for transitions to careers or to post-secondary institutions. In addition, with a mean rating of 4.54 (N = 100, SD = 1.03), participants indicated they felt the most prepared to provide individual and/or group counseling to students with disabilities. See Table 1 for a list of activities ranked from most prepared to least prepared.

What education do school counselors receive related to students with disabilities? The number of graduate courses completed by the participants that specifically focused on students with disabilities ranged from 0 to 6 with a mean of 0.80 (n = 99, SD = 1.19). Participants also completed an average of 2.40 (n = 98, SD = 2.40) graduate courses where information about students with disabilities was presented in addition to regular course content. Their responses ranged from 0 to 18. In addition to coursework, participants had between 0 and 10 (n = 91, M = 1.76, SD = 1.98) practical experiences (e.g., internship, practicum) with students with disabilities during their graduate education. Finally, since being employed as school counselors, the participants attended an average of 1.69 (n = 99, SD = 2.27) school-sponsored in-service programs and an average of 1.68 (n = 99, SD = 2.25) conferences or workshops.

What is the relationship between the education school counselors receive to work with students who have disabilities and how prepared they feel overall to provide services to those students? Multiple linear regression was used to examine this question. The null hypothesis was that there is no relationship between the education (the number of courses, practical experiences, or workshops) that school counselors complete and how prepared they feel overall to perform activities for students who have disabilities. The dependent variable was the overall preparation rating. The independent variables were (a) the total number of graduate courses the school counselors completed, including courses specifically related to students with disabilities and those integrating information about students with disabilities into existing course material; (b) the number of practical experiences with students with disabilities they completed during graduate school; and (c) the total number of conferences or workshops they attended since being employed as school counselors that related to students with disabilities.

The SPSS output (multiple regression, backward elimination option) produced three different models (see Tables 2 and 3), all of which were significant. The criteria for removing variables included a minimum F value (F-to-remove) and a minimum probability of F-to-remove. The default values of 2.71 and a probability of 0.10 were used. The third model (Model 3) indicated that 12% of the variance in overall preparation could be explained by variance in the total number of courses. Thus, the more courses an individual has completed, the more prepared he or she felt.

Discussion

Participants performed many of the activities that ASCA (1999, 2000) suggested are appropriate when working with students with ADHD and/or students with special needs, and many of those activities (e.g., providing individual counseling, advocating for students) might be performed for students without disabilities. Fewer than half of the participants indicated that they assisted students with disabilities with transition plans. Because transition planning is a service that is mandated for students with disabilities at age 16 (Hardman, Drew, Egan, & Wolf, 1993; Yell, Rogers, & Rogers, 1998), it might be expected that many of the elementary and middle school counselors would indicate they do not assist with transition planning. Results indicated, however, that 32% of the participants who reported that they worked in high schools also did not assist students with transition planning.

In general, the school counselors indicated feeling "somewhat prepared" overall to provide services to students with disabilities and to perform specific activities for those students. This suggests that there might be interventions that counselor education programs and/or school districts could implement to help school counselors feel even more prepared. Results of this study indicate that school counselors feel more prepared to provide services to students with disabilities when they receive more information about (i.e., complete courses and attend workshops) and have more experiences with students with disabilities. Although the school counselors in this study did complete courses, workshops, and practical experiences related to students with disabilities, perhaps the content or quality of those educational opportunities was not adequate in terms of helping them feel completely prepared. It also seems likely that school counselors might never feel completely prepared for any role.

While the content and quality of the courses and experiences participants completed during graduate school is unknown, results of this study indicated that pre-service education related to students with disabilities is inconsistent. More specifically, some participants reported that they completed no coursework or practical experiences related to students with disabilities during graduate school and others indicated that they discussed disabilities in every course. This suggests that there is no uniformity among school counselor education programs, which is consistent with the findings of Barret and Schmidt (1986). This lack of uniformity could be partly explained, as Coombe (1994) suggested, by the fact that some states require coursework in special education while others do not. In addition, these findings are consistent with research conducted by Deck, Scarborough, Sferrazza, and Estill (1999), which indicated that many school counselors did not receive much preparation to work with students with disabilities. It appears, however, that many professional opportunities exist for school counselors to attend in-service workshops or other conferences related to students with disabilities. The variation in the number of conferences and workshops that the participants attended may likely be a function of differences in the number of opportunities that are available for school counselors to receive additional education or in their motivation to pursue additional education.

Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

One purpose of this research was to gather information from school counselors who completed their graduate work between 1994 and 2000 in order to examine recent trends in school counselor education. The sample, however, may not have been representative of all school counselors who completed their graduate work during that time frame. It is likely that school counselors who choose to join ACA are different from those who do not choose to join, especially since school counselors can join ASCA without joining ACA. Therefore, while this study provides information about school counselor education and feelings of preparation to work with students with disabilities, the results cannot be generalized to school counselors who are not members of ACA. Results also cannot be generalized to the individuals who did not respond to the survey.

Another limitation of this study was that self-report measures were used to gather the data. While the results are useful for examining school counselor perceptions, they do not provide information about how well school counselors actually perform the activities. Therefore, future research should examine feelings of preparation or competence in relation to actual performance.

While education related to students with disabilities has been shown to be a significant predictor of the overall preparation ratings of school counselors to provide services to those students, much of the variance in the overall preparation ratings remains unexplained. Future research could help to identify other factors that may contribute to that variance. For example, it seems very likely that the content of the courses that the participants completed varied from individual to individual as did the types of practical experiences they had with students with disabilities. This resulted in analyses that were conducted based on nonstandardized treatment conditions, making it very difficult to pinpoint any one particular experience or intervention that was the most helpful. Controlled studies, where specific content areas or types of experiences are used as treatment conditions, would help researchers more clearly identify helpful topics or types of experiences.

A final limitation to this study was that the SCPS-R is a new instrument. It was developed based on a review of literature and was revised after a pilot study. The instrument appears to have face validity, however, psychometric information regarding the instrument is limited.

Implications for School Counseling

As a whole, professional school counselors should take responsibility for advocating their ongoing educational needs related to students with disabilities. One way to advocate these educational needs is by providing feedback to the colleges or universities from which they graduated. Many graduate programs seek input from their alumni for the purpose of improving their programs. By completing program evaluation surveys from graduate programs or by simply sending the program chair a letter indicating areas of strength or concern, school counselors can ensure that counselor educators are informed.

Professional school counselors can also advocate disability education in their own school districts. Scheduling a meeting with school administrators or the staff development committee and providing them with a formal statement indicating a need for more education in the area of special education as well as a rationale for providing the education is a simple way to start the process. It would also be important to discuss the potential benefits for all educational and support staff. In addition, offering suggestions about or contact information for potential presenters might make the administrators or committee more likely to pursue the idea. Local and state school counseling organizations can help to identify qualified presenters.

Professional school counselors can also advocate at the school district level by developing a support network. It is important that both administrators and school counselors recognize that many school counselors may not feel completely prepared to provide services to students with disabilities. Support from administrators is important for establishing formal mentoring relationships to help ease the transition for school counselors. In addition, special educators and school counselors can establish collaborative and/or consulting relationships to provide comprehensive services for students with disabilities. Finally, in collaboration with special educators, school counselors can create a resource list of individuals, organizations, print materials, and Web sites to be consulted for issues regarding special education or disabilities.

Conclusion

Overall, the results of this study indicate that school counselors provide many services to students with disabilities and that additional measures could be taken to help school counselors feel more prepared to work with those students. Because information and practical experiences were both found to be helpful, graduate programs could take the lead in evaluating their current programs and adding or revising relevant courses and/or practical experiences. In addition, practicing school counselors could provide feedback to graduate programs and advocate for ongoing professional development opportunities through their school districts and professional organizations. Ultimately, however, school districts, professional organizations, counselor educators, and individual school counselors need to share in the responsibility for contributing to the initial and ongoing preparation of all school counselors in relation to working with students who have disabilities.

References

American School Counselor Association. (1999). The professional school counselor and the special needs student. Retrieved November 13, 2001, from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.cfm?L1=1000&L2=32

American School Counselor Association. (2000). The professional school counselor and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Retrieved November 13, 2001, from http://www. schoolcounselor.org/content.cfm?L1=1000&L2=4

Barret, R. L., & Schmidt, J. J. (1986). School counselor certification and supervision: Overlooked professional issues. Counselor Education and Supervision, 26, 50-55.

Baumberger, J. P., & Harper, R. E. (1999). Assisting students with disabilities: What school counselors can and must do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Beattie, J. R., Anderson, R. J., & Antonak, R. F. (1997). Modifying attitudes of prospective educators toward students with disabilities and their integration into regular classrooms. Journal of Psychology, 131, 245-259.

Coombe, E. (1994). Training school and rehabilitation counselors to provide cooperative transition services. In D. Montgomery (Ed.), Rural partnerships: Working together (pp. 425-429). Proceedings of the Annual National Conference of the American Council on Rural Special Education (ACRES). Austin, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 369 638)

Deck, M., Scarborough, J. L., Sferrazza, M. S., & Estill, D. M. (1999). Serving students with disabilities: Perspectives of three school counselors. Intervention in School and Clinic, 34, 150-155.

Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.

Foster, J. C. (1977). Increasing secondary school counselor competency in providing guidance services to physically handicapped students. (Report No. 443CH60418). Washington, DC: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 159 848)

Frantz, C. S., & Prillaman, D. (1993). State certification endorsement for school counselors: Special education requirements. The School Counselor, 40, 375-379.

Hardman, M. L., Drew, C. J., Egan, M. W., & Wolf, B. (1993). Human exceptionality: Society, school, and family. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Helms, N. E., & Katsiyannis, A. (1992). Counselors in elementary schools: Making it work for students with disabilities. The School Counselor, 39, 232-237.

Hosie, T. W., Patterson, J. B., & Hollingsworth, D. K. (1989). School and rehabilitation counselor preparation: Meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 171-176.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997. 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (West 1998).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. Section 1400 et seq. (West 1998).

Isaacs, M. L., Greene, M., & Valesky, T. (1998). Elementary counselors and inclusion: A statewide attitudinal survey. Professional School Counseling, 2, 68-76.

Korinek, L., & Prillaman, D. (1992). Counselors and exceptional students: Preparation versus practice. Counselor Education and Supervision, 32, 3-11.

Margolis, R. L., & Rungta, S. A. (1986). Training counselors for work with special populations: A second look. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 642-644.

Parker, L. G., & Stodden, R. A. (1981). The preparation of counseling personnel to serve special needs students. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 16, 36-41.

Smith, J. O., & Colon, R. J. (1998). Legal responsibilities toward students with disabilities: What every administrator should know. NASSP Bulletin, 82(594), 40-53.

Sweeney, T. J., Navin, S. L., & Myers, J. E. (1984). School counselor education: Shipping water or shaping up? The School Counselor, 31, 373-380.

Tucker, R. L., Shepard, J., & Hurst, J. (1986). Training school counselors to work with students with handicapping conditions. Counselor Education and Supervision, 26, 56-60.

U. S. Department of Education. (1996). Eighteenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Williams, B. T., & Katsiyannis, A. (1998). The 1997 IDEA amendments: Implications for school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 82(594), 12-17.

Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. L. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a long, strange trip it's been! Remedial and Special Education, 19, 219-228.

Zaccaria, J. S. (1969). Approaches to guidance in contemporary education. Scranton, PA: International Textbook.

Amy S. Milsom, D.Ed., NCC, is an assistant professor, Division of Counseling, Rehabilitation, and Student Development, The University of Iowa, Iowa City. E-mail: [e-mail]

This research was funded in part through a grant from the Pennsylvania State University Alumni Society.