The development of a self-assessment instrument to measure a school district's readiness to implement the ASCA National Model.

The ASCA National Model: A Framework for School Counseling Programs is a powerful approach to the organization and management of school counseling programs. The ASCA National Model[R] connects school counseling programs to educational reform initiatives, emphasizes data-based management and accountability processes, reiterates school counseling's role in enhancing student achievement, and establishes a framework for school counselors to operate effectively within standards-based educational environments. Implementation of the ASCA National Model is expected to lead to demonstrable benefits for students and to increased recognition of the integral role of school counseling programs in supporting student achievement. This article discusses a self-assessment instrument that can be used to help public school counselors, school counseling program directors, principals, superintendents, and school board members identify the extent to which a school district is ready to implement the National Model.

**********

The ASCA National Model: A Framework for School Counseling Programs (ASCA, 2003) is a powerful approach to the organization and management of school counseling programs. The ASCA National Model is an explicit effort to link school counseling programs with standards-based educational reform approaches and to emphasize the importance of enhanced student academic achievement as a program outcome.

The ASCA National Model shares several features with the Comprehensive Developmental Guidance Program Model (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000) that has been in existence for more than 30 years. In both models, school counseling is conceived of as a developmental program with a delivery system that is intentionally structured to serve all students well. School counseling activities are delivered in four formats: guidance curriculum, individual student planning, responsive services, and system support.

The ASCA National Model also has some unique features and some features that differ by degree or emphasis from the Comprehensive Developmental Guidance Program Model. For example, the ASCA National Model emphasizes the use of data-based planning and decision-making, the use of the ASCA National Standards (Dahir & Campbell, 1997) in formulating student learning objectives goals, and the use of agreements, action plans, and calendars in program management. In addition, the ASCA National Model calls for increased accountability by means of annual results reports distributed to key constituencies, school counselor performance evaluation systems aligned with standards for practice, and periodic program audits to guide future planning and improve student outcomes.

Because of the stronger emphasis on accountability and the use of data, school counseling programs that have a fully implemented comprehensive developmental guidance program may have to make some changes in order to become a National Model program. Programs that have not yet implemented the Comprehensive Developmental Guidance Program Model are likely to have even more work to do. The ASCA National Model suggests allowing 3 to 5 years for the transition to the new model, with clear guidelines for prioritizing the changes being made.

The effort will be well worth it, for implementing the ASCA National Model is anticipated to lead to demonstrable benefits for students and to recognition of the integral role of school counseling programs in enhancing student achievement. To facilitate ASCA National Model implementation, we have developed a self-assessment instrument to help public school counselors, school counseling program directors, principals, superintendents, and school board members identify the extent to which a school district is ready to implement the ASCA National Model and to identify program areas that will need to be addressed to ensure successful implementation.

INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT

The literature on implementing comprehensive developmental guidance programs (Gysbers, 1990; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000; Gysbers, Hughey, Starr, & Lapan, 1992; Hargens & Gysbers, 1984; Lehr & Sumarah, 2002) was used as the basis for understanding factors that promote successful transitions to a new school counseling program. The ASCA National Model (ASCA, 2003) was reviewed in order to identify conditions deemed necessary or important for successful implementation of that model in particular. The ASCA National Model also identifies school counselor skills required to perform functions (e.g., using data to plan interventions) that are not uniformly addressed in counselor education training programs. We also identified conditions that logically would need to be in place in a school district for successful implementation (e.g., the ability of the district to provide the information used to make data-based decisions). The authors' professional experience in evaluating school counseling programs and in helping districts transition to comprehensive developmental guidance programs was used to supplement literature reviews and logical extrapolation. Keeping all these factors in mind, we identified seven specific readiness indicators: Community Support, Leadership, Guidance Curriculum, Staffing/Time Use, School Counselors' Beliefs and Attitudes, School Counselors' Skills, and District Resources.

The Community Support readiness indicators are about school and local community members' knowledge and value of school counseling programs (e.g., "The school board recognizes that school counseling is an important component of all students' public education").

The Leadership indicators are related to the availability, knowledge, beliefs, and skills of superintendents, principals, and guidance directors (e.g., "The school counseling program has a full-time, district-level guidance program director who is respected by the superintendent, principals, and school counselors").

The Guidance Curriculum indicators identify the existence and use of a formal National Standards-based guidance curriculum as well as integration with existing state and district guidance curriculum standards as specified in the National Model (e.g., "The school counseling program operates from a set of student learning objectives that have measurable student outcomes").

The Staffing/Time Use indicators concern school counselor workloads and time use that are conducive to effective National Model implementation (e.g., "School counselors spend at least 80% of their time in activities that directly benefit students").

The School Counselors' Beliefs and Attitudes indicator cluster reflects the congruity of school counselors' beliefs and attitudes with the goals and modes of practice suggested by the ASCA National Model (e.g., "In general, school counselors believe that they should be responsible for helping all students achieve academically").

The School Counselors' Skills indicators are concerned with the skills needed by school counselors to enact activities specified in the ASCA National Model delivery, management, and accountability systems (e.g., "School counselors can measure how students are different as a consequence of their interventions").

The District Resources indicators reflect the district's ability to provide resources, materials, and support necessary for ASCA National Model implementation (e.g., "The district provides school counselors with regular institutional data reports [disaggregated student achievement, attendance, and school climate data] in user-friendly form in order to facilitate monitoring students and defining problems").

After the initial set of clustered readiness indicators was developed, the first author spent 3 days observing the ASCA National Model implementation in the Tucson Unified School District, AZ. The Tucson guidance director (who is a coauthor of the National Model) and district school counselors were interviewed about the process of implementation. Existing indicators were revised and additional indicators added.

Next, both authors of the ASCA National Model (Judy Bowers and Trish Hatch) reviewed the revised instrument. The instrument also was shown to a group of 20 school counselors at the 2003 Massachusetts School Counselors Association conference to check clarity, readability, logical consistency, and perceived usefulness. Item revisions were made based on the feedback received from these contexts.

Once the draft of the instrument was completed, the first two authors used it during consultations with three New England school districts seeking to implement the ASCA National Model. The goal was to discover whether the instrument facilitated the identification of challenges and the development of action plans. As a result of this field testing, a better understanding of the effective use of the instrument was developed.

Because the ASCA National Model is conceived of as a district-level program, we designed the instrument so that raters are asked to make judgments about their district (rather than about a specific school). If necessary, the instrument can be modified to apply to a school to address variations between schools and concerns unique to a setting. Ideally, however, an ASCA National Model implementation occurs at a district level, and district-specific concerns are the focus of this particular instrument.

An item response format for each indicator was chosen as the most efficient and easy-to-use rating system. Raters are asked to note whether each statement is "like my district," "somewhat like my district," or "not like my district." Limiting responses to three options makes it easier to compare responses across a district and to generate group consensus on what needs to be done next, although it limits the variance in ratings. Technical language related to the field of counseling was minimized so that the instrument would be appropriate for a variety of people (e.g., principals, superintendents, and school board members) who might not be familiar with special uses of language within the school counseling profession.

THE ASCA NATIONAL MODEL DISTRICT READINESS SURVEY

The final items of the ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey are contained in Table 1. The instrument has a total of 54 items clustered in seven readiness domains.

Although every attempt was made to keep the language of the instrument consistent with ASCA National Model terminology, departures were necessary in two instances in order to make the items understandable to raters who might not be familiar with school counseling standards and terminology. For three items in the Staffing/Time Use cluster, we included specific student-to-counselor ratios and percentages of time use as examples of appropriate school counselor workload and time commitments (e.g., "300 students/elementary counselor; 200 students/middle school or high school counselor" and "school counselors spend at least 25% of their time in educational activities that promote student development and prevent problems"), even though the ASCA National Model does not identify specific ratios except to recommend that school counselors spend at least 80% of their time in direct service to students. This information is necessary for educational administrators and community members unfamiliar with school counseling standards in these areas. For these items, the Massachusetts School Counselors Association (2000) recommended ratios and comprehensive developmental guidance guidelines for time use (Gysbers & Henderson, 2000) were used.

In a similar effort to clarify terms for all potential users of the instrument, in one item of the School Counselors' Skills cluster, the terms achievement data, attendance data, and school climate survey data were used instead of the ASCA National Model terms process, perceptual, and results data (ASCA, 2003). Achievement data refers to data about grades, retention, dropout rates, and other measures of achievement. Attendance data refers to absentee and tardy rates, and school climate survey data is information about how members of the school community rate aspects of school climate such as safety, relatedness, and academic focus. The instrument item is, "School counselors can use institutional data (e.g., achievement, attendance, school climate surveys) to describe current problems and set goals."

USING THE SELF-STUDY INSTRUMENT

The ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey is intended to be included in the early stages of a district's assessment of its readiness to adopt the ASCA National Model. The survey also was designed so that it would be useful whether or not a district had already implemented a comprehensive developmental guidance program. Ideally, the survey should be administered to a school community (school counselors, administrators, and/or teachers) after a presentation on the rationale for and characteristics of the ASCA National Model.

The survey asks participants to indicate the extent to which each readiness indicator statement is "like my district," "somewhat like my district," or "not like my district." A numerical value can be assigned to each rating ("like my district" = 1, "somewhat like my district" = 2, and "not like my district" = 3), and descriptive statistics for the group can be quickly computed to identify common viewpoints, differences, and interesting patterns.

Once group results are obtained, they can be discussed with the group, and possible causes for discrepancies, problems, or roadblocks can be identified. Participants then have a chance to generate ideas about how to address any implementation issues that have been identified. In this stage of the process, it would be useful to remind participants that full implementation takes 3 to 5 years, and that some key issues (e.g., school board and superintendent support) need to be addressed very early on in the implementation while other issues (e.g., school counselor skill deficits) can be addressed later. The ASCA National Model (ASCA, 2003) and other key resources (Hargens & Gysbers, 1984; Henderson & Gysbers, 2002) are useful sources for effective responses to implementation issues. If many implementation issues are identified, the group will need to identify priorities. And lastly, the participants can develop an action plan that identifies strategies, interventions, responsibilities, and timelines.

Three case study examples of the use of the ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey follow.

Example 1: Problematic Clusters

In one district's profile, the self-assessment found that all the Guidance Curriculum readiness indicators were rated "not like my district." This district was operating without a formal district guidance curriculum. Contention between the district academic curriculum coordinators and principals over control of the academic curriculum had discouraged attempts to develop a district guidance curriculum--even though some schools within the district had evolved their own guidance curricula. The instrument identified the need to focus on the development of learning objectives with measurable student outcomes that were based on the ASCA National Standards and referenced to state-mandated curriculum frameworks, which became this group's first priority.

Example 2: Problematic Items Within Clusters

In another school district, the self-study revealed that in the Community Support cluster, the school counseling program had good support from within the district (school board, administrators, and teachers) but did not have the support of parents and community leaders and thus was targeted when there were school budget cuts. In this case, one focus of this group's action plan was parent and community outreach. Similarly, in the Staffing/ Time Use cluster, while counselors felt that appropriate workload and distribution of activities was a consistent challenge, the primary problem was coping with an inordinate amount of routine clerical tasks. Thus, another focus of their action plan was to develop alternative ways of getting the necessary clerical work done (e.g., paraprofessional school counseling aides) and to secure the support of principals for these changes.

Example 3: Critical Readiness Indicators

Table 2 contains the 14 readiness indicators that are minimally necessary for an ASCA National Model implementation. The school board and the superintendent need to recognize the potentially important impact of a school counseling program on student achievement (even though they may be dissatisfied with current models and practices). Principals must understand the need for school counselors to provide preventative services and proactive interventions to most effectively impact student achievement. Principals also need to be willing to redefine roles so that school counselors can be more effective. The district needs a school counselor program leader to facilitate and direct the change process. A guidance curriculum should be in place to guide practice. School counselors need to be knowledgeable about and supportive of the National Model, to be open to change, and to recognize the importance of focusing on academic achievement. The district must be committed to supporting relevant professional development. The district needs a system that supports good communication within the school counseling program (e.g., regular meetings, a Web site, e-mail distribution of information) as a prerequisite to implementation.

If the self-study identifies problems in any of these 14 areas, those would most likely be the priorities on which to focus.

As an example, one of the most frequent problems we see in New England is the lack of a district school counseling program director. Because there are many small districts, the functions usually assigned to a school counseling program director often are assigned to the director of special education (who may have little understanding of the work of school counselors). Sometimes, small districts do not have any district-level school counseling program leadership. In these cases, principals often are free to develop building-specific approaches to school counseling, and there may be little, if any, coordination of services district-wide.

However, small districts can develop alternative ways to achieve district-level leadership and coordination. These include (a) an assistant superintendent who is designated as the school counseling program director (and thus is expected to develop needed expertise); (b) a lead counselor chosen to serve as the school counseling program director (with adequate release time); and (c) the development of a partnership between a school district and a university school counseling program that serves some of the leadership, education, and advocacy functions of the program director. In these ways, small districts and even individual counselors can find ways to develop the district leadership necessary for National Model implementation.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Although the ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey can be a useful instrument to catalyze discussion and to direct planning, we believe that further research is necessary to demonstrate its effectiveness. Because the ASCA National Model and, hence, the readiness self-assessment instrument are relatively new, it would be useful to know whether using the survey leads to more efficient and effective program implementation. As districts implement the ASCA National Model, it would be useful to conduct studies that identify which readiness indicators need to be addressed in which stages of implementation. Likewise, it would be beneficial to study which approaches to dealing with readiness problems are the most effective. More information of this sort could be used to improve the instrument's utility and precision.

Table 1. ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey Readiness
Indicators by Cluster

Cluster      Item

Community    1. The school board recognizes that school counseling is
Support         an important component of all students' public
                education.
             2. The school board believes that school counselors can
                play an influential role in closing the achievement
                gap.
             3. Parents understand the intended benefits of the school
                counseling program.
             4. Parents support the school counseling program.
             5. Students believe that the school counseling program is
                an important resource.
             6. Teachers at all levels appreciate the importance of the
                school counseling program.
             7. Teachers at all levels collaborate with school
                counselors in meeting school counseling program goals
                and objectives.
             8. School counselors are recognized by teachers for their
                expertise in issues that impact learning and teaching.
             9. Parents from all racial/ethnic and socioeconomic
                backgrounds believe that school counseling can be an
                important source of help for all students.
            10. Influential business and community leaders are familiar
                with and support the school counseling program.
            11. Community leaders would be eager to be active
                participants on a school counseling advisory board.

Leadership   1. The superintendent believes that the school counseling
                program is an essential component of the district's
                educational mission.
             2. The superintendent believes that the school counseling
                program can help support students' academic
                achievement.
             3. The school counseling program has a full-time,
                district-level leader or director who is respected by
                the superintendent, principals, and school counselors.
             4. The superintendent commits resources to support school
                counseling program
                development.
             5. The district's school counseling program director knows
                the principles of standards-based reform and can
                communicate the relationships between school
                counseling activities and student learning outcomes.
             6. The district's school counseling program director knows
                how to initiate and coordinate systemic change in the
                school counseling program.
             7. The majority of principals believe that school
                counselors ought to be engaged in developmental and
                preventative activities.
             8. The majority of principals believe that school
                counselors ought to be involved in helping students
                achieve academically.
             9. The majority of principals would be receptive to
                redefining school counselor activities.
            10. The majority of principals would be receptive to
                creating yearly plans with school counselors.
            11. The majority of principals would be willing to commit
                resources to alleviate school counselors from routine
                clerical/administrative duties so that they can
                devote at least 80% of their time to activities that
                directly benefit students.

Guidance     1. The school counseling program operates from a set of
Curriculum      student learning objectives that have measurable
                student outcomes.
             2. The school counseling program operates from a set of
                student learning objectives that are grouped by grade
                or grade cluster.
             3. The school counseling program operates from a set of
                student learning objectives that are grounded in the
                ASCA National Standards, state and district standards,
                and local norms.
             4. The school counseling program operates from a set of
                student learning objectives that are connected to the
                district's academic curricula.

Staffing/     1. The school counselor workload is consistent with the
Time Use         needs of a National Model
                 program.
              2. School counselors spend at least 80% of their time in
                 activities that directly benefit students.
              3. School counselors spend at least 25% of their time in
                 educational activities that promote student development
                 and prevent problems.
              4. School counselors spend less than 30% of their time
                 delivering mental health counseling and responding to
                 crises and emergencies.
              5. School counselors do not spend an inordinate amount of
                 time on routine clerical tasks.

School        1. In general, school counselors are open to change.
Counselors'   2. In general, school counselors believe that it is
Beliefs and      important to adopt the ASCA National Model.
Attitudes     3. In general, school counselors believe that they should
                 be responsible for helping all students achieve
                 academically.
              4. In general, school counselors believe that it is
                 important to demonstrate how students are different
                 as a consequence of school counseling interventions.
              5. In general, school counselors believe that it is
                 important to collect outcome data in order to be able
                 to modify interventions.
              6. In general, school counselors agree on a mission
                 statement that establishes the school counseling
                 program as an essential educational program that is
                 designed to serve all students.
              7. In general, school counselors are willing to devote
                 the time to learn new skills.
              8. In general, school counselors believe that it is
                 important that they serve as advocates for
                 underserved students.

School        1. School counselors are competent in a wide range of
Counselors'      interventions (systemic, classroom, group, and
Skills           individual levels).
              2. School counselors understand the individual and
                 systemic factors that are associated with poor
                 academic achievement and the achievement gap.
              3. School counselors are familiar with the principles
                 of standards-based educational reform and can
                 identify the relationships between school
                 counseling activities and student performance.
              4. School counselors can identify evidence-based
                 interventions that enhance academic achievement,
                 career development, and personal/social development.
              5. School counselors know how to be effective advocates
                 for underserved students.
              6. School counselors can measure how students are
                 different as a consequence of their interventions.
              7. School counselors can use institutional data (e.g.,
                 achievement, attendance, school climate surveys) to
                 describe current problems and set goals.
              8. School counselors use technology effectively to access
                 needed student data.
              9. School counselors use technology effectively to
                 accomplish routine clerical tasks efficiently.
             10. School counselors use technology effectively to
                 communicate with students, parents, and colleagues.
             11. School counselors are recognized as leaders in their
                 schools.
             12. School counselors can establish goals and benchmarks
                 for school counseling in their own schools.
             13. School counselors can document their impact on
                 students for principals, school committees, and the
                 community.
             14. School counselors can query student information
                 systems for needed information.

District      1. The district's school counseling program has developed
Resources        or adopted a set of instruments, referenced to the
                 student learning objectives, to measure student change
                 in academic development, career development, and
                 personal/social domains.
              2. The district provides school counselors with regular
                 institutional data reports (disaggregated student
                 achievement, attendance, and school climate data) in
                 user-friendly form in order to facilitate monitoring
                 students and defining problems.
              3. The district has a school counselor performance
                 evaluation system that evaluates counselor
                 effectiveness in a broad range of activities (e.g.,
                 whole school, classroom guidance, small group, and
                 individual counseling).
              4. The district has a school counselor performance
                 evaluation system that is based upon professional
                 performance standards.
              5. The district has a school counselor performance
                 evaluation system that is connected to meaningful
                 professional development.
              6. The district has a system for ensuring that all
                 school counselors have access to developmental
                 supervision to improve practice.
              7. The district is committed to providing professional
                 development to help school counselors develop skills
                 necessary for the implementation of the ASCA National
                 Model.
              8. The district school counseling program director has
                 implemented a system for monitoring the ongoing
                 outcomes and continuously improving programs in each
                 school.
              9. District school counseling program director has
                 implemented a system for periodic program evaluation
                 for the entire school counseling program.
             10. The district school counseling program director has
                 implemented a system for coordinating school
                 counseling program activities (e.g., master calendars).
             11. The district school counseling program director has
                 implemented a system ensuring good communication and
                 information sharing across the school counseling
                 program.

Table 2. Critical Readiness Indicators

Cluster      Item

Community    1. The school board recognizes that school counseling is
Support         an important component of all students' public
                education.
             2. The school board believes that school counselors can
                play an influential role in closing the achievement
                gap.

Leadership   1. The superintendent believes that the school counseling
                program is an essential component of the district's
                educational mission.
             2. The superintendent believes that the school counseling
                program can help support students' academic
                achievement.
             3. The school counseling program has a full-time,
                district-level leader who is respected by the
                superintendent, principals, and school counselors.
             7. The majority of principals believe that school
                counselors ought to be engaged in developmental and
                preventative activities.
             8. The majority of principals believe that school
                counselors ought to be involved in helping students
                achieve academically.
             9. The majority of principals would be receptive to
                redefining school counselor activities.

Guidance     1. The school counseling program operates from a set of
Curriculum      student learning objectives that have measurable
                student outcomes.

School       1. In general, school counselors are open to change.
Counselors'  2. In general, school counselors believe that it is
Beliefs and     important to adopt the ASCA National Model.
Attitudes    3. In general, school counselors believe that they should
                be responsible for helping all students achieve
                academically.

District     7. The district is committed to providing professional
Resources       development to help school counselors develop skills
                necessary for the implementation of the ASCA National
                Model.
            11. The district guidance leader has implemented a system
                ensuring good communication and information sharing
                across the school counseling program.

References

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

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

Gysbers, N. C. (1990). Comprehensive guidance programs that work. Ann Arbor, MI: ERIC/CAPS.

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

Gysbers, N. C., Hughey, K. R., Starr, M., & Lapan, R.T. (1992). Improving school guidance programs: A framework for program, personnel, and results evaluation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70(5), 565-570.

Hargens, M., & Gysbers, N. C. (1984). How to remodel a guidance program while living in it: A case study. The School Counselor, 32, 119-125.

Henderson, P., & Gysbers, N. C. (Eds.). (2002). Implementing comprehensive school guidance programs: Critical leadership issues and successful responses. Greensboro, NC: ERIC/CASS.

Lehr, R., & Sumarah, J. (2002). Factors impacting the successful implementation of comprehensive guidance and counseling programs in Nova Scotia. Professional School Counselor, 5, 292-299.

Massachusetts School Counselors Association. (2000). The role of the Massachusetts professional school counselor. Boston: Author.

A copy of the ASCA National Model District Readiness Survey can be downloaded from the National Center for School Counseling Outcome Research Web site at http://www.umass.edu/ schoolcounseling/

This work would not have been possible without the critical input of both Judy Bowers and Trish Hatch and the valuable contributions of the school counselors and supervisors at the Tucson Unified School District in Arizona.

John Carey, Ph.D., is the director, Jim Harrity, M.Ed., is a research assistant, and Carey Dimmitt, Ph.D., is the associate director, National Center for School Counseling Outcome Research, School of Education, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. E-mail: cdimmitt@ educ.umass.edu