What counselors do in high-achieving schools: a study on the role of the school counselor.

School counselors are being challenged to redefine their role to better support the overall academic performance of students. In light of this challenge, counselors need to know characteristics of counseling programs in high-achieving schools. The authors of this study collected information from 63 schools in Kentucky regarding the tasks of the school counselor and the school's student achievement test scores. Results of the study indicated that counselors in higher-achieving schools spent more time on program management, coordination, and aligning programs with professional standards.

**********

Schools are under increasing pressure to account for their overall student academic performance (Elmore & Fuhrman, 2001). Some states are even providing drastic financial incentives for school personnel in higher achieving schools (State Legislatures, 2002). California, for example, has provided up to $25,000 for certified personnel in higher achieving schools. Measurements of performance have been increasingly based on test outcomes (Samuelsen, 2001), and the feedback on this focus has been mixed (Elmore & Fuhrman). While some proponents highlight these initiatives as ways to better focus schools and provide motivation, others argue that they end up narrowing curriculum and restricting their flexibility in the curriculum (Elmore & Fuhrman). Regardless of what argument counselors endorse, it is evident that their overall role in the school's mission is impacted by these initiatives.

School counselors are actively involved in supporting the educational initiatives of the school. They coordinate many programs to provide mentoring and support to students as well as work with teachers to identity academically at-risk students and provide support for educators (Edmondson & White, 1998; McElroy, 2000). Using counselors to directly support the school's academic mission is gaining even greater support as seen in recent initiatives with Education Trust (2002). Education Trust is a grant funded private organization that is exploring reform models for school counseling. Many of the reform initiatives highlight aligning school counselors more tightly with the educational mission of the school. In light of these trends, more research is needed that explains the role of a school counselor in relation to school success.

THE ROLE OF THE SCHOOL COUNSELOR

The ASCA (American School Counseling Association) Role Statement (ASCA, 1990) outlines standards of practice. Role statements also generate from the individual state's education department and are usually based on the ASCA Role Statement. Textbooks in school counseling also offer role statements for counselors (Myrick, 1993). Finally, local school districts, administrators, and schools themselves outline role statements. Although most role definitions overlap greatly, there remains some confusion regarding the appropriate duties of a school counselor (Fitch, Newby, Ballestero, & Marshall, 2001). Since duties vary greatly from one school counselor to another, it is helpful to know how high-achieving schools tend to use their counselors.

According to the ASCA Role Statement (1990), professional school counselors provide services to help students learn more effectively. One way they remove barriers to student learning is through individual and group counseling (Myrick, 1993). Another service is consultation. The ASCA Role Statement defined consultation as helping people become more effective in working with others and also helping individuals think through problems and concerns, gain knowledge and skills, and become more objective and self-confident. The ASCA Role Statement defined a third rote of coordination as counselor intervention of various indirect services that assist students and functions as a liaison between school and community agencies through programming efforts. These three primary roles outline a scope of practice for school counselors.

The scope of practice must also link with the overall components of a school counseling program. The areas of accountability, management systems, foundations, and the delivery system have been presented as core components of school counseling (ASCA, 2003). The study of how school counselors impact the academic achievement of students overall overlaps with each of these components. However, school counselors are frequently required to work on tasks that may not reflect these components.

There are many duties that school counselors often perform that do not appear in published counselor role statements (Baker, 1996). Performing these unpublished roles represents a threat to the essential services of school counselors. In one study, high school counselors surveyed claimed they spent more time scheduling than any other function (Tennyson, Miller, Skovholt, & Williams, 1989). Maintaining student records, assisting with transcript requests, and collecting and organizing program materials are among some of the many clerical tasks that school counselors conduct (Baker).

FACTORS OF SCHOOL PERFORMANCE

Researchers have identified six major factors of effective schools (Good & Brophy, 1994; Linney & Seidman, 1989; Wohlsetter & Smyer, 1994). McWhirter, McWhirter, McWhirter, & McWhirter (1998) listed the first component as autonomous school leadership. Schools performed better when they had more freedom from school boards and other departments to make decisions. Second, high-achieving schools actively recognize academic achievement and often measure student achievement. Third, staff relationships and professional development was strong in high-performing schools. There was more evidence of teaming and staff training in these schools. Fourth, students in high-achieving schools reported a sense of belongingness with the school. They felt they were treated fairly and respected by staff. Fifth, parent and community support was high in better performing schools. Sixth, the quality of the social systems surrounding the students was high in strong performing schools. Family and community relationships actively stress the importance of education to the students. These factors of school performance can be directly enhanced by the school counseling program. The human relations training of school counselors makes them especially qualified for impacting these systemic areas related to achievement. However, few studies have explored the role of the school counselor in high-achieving schools.

SCHOOL PERFORMANCE AND THE ROLE OF THE COUNSELOR

Leadership skills have been identified as a primary area of competence needed by effective school counselors (Education Trust, 2002). School counselors can greatly impact school climate and school policies. Particularly, counselors can influence curriculum decisions and course planning. They can enhance the academic mission of the school and improve overall student performance by teaming with faculty to set high curriculum standards for all students. Finding inadequacies in curriculum and course planning can also be a role of the school counselor. For example, they can check for differences in course selection by gender, ethnicity, or economic status.

Full attention to student academic achievement must be directly connected to the school counselor's role. Otherwise, when they collaborate with faculty and administration their role might be delegated as peripheral (Bemak, 2000). McElroy (2000) outlined how counselors directly support the school's academic mission through improving transitions, advising programs, and connecting with parents.

Counselors possess skills to directly address threats to school climate (Pelsma, 2000). For example, teachers undergo enormous pressures related to classroom stress, compensation, and relationships with school officials. Counselors can serve as a collaborator, colleague, and ally for teachers. Pelsma suggested that counselors can use solution-oriented consultation to help teachers not only function better but also to improve attitude and reduce stress.

The purpose of this study was to compare the school counselor's role in high-achieving schools to the school counselor's role in lower achieving schools. The research questions are as follows: Is there a relationship between school performance and the perceived importance of different counseling duties and time spent on the duties?; Is there a relationship between school performance and counselor/student ratio?

METHOD

Procedure

Graduate students in a post-master's degree counseling program assisted in data collection. The ten students were full-time school counselors representing different counties in Kentucky. A sample of convenience was used to collect information on school performance and the perceived significance of the school counseling duties. The students distributed the surveys to full-time school counselors in their district. The surveys were sent with a letter explaining the nature of the study, confidentiality, and instructions. The surveys were returned in preaddressed, postage-paid envelopes. Students were given bonus course credit for their participation.

Survey

A questionnaire was constructed to obtain descriptive data related to school performance and the perceived importance of different counseling duties. The counseling duties were chosen by using the Kentucky School Counseling Standards (Education Professional Standards Board, 1996) published by the Kentucky Department of Education. The survey included several examples, or specific duties, that relate to each standard. The Kentucky Standards parallel ASCA Standards which gives evidence of construct validity. Reliability coefficients were not obtained on the survey because of its descriptive nature and a similar questionnaire had been used previously to assess perceptions of the school counselor's role by future administrators (Fitch et al., 2001). Participants were directed to rate the importance of each item on a 7-point Likert (Babbie, 1998) type scale. They were also asked to indicate the number of hours a week they spent on these duties. Participants then provided information related to their school's performance. Participants provided group mean scores on the California Test of Basic Skills (CTBS). These scores were used to rank schools into high-achieving and low achieving categories.

Data Analysis

The questionnaire used a 7-point Likert (Babbie, 1998) type scale asking participants to rate the importance of a specific counseling duty. Demographic information were also collected on the school as well as the student/counselor ratio. A non-parametric test of significant differences in mean ranks was used, Mann-Whitney U, with each survey item comparing low- and high-achieving schools. Schools were categorized as low- or high-achieving based on their school average on the CTBS Reading score. When a separate analysis was done using math achievement in lieu of reading, the results were unchanged. Schools in the top one third were listed as high-achieving and schools in the bottom third were placed as low-achieving. A separate analysis examined student/counselor ratio with school performance.

RESULTS

Full time public school counselors in Kentucky from all grade levels participated in this study (n = 62). The average age of the participant was 40 and the average number of years of experience was 6 years. The sample was 98% European-American and 2% African-American. The sample was comprised of 84% female and 14% male participants. The CTBS score averages for the participating schools were as follows: math = 48 national percentile; language = 48 national percentile; and reading = 52 national percentile. High school counselors comprised 40% of the sample, middle school counselors represented 19% of the sample, and elementary school counselors comprised 40% of the sample while 1% did not identify school level.

The first research question was: Is there a relationship between school performance and the perceived importance of different counseling duties and time spent on the duties? A 7-point Likert-type scale was used to identify the perceived importance of a duty or role. A non-parametric test comparing mean differences was utilized. The perceived importance of particular counseling duties did not vary greatly when comparing high-achieving schools to low-achieving schools. There were no statistically significant ratings except for one area, advocacy. Low-achieving schools were more likely than high-achieving schools to perceive this role as important.

When comparing actual hours reported on the duties (see Table), significant differences were found in several areas. First, the area of program management, evaluation, and research received more time in high-achieving schools (p < .01). Second, the area of adhering to professional standards (e.g., aligning program to national standards) also received more rime in high-achieving schools (p <. .05). Third, coordination activities received more time in high-achieving schools (p < .10). Although advocacy was rated as more important by school counselors in low-achieving schools, they did not report that they spent significantly more time on these activities.

The last research question was: Is there a difference in the counselor/student ratio when comparing high- to low-achieving schools? High-achieving schools actually had a higher ratio (i.e., more students per counselor) than low-performing schools. However, many of the smaller schools in Kentucky have the highest rates of poverty and tend to score lower on achievement tests.

It is important to note that school counselors in this sample rated the 'other duties' category as the highest area except for 'counseling' with regards to the number of hours spent weekly. This trend was evident in both high- and low-achieving schools. This finding certainly flows against the idea of standards-based counseling programs.

DISCUSSION

With the rise of emphasis in school accountability it becomes increasingly important to understand the counselor's role in relation to student achievement. Few studies have been published that actually provide evidence of how counselors at high-achieving schools allocate their time. There is a movement towards school counselors becoming more academically focused (Education Trust, 2002) while there is little evidence to support the best way to reach this goal. This study was conducted to explore if school counselors in high-achieving schools focused more on particular roles when compared to lower achieving schools. The findings of this study warrant future inquiry into this topic. A total of 11 roles were identified, and counselors in high-achieving schools spent significantly more time on three of them. These roles were: program management, evaluation, and research; adhering to professional standards (i.e., aligning programs); and coordination.

The area of program management, evaluation, and research showed the largest discrepancy between high- and low-achieving schools. Duties in this area include conducting needs assessments, program planning, studying the effectiveness of counseling programs, and making changes based on the findings. School counselors in high-achieving schools spend more time on these particular tasks. When school counselors spend more time planning and organizing the counseling programs, they become more structured and systemic. This finding is in alignment with Education Trust initiatives (2002) that clearly outline a greater need for using data to steer school counseling programs. However, school counselor advocacy and leadership roles, two other areas of focus for Education Trust, were not more evident in high-achieving schools in this limited sample.

Counselors in high-achieving schools spent more rime on tasks relating to professional standards. More time is spent aligning programs to national and state standards. This supports the use of standards-based programs in lieu of a reactive model of school counseling. This finding emphasizes the importance of ASCA and state sponsored school counseling standards. Not only must counseling programs be organized, but they also must be steered in the most beneficial direction.

Coordination activities of school counselors were more prevalent in high-achieving schools. This role tends to influence systems more than individuals. By impacting systemic change, counselors reach a larger population and make more enduring changes. For example, a counselor who implements a peer mediation program reaps more benefit than one who individually mediates student conflict.

School counselors provide many important services that are not reflected directly in student achievement. They communicate with parents, counsel distraught students, and provide classroom guidance along with many other tasks. Their overall value cannot be defined only in terms of school academic performance. The fact that school counselors in high-achieving schools, for this sample, did not spend much more time counseling does not mean that role is not important. The value of this role may not reflect well in test scores. While for some roles, program management for example, rte value of counseling resources might be measurable in school achievement.

LIMITATIONS

Several limitations were evident in this study. First, the sample was not a random sample. It was a sample of convenience from a geographic area limited to rte state of Kentucky with most participants coming from East Kentucky. Second, the questionnaire was descriptive and does not contain evidence of reliability. Third, the population was primarily European American females. Although this accurately reflects the majority of counselors in the region, it greatly restricts rte ability to generalize the results. The findings suggest that more research in this area is warranted and no conclusive arguments can be made for schools outside the sample.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Many counselor-training programs are undergoing change as a result of various educational initiatives. However, there is little direct evidence of what type of change is needed to reach desired outcomes. Before chasing the next rabbit that runs through the field, training programs need to transform cautiously and use evidence and data to direct changes.

Counselors tend to not feel comfortable as researchers and program evaluators. These functions are becoming increasingly more important, and professional school counselors need competency in these areas. Research training for graduate students in school counseling needs to be practical and school related. A generic research course will not give them the tools they need to conduct independent educational research in school settings. Students will probably need development in research skills beyond graduation. Counselor educators would be useful resources for providing this professional development and training.

School settings vary greatly in their attention to professional counseling standards. Many school leaders are unfamiliar with ASCA and state counseling standards. Professional school counselors must educate and advocate these standards to decision-makers. For example, some states publish school counseling standards but do not directly encourage implementation. It is the role of professional counseling groups, local and national, to clearly define the counseling role in schools and to communicate to schools best practices for counselors.

Finally, counselor training programs and school districts need to re-emphasize rte importance of planned and well-managed counseling programs. This can be accomplished by professional development efforts, greater communication with school leaders, and better training at rte graduate level.

Means, Standard Deviations, and 2-Tailed Probability values (High v.
Low Achieving Schools) for Hours Spent on Counseling Tasks

                            Average Weekly              2-tailed p
Role                            Hours          SD          value

Counselors (n = 62)
Program Management               2.87         3.51        .0036 *
  Top Third                      5.50         5.05
  Bottom Third                   1.85         1.27
Curriculum                       6.11         4.53        .2991
  Top Third                      5.95         4.49
  Bottom Third                   5.75         4.90
Counseling                       9.00         6.40        .9495
  Top Third                     10.45         3.50
  Bottom Third                   9.90         6.34
Consultation                     4.71         4.26        .1760
  Top Third                      5.15         3.50
  Bottom Third                   3.50         2.19
Coordination                     3.69         3.59        .0692 ***
  Top Third                      4.10         3.40
  Bottom Third                   2.25         1.41
Assessment                       2.92         2.34        .7482
  Top Third                      2.90         2.85
  Bottom Third                   2.85         2.23
Professional Standards           1.63         1.90        .0308 **
  Top Third                      2.35         2.68
  Bottom Third                   1.00         1.03
Leadership                       2.76         2.27        .7872
  Top Third                      2.70         1.90
  Bottom Third                   2.70         1.81
Professional Development         1.56          .88        .7855
  Top Third                      1.50          .61
  Bottom Third                   1.70         1.17
Advocacy                         1.63         2.11        .9788
  Top Third                      1.40         1.05
  Bottom Third                   1.40         1.47
Other Duties                     7.87         6.05    4540
  Top Third                      5.90         3.95
  Bottom Third                   6.85         3.66

Note. * Denotes the test was significant at a .01 level. ** Denotes
significant at .05 level. *** Denotes significant at .10 level.

References

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

American School Counselor Association. (1990). Role statement: The school counselor. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Babbie, E.R. (1998). The practice of social research (8th ed.).Belmont: Wadsworth.

Baker, S.B. (1996). School counseling for the twenty-first century (2nd. ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N J: Merrill

Bemak, F. (2000).Transforming the role of the counselor to provide leadership in educational reform through collaboration. Professional School Counseling, 3, 323-332.

Edmondson, J.H., & White, L (1998). A tutorial and counseling program: Helping students at risk of dropping out of school Professional School Counseling, 98, 43-48.

Education Professional Standards Board. (1996). Guidance counselor standards. Frankfort, KY: Kentucky Department of Education.

Education Trust. (2002). Transforming school counseling. Retrieved December 15, 2002 from http://www.edtrust.org/main/main/school_counseling.asp

Elmore, R.F., & Fuhrman, S.H. (2001). Research finds the false assumption of accountability. Education Digest, 67, 9-15.

Fitch, T.J., Newby, E., Ballestero, V., & Marshall, J.L. (2001). Future administrators perceptions of the school counseling role. Counselor Education and Supervision, 42, 89-99.

Good, T.L., & Brophy, J.E. (1994). Looking into classrooms (6th ed.). New York: Harper Colllins.

Linney, J.A., & Seidman, E. (1989).The future of schooling. American Psychologist, 44, 336-340.

McElroy, C. (2000). School counselors' use of solution-focused questioning to improve teacher work life. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 277-281.

McWhirter, J.J., McWhirter, B.T., McWhirter, A.M., & McWhirter, E. H. (1998). At-risk youth: A comprehensive response (2nd ed.). Pacific Grave, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Myrick, R.D. (1993). Developmental guidance and counseling: A practical approach. Minneapolis, MN: Educational Media.

Pelsma, D.M. (2000). School counselors' use of solution-focused questioning to improve teacher work life. Professional School Counseling, 4, 1-6.

Samuelsen, S. (2001). Student testing: The stakes are rising. State Legislatures, 27, 30-34.

State Legislatures. (2002). California gives bonuses to educators for results. State Legislatures, 28, 8.

Tennyson, W.W., Miller, G.D., Skovholt, T.M., & Williams, R.C. (1989). Secondary school counselors: What do they do? What is important? The School Counselor, 36, 253-259.

Wohlsetter, P., & Smyer, R. (1994). Education by charter. In S.A. Mohrman & P. Wohlsetter (Eds.),School-based management: Organizing for high performance (pp. 88-107). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Trey J. Fitch, Ed.D., is

an assistant professor of

Counseling, Columbus

State University,

Columbus, GA. E-mail:

[e-mail].

Jennifer L. Marshall,

Ed. D., is an assistant

professor, University of

Cincinnati-Raymond

Walters College, OH.