School counselor assignment in secondary schools

Professional School Counseling, Oct, 2009 by Patrick Akos, Heidi Schuldt, Meg Walendin

Research has not yet begun to investigate the practice or impact of school counselor assignment. A preliminary study sought to explore the nature and consequences of school counselor assignment practices in secondary schools. Secondary school counselors from one large Southeastern school district were asked to complete a questionnaire created for the purpose of this study. The results suggest a significant difference between school counselor assignment at the middle and high school levels. Middle schools predominantly utilized grade-level assignment while high schools used alphabetical assignment. Distinct advantages and challenges were indicated by school counselors from each assignment type. Implications for professional school counselors and future research directions are provided.

**********

The American School Counselor Association designed its ASCA National Model[R] to reflect the necessary components of a comprehensive school counseling program (ASCA, 2005). According to ASCA, a comprehensive school counseling program is composed of four separate yet interdependent components: the foundation, the delivery system, the management system, and the accountability component. Much of the conceptual and research literature has centered on the foundation (e.g., Foster, Young, & Hermann, 2005), delivery system (e.g., Akos, Cockman, & Strickland, 2007), and accountability (e.g., Poynton & Carey, 2006) aspects of the model. Even with inherent overlap between these components, it is clear that little research exists on the management system or the organizational aspects of a comprehensive school counseling program.

The management system focuses on the use of calendars, on the use of data in planning, and on the working relationships among school administrators, community members, and advisory boards. Another salient part of the management system is the organization and assignment of school counselors to students. The ASCA National Model's (2005) recommendations indicate that the management agreement made between the school counselors and administrators should reflect a decision regarding both the organization and assignment of school counselors. With this, the administration and school counselors should reach an agreement on not only how students will be assigned to specific counselors but also whether counselors will specialize in different areas and whether there will be one counselor designated daily to handle crises (e.g., a "counselor of the day" program; ASCA, p. 46). ASCA suggests that schools may assign students to school counselors based on grade level, alphabetical breakdown, standards domain, academy or pathway, or a combination of these strategies.

While not specified by the ASCA National Model, Gysbers and Henderson (2006) suggested that particular assignments may be made for specific reasons. For example, they noted that a counselor assignment by surname (alphabetical breakdown) "enhances the quality of a counselor's responsive services" (Gysbers & Henderson, p. 211) because of the extended relationships with students. This arrangement also requires collaboration and a team approach to guidance delivery or programming. In contrast, grade-level assignments are most consistent with a developmental philosophy and supportive of guidance and individual planning responsibilities because counselors are able to focus exclusively on the needs of a particular grade level. Gysbers and Henderson also advocated for consistency in counselor-student relationships with a "looping" type of arrangement in which the school counselor moves with students across grade levels (rather than a static arrangement in which a school counselor stays at one grade level on a recurrent basis).

Presumably, each school and school counseling staff should determine which type of assignment is most effective. With caseloads averaging over 475 and as high as 900 (ASCA, 2008), efficiency must be another consideration. Finally, to embody the mission of advocacy and serving all students, schools and school counselors must consider equity in terms of school counselor assignment. Even so, further definitions, explanations, or purposeful uses of various school counselor assignments have not been explored in the school counseling literature. No empirical studies have examined possible advantages or disadvantages that may exist for each. Given the absence of research on school counselor assignment, this preliminary study was designed to explore and describe school counselor assignment at the secondary level in one large Southeastern school district. Specifically, the three research questions were as follows:

1. How are school counselors assigned in secondary schools and who makes this decision?

2. What are school counselors' perceptions of the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of each type of assignment?

3. What are school counselors' perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of each type of assignment?

METHOD

Participants

All school counselors who participated in this study were employees in one large Southeastern school district that contains 28 middle schools and 22 high schools. The district employs 81 middle school and 115 high school counselors. Of the 196 potential participants, 146 school counselors participated, yielding a return rate of 74%. Eighty-one high school and 65 middle school counselors completed the survey, representing 70% of the high school and 80% of the middle school counselors in the district.