The Counseling Psychologist

http://tcp.sagepub.com

Counseling Psychology and School Counseling Partnership: Overlooked? Underutilized? but Needed!
Norman C. Gysbers
The Counseling Psychologist 2004; 32; 245
DOI: 10.1177/0011000003261355

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/2/245

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association

Additional services and information for The Counseling Psychologist can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://tcp.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/32/2/245

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

THE COUNSELING
Counseling Psychology and
10.1177/0011000003261355
Gysbers / COUNSELING
PSYCHOLOGIST
PSYCHOLOGY/ March
AND 2004
SCHOOL COUNSELING

School Counseling Partnership:

Overlooked? Underutilized? But Needed!
Norman C. Gysbers
University of Missouri-Columbia

This article focuses on why possible partnerships between counseling psychology and
school counseling may be overlooked or underutilized. One reason may be a lack of
awareness. Then, attention is given to some challenges faced by school counselors as
they carry out their work in the schools. Finally, suggestions are offered that can lead to
forging strong partnerships that could assist school counselors to respond to the chal-
lenges they face and be more effective in their work.

Congratulations to Romano and Kachgal (2004 [this issue]) for speaking

out in their article about the need to forge a strong partnership between coun-
seling psychology and school counseling. As one who has spent his profes-
sional life working to improve the practice of school counseling, I appreciate
this attention and support. It comes at a time when school counselors are fac-
ing many substantial challenges in their work and can use all of the support
and help they can get.
In the title of their article, Romano and Kachgal (2004) suggested that a
partnership does exist but that it is underutilized. I question this assumption.
While individual counseling psychologists and school counselors may have
formed partnerships for specific purposes over the years, I suspect that most
professionals from both sides have not. In fact, I believe that most profession-
als on either side are unaware of each other or, if they are aware of each other,
the benefits of possible partnerships have been overlooked due to a lack of
understanding about each other’s work roles, functions, and settings.
In my response to Romano and Kachgal (2004), I will address what I feel
are some of the reasons for the lack of awareness of each other as profession-
als and why possible partnerships may be overlooked. Then I will focus on
some of the challenging issues that school counselors are facing today.
Finally, I will comment on a number of suggestions offered by Romano and
Kachgal that I feel can lead to the development of strong partnerships at the
local, state, and national levels.

THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST, Vol. 32 No. 2, March 2004 245-252

DOI: 10.1177/0011000003261355
© 2004 by the Society of Counseling Psychology.
245

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

246 THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST / March 2004

A LACK OF AWARENESS

Over the past several years, The Counseling Psychologist has printed arti-
cles that have called for stronger relationships with school counselors. Dur-
ing this same time period, I have not seen any articles in Professional School
Counseling, the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) journal,
calling for similar relationships with counseling psychologists. Why are
counseling psychologists aware of school counselors but the reverse does not
seem to be true? I am not sure, but I think part of the answer can be found in
the history of the evolution of both professional groups.
As Romano and Kachgal (2004) noted, the early leadership of both
groups was intertwined. Many of the early leaders belonged to Division 17 of
the American Psychological Association (APA) and the American Personnel
and Guidance Association (APGA) with its Division, the ASCA. In fact, the
first headquarters for the APGA (now the American Counseling Association
[ACA]) was in space rented from APA.
Soon, however, both groups began to drift apart. As credentialing became
an increasingly important issue, counseling psychology aligned itself with
psychology, doctoral-level training programs, and doctoral-level licensure.
The accreditation process used for counseling psychology programs became
aligned with psychology as well. Professionals associated with ACA, how-
ever, developed their own emphasis in licensure focusing on the master’s and
doctoral levels. They also developed their own accreditation process. In addi-
tion, if the membership of both groups were examined over the past 20 years,
one would observe a rapidly decreasing overlap.
Within ACA, changes also have been occurring. In the past 10 years,
ASCA has moved to become a semiautonomous organization. While still a
division of ACA, ASCA has its own executive director and its own headquar-
ters. Essentially, it operates independently from ACA.
Then there is the issue of the title of programs at colleges and universities
that train school counselors. Most school counselors are trained in counselor
education programs, not counseling psychology programs. Counselor edu-
cation programs are aligned with ACA and its division the Association for
Counselor Education and Supervision (ACES). Counselor education pro-
grams are accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and
Related Educational Programs (CACREP). It is estimated that there are 350
counselor education programs, of which 180 are CACREP accredited
(CACREP Office, personal communication, October 7, 2003). In turn, there
are 73 APA-accredited counseling psychology programs, with several more
anticipating accreditation (P. Heppner, personal communication, October 7,
2003).

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

 Gysbers / COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY AND SCHOOL COUNSELING 247

Within the culture of school counseling, another issue exists that has
implications for the formation of any partnership between counseling psy-
chology and school counseling. Early in the history of school counseling,
teachers were asked to assume the duties of positions that were titled voca-
tional counselors, often with little or no released time from the classroom
(Ginn, 1924). Gradually, more and more individuals were trained as school
counselors and began to assume school counseling duties full-time. Over the
years, the vast majority of school counselors came from the ranks of teachers.
That changed as states began to drop teaching certification and experience as
requirements to gain certification. At the same time, there was a movement
within the profession to form an identity separate from that of a teacher.
Today, the identity debate continues. The first question is, Do “school
counselors consider themselves to be mental health professionals who work
in a school or educators whose ‘specialty’ is counseling or both” (Wong,
2002, p. 2)? The second question is, How do others view school counselors?
For example, Romano and Kachgal (2004) referred to school counselors as
school-based mental health professionals; they did not refer to them as edu-
cators who have a counseling specialty.
The issue of the identity of school counselors goes beyond semantics. It
goes to the very core of the identity of school counselors and the orientation
they bring to their work in schools. Counseling psychologists need to be
aware of the identity issue because it can affect the nature and structure of any
partnership. It is important to remember as well because school counselors
themselves are divided on the identity issue.
What do all of these issues have to do with forging a partnership between
counseling psychology and school counseling? A lot! While some relation-
ships may have existed in years past, due to the overlap in membership in
APA and ACA that overlap is almost gone. Two different cultures have devel-
oped. Counseling psychology’s culture has evolved to become more focused
on psychology and training at the doctoral level, with practitioners working
in higher education, clinics, hospitals, and agencies, whereas school counsel-
ing’s culture exists in counselor education and training at the master’s level,
with practitioners working in K-12 school settings. As a result, even though
counseling psychologists and school counselors share some common lan-
guage and knowledge, there is a disconnect between the two groups that can
lead to a lack of awareness about each other’s work roles, tasks, and settings.
While all of these issues do not preclude partnerships from forming, difficul-
ties can arise when two groups who lack awareness of each other attempt to
form working relationships.

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

248 THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST / March 2004

CHALLENGES FACED BY
SCHOOL COUNSELORS

Today, more than ever, school counselors are facing substantial chal-
lenges as they practice in the schools. They work in complex political organi-
zations called local school districts that are caught up in issues of school
reform and often operate with severe fiscal restraints. They have large stu-
dent-counselor ratios and deal with increasingly difficult student problems
and parental issues. Also, they often are required to spend a great deal of time
on nonguidance and counseling administrative-management duties some-
times reaching up to 40% of their time (North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction, 2000; Rylander, 2002; Vandegrift, 1999).
In addition to these challenges, school counselors are facing increasing
pressure to be accountable for their work. It is no longer enough to provide
activities and services to students; now school counselors are challenged to
demonstrate the impact such activities and services have on students. As a
result of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, attention is focused on aca-
demic achievement. School counselors are being asked to demonstrate how
the work they do with students contributes to student academic achievement.
Given such challenges and many more in addition, many school districts
and the school counselors involved have adopted/adapted the comprehensive
guidance and counseling program approach to better organize and imple-
ment the activities and services they provide (American School Counselor
Association, 2003; Gysbers & Henderson, 2000). The organization frame-
work provided by the comprehensive program approach gives school coun-
selors a way to structure and evaluate their work with students and parents. It
provides them with a way to be accountable.
The concept of guidance and counseling as a program, as we know it
today, began to emerge in the 1970s (Gysbers & Moore, 1974, 1981),
although the idea of a program had existed for many years (Myers, 1924).
The call came to reorient guidance from what had become an ancillary set of
services delivered by a person in a position (school counselor) to a compre-
hensive, developmental program. The call for reorientation came from
diverse sources, including a renewed interest in vocational-career guidance
(and its theoretical base, career development), a renewed interest in develop-
mental guidance, concern about the efficacy of the prevailing approach to
guidance in the schools, and the concern about accountability and evaluation.
The comprehensive guidance and counseling program consists of three
elements: content, organizational framework, and resources (Gysbers &
Henderson, 2000). The content element identifies competencies considered

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

 Gysbers / COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY AND SCHOOL COUNSELING 249

important for students to master as a result of their participation in a compre-

hensive guidance and counseling program. Competencies are usually orga-
nized by grade level (kindergarten through Grade 12) or grade-level group-
ings (elementary, middle, and high school). They are often grouped by
domains such as career, academic, and personal/social.
The first section of the organizational framework contains three structural
components (definition, rationale, assumptions). The program definition
includes the mission statement of the program and its centrality within a
school district’s total educational program. The rationale discusses the
importance of the program as an equal partner in the educational system.
The second section of the organizational framework consists of the four
program components, including guidance curriculum, individual planning,
responsive services, and system support. These four program components
are the delivery system for all of the guidance and counseling activities pro-
vided to students and their parents. The guidance curriculum component
contains structured activities for kindergarten through Grade 12 and provides
all students with opportunities to master guidance competencies drawn from
the content elements of the program. Individual planning focuses on assist-
ing students, in close collaboration with parents, to develop, analyze, evalu-
ate, and carry out their educational, occupational, and personal goals and
plans. Individual counseling, small group counseling, consultation, and
referral are included as ongoing services of the responsive services compo-
nent of the comprehensive guidance and counseling program. Finally, the
administration and management of a comprehensive guidance and counsel-
ing program requires an ongoing support system. That is why system support
is a major program component.
The third element of the comprehensive guidance and counseling pro-
gram is resources. Three kinds are required: personnel resources, financial
resources, and political resources. Personnel resources include school coun-
selors, teachers, administrators, parents, students, community members, and
business and labor personnel. In addition, for a guidance and counseling pro-
gram to function effectively, adequate financial support is crucial. This also
means that appropriate facilities are provided by the district to house the per-
sonnel of the program. Finally, the mobilization of political resources is key
to a successful guidance and counseling program. Full endorsement of the
guidance and counseling program by school district policy makers as an offi-
cial “program” or a “framework” of the district is one example of mobilizing
political resources. Another example is a clear and concise educational pol-
icy statement that highlights the integral and central nature of the com-
prehensive guidance and counseling program in the school district.

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

250 THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST / March 2004

FORGING A STRONG PARTNERSHIP

According to the dictionary, the word forge is defined as follows: “to form
or make by concentrated effort” (Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, 2001, p.
751). I like this definition because it emphasizes the point that a partnership
between counseling psychology and school counseling will require concen-
trated effort. And most important, given the two cultures that have evolved, I
believe that counseling psychology must take the first step, the second step,
and perhaps even the third step toward the beginnings of a strong partnership.
Romano and Kachgal (2004) have provided us with some ways to begin to
work together by focusing on curriculum (training), research, service, and
professional organizations. In the training both receive, Romano and Kachgal
(2004) suggested that connections can be made in “theoretical orientation,
career development, multiculturalism, prevention, supervision, group work,
and psychopathology” (p. 186). While their suggestions for connecting links
are excellent overall, some may have limitations. For example, while the cur-
riculum (training) offers some possibilities, it may be limited since the over-
lap in training programs appears to be small. Nevertheless, where counseling
psychology and school counseling overlap, these ideas provide useful begin-
ning points to forge strong partnerships.
Based on my work with school counselors over the past 40 years, but par-
ticularly the past 10, the area of research that Romano and Kachgal (2004)
suggested I believe can be the most important and fruitful. As was mentioned
previously, the issue of accountability is a most pressing issue for school
counselors, and it is in this area that I believe counseling psychologists can be
of the most help. Here is where a strong partnership should be forged because
it is an area of high need.
What kind of help is needed? All kinds, but particularly help at the local
level in designing and carrying out action research studies that can examine
the possible impact of guidance and counseling activities and services on stu-
dents. To provide such help, counseling psychologists will need to get into
the trenches with school counselors. They will need to become real-time col-
laborators with school counselors. In addition, many states are using the
comprehensive guidance and counseling program approach in their schools.
State guidance leaders need help in designing and carrying out state-wide
studies that examine the impact of comprehensive guidance and counseling
programs on students, schools, and communities.
On June 28 and 29, 2003, a school counseling research summit was held in
St. Louis, Missouri, just prior to the ASCA national conference. At that meet-
ing it was agreed to ask ASCA to establish an Office of Research and Devel-
opment. ASCA responded positively to this request and is in the process of
establishing such an office. Currently, a committee has been formed to lay the

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

 Gysbers / COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY AND SCHOOL COUNSELING 251

necessary groundwork to get the office up and running. When the office is up
and running, Division 17 (Society of Counseling Psychology) could offer its
assistance in such areas as research design, data analysis, and report writing.
Romano and Kachgal (2004) anticipated such assistance when they sug-
gested that Division 17 should consider forming a strong organizational part-
nership with ASCA and ACES. Care must be taken, however, if Division 17
decides to approach ASCA because currently, counselor educators (ACES)
and school counselors are forging their own partnership centering on
research and evaluation. Perhaps Division 17 could approach ASCA and
ACES with suggestions about how counseling psychologists could contrib-
ute their expertise to research and evaluation of guidance and counseling in
the schools.
As a part of forging a strong partnership, Romano and Kachgal (2004)
pointed out that there are a number of challenges. I believe they are correct in
suggesting that the structure of a university creates a barrier to professional
collaboration. I further believe that it is a greater barrier than some might
imagine because by being separated, different cultures have emerged.
Remember that most school counselors are trained in counselor education
programs, many of which are located in universities or colleges that do not
have counseling psychology programs. Even in universities where both
training programs exist, separately or together, there is often a real or imag-
ined separation between master’s degree students (school counseling stu-
dents) and doctoral degree students (counseling psychology students). Per-
haps some of the strategies that Romano and Kachgal suggested might work,
but any effort will require perseverance on the part of both groups,
particularly counseling psychologists.
One of the strategies that Romano and Kachgal (2004) endorsed was a
recommendation by Boggs and Douce (2000) to offer accredited predoctoral
internships in public schools. I too endorse this recommendation. This would
help counseling psychology students learn about the work of school counsel-
ors and the challenges they face as they work with students and parents.
Pressing this recommendation further, perhaps some existing doctoral
internships could develop a school rotation for counseling psychology
interns, giving them even more experience in schools.

A FINAL NOTE

In the final paragraph of their article, Romano and Kachgal (2004) wrote
about the goal of a strong partnership: to bring “the combined expertise of
each specialty to bear on major problems confronting U.S. education”
(p. 210). I concur wholeheartedly with this goal. Efforts to realize this goal

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009

252 THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST / March 2004

must take place on the local, state, and national levels. Faculty members must
begin to explore ways to work together where counseling psychology train-
ing programs and school counselor training programs exist in the same insti-
tutions. The leaders of state professional organizations need to explore ways
to hold joint meetings or sponsor training sessions together. At the national
level, I urge the leadership of Division 17 to contact and begin preliminary
discussions with the national leadership of ASCA.
Intensive work must take place at all levels if we are to see an overlooked
and underutilized partnership turn into a fully developed and fully used part-
nership. I am urging the leadership of Division 17 to take the first step. Please
contact the leadership of ASCA and perhaps ACES to begin discussions
about forming a strong partnership as soon as possible.

REFERENCES

American School Counselor Association. (2003). The ASCA national model: A framework for
school counseling programs. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Boggs, K. R., & Douce, L. A. (2000). Current status and anticipated changes in psychology
internships: Effects in counseling psychology training. The Counseling Psychologist, 28,
672-686.
Ginn, S. J. (1924). Vocational guidance in Boston public schools. Vocational Guidance Maga-
zine, 3, 3-7.
Gysbers, N. C., & Henderson, P. (2000). Developing and managing your school guidance pro-
gram. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
Gysbers, N. C., & Moore, E. J. (Eds.). (1974). Career guidance, counseling and placement: Ele-
ments of an illustrative program guide. Columbia: University of Missouri.
Gysbers, N. C., & Moore, E. J. (1981). Improving guidance programs. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Myers, G. E. (1924). A critical review of present development in vocational guidance with spe-
cial reference to future prospects. Vocational Guidance Magazine, 2, 139-142.
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2000). How North Carolina school counsel-
ors spend their time. Raleigh, NC: Author.
Romano, J. L., & Kachgal, M. M. (2004). Counseling psychology and school counseling: An
underutilized partnership. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 184-215.
Rylander, C. K. (2002). Guiding our children toward success: How Texas school counselors
spend their time. Austin: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.
Vandegrift, J. A. (1999). Are Arizona public schools making the best use of school counselors?
Results of a three-year study of counselors’ time use. Phoenix, AZ: Morrison Institute for
Public Policy.
Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary (2nd ed.). (2001). New York: Random House.
Wong, R. (2002). A new question. School Counselor, 39, 2.

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by Fenda - on April 23, 2009