Week 8

            As I read the assigned texts for this week, I recalled a conversation with someone who was a school psychologist.  She was somewhat dismayed that the majority of her time in the schools was spent administering tests.  Yet this was how the school district utilized her as she traveled to several schools within the district.  This did not mesh well with what she had hoped to do as a school psychologist.  However, this would seem to be consistent with the findings in the Giordano (1997) article.  In the article they reported that most testing in a school became the responsibility of the school psychologist, with the school counselor doing very little testing.  District protocol and precedent not withstanding, I am wondering whether testing might also be an important task for the school counselor.  As we have learned, testing seems to benefit from occurring within the context of a continuing counseling relationship.  Oftentimes, it is the counselor who has the opportunity for that continuing relationship.  Yet many instruments may require training beyond the scope of most school counselors.  I would imagine that fiscal issues might stand in the way of training and purchasing for many assessments.  I was intrigued, yet not surprised that counselors tended to utilize a very limited number of assessments, and many of them were the old standards.   In the end practicality often supersedes other concerns or desires.  It would seem that there was no disagreement about the benefit of assessment, but the difficulty comes in putting things into practice. 

Reference

Giordano, Fransesca G., Schwiebert, Valerie L. (1997) School counselors' perceptions of the usefulness of standardized tests, frequency of their use, School Counselor. Vol. 44, Issue 3.

Week 8 Blog Chp. 9,10 & Giordano article

Week 8 Blog  Chapter 9, 10, and Giordano et. al article

I found this week’s reading very informative and practical. I can see myself going back to these chapters and the article for future reference. Once again the readings reiterated the importance of the role of the school counselor. I see them as a “middle man/woman” between the school psychologist and the parents and student. “The special challenge to school counselors is to gather the assessment information from all sources and to develop a treatment plan that is understandable and relevant to all members of the team, including parents and children.” (Giordano & Schwiebert, 1997). I think this may sound easier than it actually is in practice.

The description of achievement tests vs. assessment tests was very helpful to me. I really liked the description of all the major testing instruments. Most of them I had never heard of, but now can understand how helpful they may be in working with students, families and helping professionals. Giordano states that counselors “rated the WISC-R as the most useful in counseling” (1997). After Ami’s most informative presentation, I know have a better grasp on that particular instrument. It makes me excited to see all of the other presentations of testing instruments that my classmates will be showing to us in the upcoming weeks.

When I was reading about the Aptitude Tests in the Drummond textbook, I had a flashback to the summer before I entered 6^th grade. We were living in Cincinnati, Ohio and there was a school called SCPA (School for the Creative and Performing Arts). It was similar to the TV show FAME and many well- known actors (Sarah Jessica Parker to name one) went there. I auditioned and was accepted into their creative writing and art program. The audition took a half day or so and I remember going from room to room auditioning for all the program areas. For dance, I had to do some flexibility and dance routines (did not do well!), for music I listened to different notes and had to describe them (Drummond talks about Musical Ability tests), and I had to do some test that reminded me of the Bennett Hand-Tool Dexterity Test that Drummond describes on page 210. I haven’t thought about that day for many years but now I am curious about the battery of tests I went through that afternoon. I am looking forward to learning about more testing instruments and how they can help provide another piece of the puzzle!

Drummond, R. J. & Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and

            helping professionals. (7^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Giordano, F.G. & Schwiebert, V. L. (1997). School counselors’ perceptions of the   

            usefulness of standardized tests, frequency of their use, and assessment

            training needs. School Counselor (44)3.

Week 7

Reading Chapter 16 helped alleviate some of my concerns about presenting my assessment results to my client and his parents. I liked how the authors lay out a plan of action for the feedback session, stipulating that the counselor should begin the session by describing the purpose of the assessment, explaining limits and possible test bias. It is important to remind clients that these tests are just one source of information and cannot fully assess an individual's entire range of skills and abilities. When reporting actual scores, I found it interesting that percentile ranks are the most understandable score as reported by clients and family members, so I will make sure to emphasize these results in particular during my feedback session. I liked how the authors' emphasize readiness in the chapter, and I am fortunate that my appraisal client is also my client for my Theory course, so I have already developed rapport with him and have had several counseling sessions with him prior to actually administering the exam. If he does any any issues identified by either exam, I can also plan to explore these issues further during future counseling sessions. I reviewed the frequently asked questions on page 16 and will plan to have some responses in mind in advance of presenting my data. I appreciated the discussion of the importance of the language used during feedback sessions, especially the importance of referring to intelligence tests as aptitude tests or learned ability tests. The authors emphasize that it is important not to undervalue the importance of assessment results, even if the data is is not what the test taker expects or desires. Similar to Drummond and Jones, Tinsley and Bradley also remind us that testing is one piece of the counseling process. Although a counselor certainly wants to present accurate information, adopting an overly formal tone with a client when presenting assessment results is not helpful for the client or the counselor. I liked the questions the authors suggested for leading the client into the interview, such as "Do you remember this test?" and "What did you think about it," as I think this will set a casual yet still professional tone for the remainder of the session. I also liked the suggested responses to feedback, such as "What do you think about that?" and "How does that compare with what you expected?," as I think it will be important to check in often with the client to gauge understanding and reactions to various pieces of data. Drummond, R. J. and Jones, K. (2010). Assessment Procedures for Counselors and Helping Professionals. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. Tinsley, H., and Bradley, R. (1986). Testing the Test: Test Interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Test interpretation

Tinsely and Bradley Article

               In reading this article it was very relatable to both my experiences and my expectations as a school counselor. I like that they specifically outlined methods of delivery and interpretation. As I am working on learning how best to administer assessments and relay the interpret results I am finding this article to be more and more like a foundation I look to for support. I felt very personally linked to the minimizing defensive reactions section of this article. I can remember both times I have been assessed and I had two different experiences with the counselor delivery. The first time I was 8, and even though I still cried the whole way home I remember thinking that Dr. Blackbird was really nice to me even though I felt really stupid after taking the intelligence battery. The second exposure I had was less sensitive and I was feeling cognitively assaulted as I left that re-evaluation session. I think that this experience will only aid me in the future in approaching result explaining with hopefully ultimate sensitivity towards my clients.

               I also really loved that this article seemed to be more solution focused in allowing the counselor to step away from the title of being the “bearer of bad news” and instead aiding the client in understanding and supervision their own interpretation of what the results will mean to them as students and people. Allowing clients to be in the here and now moments of interpreting the results will offer them the fantastic opportunity to not only receive information about themselves but to delve- if they want to- into learning more about themselves. This is a fantastic opportunity to be a responsible reliable guide to attempt to better ensure that students are gaining the most that they can from the assessment and interpretation sessions. I strongly feel that if a client requests to be able to see their test profile to be able to have a better understanding of where their natural deficit areas may be they should be allowed to do so. Not without supervision of course- but I feel my experience with being re-evaluated would have been a better experience if I would have had time to process what happened and where I tend to naturally struggle. Instead the test concluded and I was left with a lot of confusion, frustration and bitterness which has extended till today. Hopefully the tart taste that has been left in my mouth will ensure that I as a future counselor will do my absolute best to make sure others do not have my experience. 

Drummond, R.J. & Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping professionals ( 7^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Tinsley, H.E.A. & Bradley, R.W. (1986). Testing the test: Test interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Blog 7: Communicating Test Results

Tinsley and Bradley (1986) state that two principles make up the foundation upon which good test interpretation is built: 1) test interpretation as a part of the ongoing counseling process, and 2) tests are instruments which provide information about a client in an efficient manner.  These principles make a lot more sense to me as I sit here and reflect on my very recent experience with administering and interpreting assessments.  I felt a bit unsettled as I left the high school where I delivered my interpretation of my client’s assessment results today.  I believe that I felt this way because I recommended that my client seek a Solution-Focused counselor to help her work through a couple of personal issues that surfaced in the Baron EQ assessment.  As someone who practices Solution-Focused counseling, it felt strange to just deliver this recommendation and then walk out the door, especially since this client expressed interest in finding a counselor.  I wished that I would have just made her my client for Theory and Practice II.  Since we had already identified areas that she struggles with and wants to change, we would have already had a great foundation to begin our first session.  I could also see how using these assessments or others like them might have been helpful in my counseling sessions with my first client in Theory and Practice II, who I had to stop seeing because she could not come up with anything that she wanted to change about herself.  I wonder if things might have worked out differently if I had been able to present her with data about how she functions.  Would she have been surprised?  If so, would she have been propelled to make changes that she might not have been willing to make before seeing the assessment report(s)?  I guess I will never know.

Overall, I found the Tinsley & Bradley article (as well as the Drummond & Jones text) to be very easy to understand and full of practical advice surrounding the issue of test interpretation.  I felt much more competent and prepared going into my interpretation session after reading it, and I also felt that I was able to integrate the concepts that Tinsley & Bradley advocate.  For instance, I began the session with the more concrete information (KBIT2 scores) and then moved toward more abstract information (BarOn EQ scores).  Before delivering the scores and my interpretation of them, I spent a little bit of time building rapport with my client and asking her what she remembered about the assessments that she took and what she thought about them.  Another thing that I incorporated into my interpretation session after reading both texts was to refer to the Verbal portion of the KBIT2 as a learned abilities test rather than an intelligence test.  Finally, the Drummond & Jones (2010) text was incredibly helpful to me as I created my assessment report in preparation for my interpretation meeting.  The reading for this week really helped me to experience first-hand the assistance that assessments can bring into counseling sessions.

References

Drummond, R.J. & Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping professionals ( 7^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Tinsley, H.E.A. & Bradley, R.W. (1986). Testing the test: Test interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Blog #7

             I started off this course nervous about the idea of administering an actual assessment test to a client.  While I am starting to get over that nervous feeling about administering a test, I now doubt whether I will be able to interpret the results in the most effective way to my client. 

            I believe that I am generally an extremely genuine and compassionate person.  When I first thought about how one would go about interpreting test results, I immediately assumed that it would be more of a robotic, rehearsed, repetitive process.  I then thought to myself, how will I be able to make this seem like a genuine interaction with my client, while also being able to interpret the results in the most effective way?  The number one thing that I worry about with my interaction with my clients, is trying not to sound fake.  The reason why this came up after my reading was because my interactions in the past with my school counselors did not seem very genuine.  It just seemed like they didn’t care about getting to know you as a person.  They would just draw conclusions and make assumptions based on some random simple thing that maybe happened to be in a file folder.  While I know that I will strive to be a better counselor than that, I can’t help that it is always in my bubble. 

            It was quite encouraging and helpful for me to read Chapter 16 and the Tinsley and Bradley article.  First off, Chapter 16 gave me a more of a clear idea on how to share test results with a client.  While I am still not 100 percent confident in the process, at least I was able to paint a clearer picture on how I would go about structuring the session.  Also, in the Tinsley and Bradley (1986) article, they mention something about not abandoning the counseling process when interpreting test results.  It also stated that “clients are people, not just a series of test scores.”  To me, with my experiences with school counselors, I was just a test score.  The advice in the article about not taking a “time-out” from the counseling process was a very important piece of feedback for me.  Not only did it re-assure what I was already thinking, but it encouraged me to have more confidence in myself as a counselor and to stop over thinking everything.

Drummond, R. J. and Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping professionals. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Tinsley, H. & Bradley, R. W. (1986). Test interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Blog 7: Communicating Test Results

The chapter on communicating assessment results helped me prepare for my meeting with the student that I assessed and his parents.  In the “feedback sessions” section of the chapter, it included examples of how you can word particular results.  My fear of communicating results is providing the information incorrectly due to my lack of background in statistics.   However, these examples provided me with a way to communicate results in a clear and understanding manner.  I also liked how Drummond and Jones (2010) provided a checklist of what needs to be done in an interpretation session.  It is an organized in a way that allows you to ensure that you are adequately prepared prior to the meeting with the client. 

As I was reading over the problem areas I found two points that I felt are very important when communicating results.  The first one is establishing rapport because when providing test results to a child, parent, and/or young adult it is not always easy.  With that being said, it is vital that you provide a comfortable environment and trust is established between you and the client.  You may be communicating positive results; however, there are times when the results are not what they want to hear so you want to communicate it as positive as you can.  Another important factor is when communicating these results you need to make sure that you are doing so in a manner that the client can understand the language you are using.  I remember that I was in a data meeting and my principal and literacy coach was reviewing testing scores with me.  It happened to be my first year and coming from the high school I was never exposed to data presented in the way they were showing me.  I tried really hard to understand what they were saying but I ended up beginning to tune them out.  I later returned to my coach and asked for support because I needed her to break down the results again and explain it in a way that I could understand in order to help my students improve in their education.   

The final points that I related to when reading the chapter was the motivation and attitude section and the frequently asked questions presented.  Drummond and Jones stated, “Test results are more significant to clients who are motivated to take a test, come in and discuss the results, and have a positive attitude toward the value of the data” (p. 348).   With that being said, it reminded me of my testing session with my client.  Prior to me testing him you could tell he was interested in being tested to learn about his intelligence levels.  Om the day he was assessed, he came in immediately with a positive attitude.  Then throughout the testing session you could tell that he worked hard.  As I was observing him you could tell that he was not guessing on the answers.   He would take a moment to think, choose the best answer, and put his full effort into this session.  I was pleased with the overall experience of the, test and look forward to meeting with his parents to discuss the results.  Finally, with the most frequently asked questions, I feel as though it is important to be knowledgeable of what parents may ask so that you are prepared to provide an appropriate and accurate answer.  As future counselors, I know that we may not experience testing in this manner but it is important to be knowledgeable of what is expected if you ever have to sit through an interpretation session and/or communicate test results to parents. 

Drummond, R. J. and Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping professionals. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Important things to Consider with Test Interpretation

The scariest and most difficult part of assessments and administering tests is having to then interpret those scores and relay that information back to a client.  Once you have advocated for a student to take an assessment for any particular reason, the only part to fall back on are your results.  Results become one more piece to the puzzle and the holistic view of a student.  What those results are telling you can become crucial in decision making and goal setting.  It seems quite important that you are able to interpret those scores correctly and that you are then able to determine what they are telling you about your student, their success, and their future.  This week's readings were all about interpreting results and then determining how to explain those results to your student, parents, a school, or the public.  While Drummond and Jones (2010) provided some valuable information on communicating results in general, the article for this week by Tinsley and Bradley (1986) went into greater depth about what you need to consider when interpreting a test.

The first and most important concept that I gained from Tinsley and Bradley (1986) was that assessments, tests, and test interpretation need to become part of the counseling process and not just a separate activity done with our clients/students.  As school counselors we cannot behave a certain way all the time and then when we switch to administering tests or reporting results become robots.  It is crucial that we consider what these results may be telling us and take into account all of the other pieces as well as the student's thoughts and feelings about this test and their results.  An interpretation session should be a conversation between counselor and student/parents about what the results mean and how they may influence decisions that need to be made.  In this conversation, the student should be able to provide feedback, discuss goals, and talk about other reactions to what they are learning about themselves.  Something that seemed really beneficial to me was having the student summarize what has been said so far or even just explain their understanding of the test and the results being presented.  This provides a better look at what the student is really thinking and whether or not they are on the same page as you.  One aspect they may be a little difficult at first is either fully relying on a test or disregarding it.  Tinsley and Bradley (1986) make it clear that we should not fall either way but instead should consider limitations of the test, strengths of the test, similarities and differences with what the test is telling us and other sources/observations have told us previously.

However, I think what scares me the most is explaining results to a parent.  My previous experience with parents is that they care a lot about how their child performs or not at all.  Those who care often times believe their child can do no wrong or want to push them to an extreme that may or may not be appropriate for their child's capabilities.  Drummond and Jones (2010) began to explain the important points that should be made during a session with the parents.  The more parents know about a test, how it is scored, how it is interpreted, how it is stored, and what it will be used for the better they feel about the situation.  Parents like to be in the know when it comes to their children.  As a school counselor, I would hope that I could keep myself as educated as possible so that I would be able to help those parents I am working with to understand the assessment procedures.

Drummond, R. J. and Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping professionals. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Tinsley, H. & Bradley, R. W. (1986). Test interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Week 7

             When reading the Tinsley and Bradley (1986) article, I was particularly struck by two things.  First of all is the idea that assessments are best utilized in the context of a continuous counseling relationship.  I would agree that assessments can be most beneficial when chosen, interpreted, and utilized in that ongoing relationship.  In this way assessments become a tool to be used by clients rather than a means to label a client based on one source of information.  The point of assessments is not to simply to label or diagnose, but rather to assist the client in determining further courses of action. 

            I also resonated with the idea from the article that too often tests have focused on prediction.  Perhaps this is one of the reasons that clients can feel nervous about test results. Often those results may be seen to predict a likely future career, academic path, or other scenario.  When viewed from this perspective, tests can be damaging to those who are disappointed with the results, and who may currently exhibit behaviors or abilities that belie the test results.  The results may actually undermine academic success and prompt self-doubt on the part of the client.

            As I prepared to report the scores of the assessment I did with my client, I had the feeling that the results would be different than he anticipated.  I have not yet met with the client, but am aware that I in no way wish to undermine his confidence or his academic achievements by presenting results to him that may run counter to his self-understanding.  I even found myself asking what positive value these results could have for my client.  While I can see the value of testing as a way to gather information on the student, I am very aware of the powerful nature of such testing and the accompanying feedback.  In some sense, perhaps all tests are high-stakes testing because there is a lot at stake for the student in terms of his/her self-understanding.  I will be interested to see how the feedback session goes with my client, but I hope I can find a way to give him the honest feedback he deserves while at the same time finding a way for the tests to be something that will aid him and not undermine him.

Reference

Tinsley, H. & Bradley, R. W. (1986). Test interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

Test interpretation & Communicating Results

            I found this week’s reading to be very helpful and informative.  Sharing and interpreting data is something that I do during the IEP process, but I do not remember explicitly learning the “dos” and “don’ts” of interpretation sessions.  There are definite differences between sharing results of a multi-disciplinary evaluation and sharing a student’s academic and functional progress, but the information is still relevant, and will be helpful for me in future IEP meetings.

            Both the textbook and the Tinsley & Bradley article (1986) discussed the importance of looking at information holistically and determining how it all fits together.  Sometimes there are discrepancies in data, which need to be given careful thought in interpreting.  An example of this occurred with me lately when developing an IEP for one of my 7^th grade boys.  This particular boy has met his reading decoding (ability to read sight words) goal, and is now able to decode words on grade level.  However, his weekly scores for his reading fluency goal (reading fluency is the words correct per minute he reads) have been stagnant.  He is assessed on the 4^th grade level for fluency, so the fact that he is on grade level for decoding did not match up.  This particular student previously had speech and language instruction, but was dismissed from this service 3 years ago.  However, almost all teachers had expressed their concern with his speech fluency (how “smoothly” he talks – he tends to have difficulty getting particular words “out.”)  Looking deeper into things, his reading teacher agreed that his speech fluency has a negative impact on his scores, as his speed of reading is affected.  Because his speech has been impacting his academic progress, he is now going to be re-evaluated by the speech therapist to determine a need to re-instate speech and language services. 

            The Tinsley & Bradley (1986) article also emphasized the importance of discussing results while keeping the client’s goals in mind and in general relating the things the client would want to know.  I never thought of the fact that, when relaying test results, one should also interpret how the information may affect a person’s future.  I am wondering what articles or studies are out there that indicate typical correlations between various test scores and post-secondary achievement.   Along the lines of intelligence, Tinsley & Bradley (1986) recommended avoidance of using terms like “intelligence.”  They suggest instead using the terms “scholastic aptitude” or “ability to learn things from books.”  It seems to me that the term “intelligence” is more widely understood than “scholastic aptitude,” but I could be wrong.  I think that “ability to learn things from books” sounds rather simple and somewhat unintelligent, probably because of the usage of the word, “things.”  It also does not help that books are not the only method of learning “things.”  I liked the recommendation by Drummond & Jones (2010), who suggest using the term “learning ability” test instead of intelligence test.  I think I will use this terminology during my interpretation session, and perhaps explain that the scores help us understand how successfully one is able to learn (and apply or generalize??) information.  I still would like to know more about typical correlations of IQ scores and success in post-secondary schooling so that I can discuss long-term goals with my client during our meeting.

            I appreciated the thorough information and examples in the readings this week, and feel more prepared for my interpretation session.

Drummond, R. J. & Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping

professionals. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson.

Tinsley, H.E.A, & Bradley, R.W. (1986). Testing the test: Test interpretation. Journal of 

Counseling and Development, (64)462-466.

           

Week 7 Chp. 16/Tinsley & Bradley article

The readings this week were very timely for me as I gave the two IQ tests (KBIT 2 & BarOn EQ) to my client, scored them, and had a taped interpretation session with her and her mother. I must admit I was a little nervous but excited too. The actual administering of the tests went well. I had practiced on my own two children and read the manuals so I felt pretty comfortable with the administration. My client, a 10yr girl named Megan, scored in the Above Average range on the IQ test. This was not a real surprise to me as I have known her for years from church and I was impressed with her knowledge during the testing. The EQ test was another story! She took the test and that went well. I could tell she was really concentrating and taking her time. When I went to score the test, I came up with a 56 Total EQ which put her in the "Markedly Low- atypically impaired emotional and social capacity". I must admit I freaked out a bit. My interpretation session was the next day and this just wasn't making sense. I knew that Megan did seem self-conscious at times and was shy with adults but I didn't think that should reflect such a low score. I went back and rechecked her answers and my scoring. I had missed one answer and while it raised her score to a 58 we were still in the same category. I looked at the profile again and it hit me...I had forgotten to convert the 58 to the Standard Score. When I did that, Megan scored a 101 which is in the middle of the Average range. I definitely learned a lesson! I am so glad I figured this out before the session with Megan and her Mom.

While preparing for the interpretation session, I found the article by Tinsley and Bradley to be very helpful and I appreciated several suggestions. First they underscored what we have been saying in class all along. Tests are only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to understanding a person. "Tests should virtually never be interpreted in isolation but rather should be integrated with the other information available to present a unified picture." (Tinsley & Bradley, 1986). I also took note of their methods of involving clients input during the interpretation session. I myself started the session with asking Megan about the two tests and having her describe them a bit to her mother and me. I also used Tinsley & Bradley's advice about explaining to your client and parents about the "inexact nature of test scores" (1986). 

While our textbook was helpful in me planning my interpretation session there was one more point that Tinsley and Bradley made that made an impression on me. "Clients do not always need information above all else." (1986). Being a task oriented individual, this was important for me to note. I will need to monitor myself during sessions so I don't let the dissemination of information be important above all else. I do also feel that I am generally sensitive to people's needs and mood but I know in a hurried situation I might lose sight of that as I want to accomplish my goals for the interpretation session. I will try to keep this in the forefront of my mind for my future interpretation sessions.




Drummond, R. J. & Jones, K. (2010). Assessment procedures for counselors and helping
    professionals. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson.


Tinsley, H.E.A, & Bradley, R.W. (1986). Testing the test: Test interpretation. Journal of 
      Counseling and Development, (64)462-466.

Blog 6

Tinsley and Bradley (1986) opened up the article with stating that, “It has been argued that tests contribute little to the counseling process.  One possible explanation may be that counselor training has focused on technical aspects of testing and has not emphasized higher level application skills” (pg 462).  This statement makes me question how much counselors are involved in the testing procedures.  In talking to my school counselor I gathered that the role of administering and interpreting test was in the hands of the school psychologists.  Next, there were two principles that were presented that I felt were important.  The testing is not a discrete activity but yet ongoing in the counseling process.  In addition, another important factor that was presented is that it is vital to remember that the clients are people and not a set of test scores.  The second principle was to think of the tests as interviews that enable you to gather information about them.  Assessments can be used as valuable tools if done correctly.  One important factor to keep in mind that was discussed was that the points are not exactly accurate and clients need to be aware of that.  They need to be knowledgeable that there is an error of measurement that needs to be accounted for.    

The article then presents the four aspects of testing, which are counselor and client preparation, delivery, and the follow up.  In order for this to be successful and reliable you need to be knowledgeable of each component.  Even though I am aware that it is different it reminds me of the upcoming PSSA tests.  Yesterday, we needed to sit through an hour training, listen to an hour tutorial, and answer ten questions.  By the conclusion of this we needed to pass with an 80% to be certified to administer this test.  It is crucial that every member that will be involved in the testing is properly trained so that the students achieve the best and are provided with organized, comfortable, and quiet environments.  As counselors need to become familiar with the tests as well as the regulations and procedures before, during, and after testing.  Also, with encouragement, we are promoting confidence that they can be successful just as when interpreting results, you do so which allows encouragement.         

In conclusion, I found this article to focus on the importance of test interpretation because we need to be aware that if done incorrectly could affect the client in a significant way.  We want to be accurate in the information we are relying to them as well as providing them with reliable and valid information.

Tinsley, H. & Bradley, R.W. (1986). Test Interpretation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 462-466.

 

Counseling Strategies

Throughout my time in the School Counseling Program here, I have continued to learn more and more about the importance of looking at each person individually and holistically. Whether it be yourself, a fellow classmate, your counselor, or a student it is crucial to understand as much as you can about that person. Each individual reacts differently to counseling and the different benefits that can come from a counseling relationship. During the first week of my graduate program, I remember one of my professors talking about eclecticism and how as counselors we should never state that that is the type of theory we use with our clients/students. It took me a while to figure it out but I am starting to understand why just stating eclecticism is not appropriate. Many school counselors use this term because they have no clear direction or counseling personality that they fit into. They have never taken the opportunity to explore what works best for them or taken the time to truly understand each and every theory along with their benefits and issues. It wasn't eclecticism that we were being warned of but unsystematic eclecticism. Having no rhyme or reason to our practices and interventions being used with clients is unhelpful and unethical in a sense. "Interventions that are based on specific client needs and problems, rather than on the preferred strategy of the counselor, then to lead to better outcomes" (Nelson, p. 416, 2002). What we should be using as school counselors is technical eclecticism which refers to carefully determining what interventions would work best for each individual client. And the interventions that are being used are empirically sound as well as effective for that client's personality. Gaining this understanding allows for a much broader use of all we have learned during a program as well as providing a more effective counseling practice for our students.

When I started to read Nelson's (2002) article on counseling strategy selection, I was wondering how assessment was going to fit into this topic. Part of my struggle is the difficulty I still have with broadening my definition of assessment in counseling. I think part of me still sees assessment as testing that is used to determine a score for students. I am starting to understand more and more the importance it can hold for a school counselor's role. This article laid it out very nicely that assessment must be used every day all the time. When a student comes into your office, you are almost always not aware of their situation, their skills set, and who they are mentally, emotionally and so on. Part of our job is to determine these pieces of the puzzle as we get to know our clients and form healthy counseling relationships. The more we learn about a student the better we are able to help them help themselves. Chances are if we are learning about them, they are in turn learning more as well. This type of assessment process requires the gathering of information through multiple resources and it does not come just from a simple test score. Once we have several pieces to the puzzle however, the process of technical eclecticism becomes easier and more beneficial to our counseling process and success.

 Nelson, M. L.  (2002).  An assessment-based model for counseling strategy selection.  Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 416-421.

Week 6

I was interested to read Nelson’s article this week because it initially seemed to contradict some of the tenets of the solution-focused approach we are learning in our theory courses. According to Nelson and other eclectic model theorists, “interventions that are based on specific client needs and problems, rather than on the preferred strategy of the counselor, tend to lead to better outcomes” (Nelson, M., 2002, p. 416). Eclecticism does not mean throwing any strategy possible at clients, but rather, is the “judicious selection of techniques that have been empirically demonstrated to be effective for certain types of individuals with particular types of complaints” (p. 416). This is certainly a different approach than the solution-focused or bust approach we are currently using when counseling clients in our theory course. However, perhaps these theories are not really different after all as we are also learning about other theorists and being encouraged to incorporate them in our solution-focused counseling work as well. Because of this, we may actually be practicing eclecticism with the solution-focused framework serving as our underlying foundation. My thoughts were confirmed as I continued reading and learned that the initial stages of the strategy selection model is to identify clients' goals. This is also a very important element of the solution-focused approach. After identifying goals, the counselor must rule out psychopathology, such as disorders like depression, bipolar disorders, or psychosis. In assessing clients for these disorders, I think that a chart like the one depicted in Figure 1 in the article would be especially useful. The authors recommend other sources such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and articles in the Journal of Counseling and Development which may be helpful for beginning counselors to consult when making initial assessments of clients. After psychophysiological factors have been assessed, counselors must consider the complexity of clients' problems, as well as their reaction level and capacity for insight. The authors then describe various strategies which may be more appropriate for certain clients. I really liked the discussion of metaphors because these are strategies that I would like to incorporate into my own work, as the use of a well-placed metaphor has often helped me to analyze my problems or issues more effectively. Despite the strategy used, the authors emphasize that counseling must be client-focused, placing "careful attention to clients and their desires, problems, and needs" (p. 421). Nelson, M.L. (2002). An assessment-based model for counseling strategy selection. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 416-421.

Blog #6

            The more I read and learn about the field of School Counseling, the more I realize how important it is to keep an open mind about all of the different techniques and styles of counseling that can be used.  Dr. Garner really drove home in Theory & Practice I that we all need to have one counseling style that we “specialize” in.  In the case of the School Counseling program here at Millersville, it was suggested that we choose Solution Focused Counseling.  I am completely comfortable with Solution Focused Counseling and really enjoy focusing on the client being the expert of their own experience.  Also, ever since I started my own journey through Solution Focused Counseling, it has been nothing but a positive experience for me.

            While I want to continue to craft my skills in the world of Solution Focused Counseling, I also know that it is extremely important to have an eclectic skill set.  Even though Dr. Garner talked to us about having one type that we can use to describe our counseling style, I believe that it would still be extremely beneficial for us to say that we have an eclectic skill set based on the needs of each client.  Essentially, we should be able to get to know the client, evaluate their needs, and use whatever counseling style or technique that fits their needs.  It shows how you should assess each client in the Counseling Strategy Selection Chart that is shown in the Nelson article.  While I agree that the chart would be an effective way to choose a counseling strategy, I feel like it will take a lot of experience for someone to be able to assess a client that quickly and choose a style that is catered to them.

Dr. Garner suggested that we shouldn’t really come out and say that we are an eclectic style counselor when we eventually go through a job interview, or when somebody simply asks us.  Maybe it would be more appropriate to mention that we have an eclectic skill set that caters to all clients or students, but still driving home the fact that our expertise is in Solution Focused Counseling.  Maybe I am being completely naïve to the situation, but I still question whether the administration would even care what you would choose as far as a counseling style.  I would think that they would be more interested in hiring someone that would simply have the knowledge to be able to cater to their students needs, and would have the skill set to use many different effective styles of counseling.

           

Nelson, M.L. (2002). An assessment-based model for counseling strategy selection. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 416-421.

Intelligence

What surprised me in reviewing this week's readings was the sheer breadth of information available about the way in which intelligence scores can be calculated and used. Earlier in the class, I shared how I was administered an intelligence test in third grade which consisted of being asked to assemble various puzzles. As a result of these assessments, my spatial ability was determined to be sub-par, and I was not placed in the gifted program because of this initial assessment. Fortunately, this did not have much impact on my academic career as my grades and academic achievement allowed me to be placed in the same honors and AP courses as my gifted peers. If I knew what I do now about intelligence, though, I would have certainly explored other options as there seem to be so many more assessment options available that would be more valid. As it was, my parents had to be called into a meeting with a school counselor and psychologist to examine the reasons why my verbal and written capabilities were so advanced as compared to my spatial and mathematical abilities. If they would have asked me, I may have described how nervous I felt the day I was pulled out of class to take the assessment because I had no idea where I was going or for what reason the test was being administered. I would have told them about the pit in my stomach as I tried to assemble the various puzzles which the test administrator seemed to deem simple. I would have also shared how I always ignored legos, puzzles, and other mechanical tasks in favor of settling down with a good book. They didn't ask me though-in fact, they didn't have any discussion with me or my parents until that later meeting when they shared the results. I found the Ester and Ittenbach article interesting because it described how Stanford-Binet exam was designed without having a clear understanding of the construct of intelligence. Similarly, the Weschler Scales were based on the concept of g, which viewed intelligence as a one-factor construct, but was later found to be lacking in adequately explaining the concept. The Fluid-Crystallized Theory of Intelligence is more comprehensive, including nine factors, such as fluid reasoning, crystallized intelligence, visual and auditory processing, processing speed, short-term memory, long-term retrieval, quantitative knowledge, and correct decision speed. Unfortunately, this theory contradicts the concept of g, upon which the original assessments were based, but this theory makes more sense to me-if only because it includes many more elements which can be measured. According to the authors, Carroll's Three Stratum theory may be the most widely accepted theory accounting for intelligence-perhaps because it combines the two competing ideas (g and fluid-crystallized theory) and organizes cogntive abililities into three different levels. Regardless of the model used, it is helpful to understand the theory upon which popular intelligence tests are grounded-if only so we can have more understanding and ammunition when attempting to explain results to teachers, students and parents. Esters, I., & Ittenbach, R. (1999, June). Contemporary theories and assessments of intelligence: A primer. Professional School Counseling, 2(5), 373. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database

Week 6

Ah that word "eclecticism" surfaces again! I have always thought of this word favorably and really first heard about it years ago as a decorating style. You know mismatched chairs at a dining room table, mixed woods (how daring!) in your living room and so on. I must admit part of me likes the symmetry that comes from three matching chairs on one side of the table and three matching chairs on the other side of the table. It is comfortable...you know what you are getting. Isn't that where counselors can run into problems? Getting so comfortable with one approach that we are hesitant or forget that there may be a better "chair" for our client to sit in? Does one chair really fit all? I don't think so.

I turned to my beloved Webster's Dictionary (Collegiate Dictionary, 10th ed) and looked up eclectic. It says, "selecting what appears best in various doctrines, methods, or styles". I also looked at the word origin (I love etymology!) and the word eclectic comes from the Greek words that mean "to collect" and "to gather". If applied to the counseling profession, I would think that eclecticism means selecting the best method/style to work with each individual client. Maybe this is too simplistic but I think it is easy to overlook as the Nelson article pointed out. "Numerous authors have written about the limitations on counseling outcomes that can result from practicing from a single theoretical lens,..." (2002).

I remember back in Theory and Practice I when Dr. Gardner talked about electicism in regard to counseling. At first I thought she was speaking about it negatively, and after working with a few clients and reading this article by Nelson,  I can better understand both sides of the argument. While I do not believe that that eclecticsm is always the right approach, I think that it may be a useful approach for many clients. Some counselors may only be able to operate looking out of a single lens, and some clients may benefit from that monocular approach. I think that many more may be able to work through their issues when counselors use technical eclecticism. "Technical eclecticism, on the other hand, is the judicious selection of techniques that have been empirically demonstrated to be effective for certain types of individuals with particular types of complaints." (Nelson, 2002).

As school counselors, most of our clients don't get to choose their counselors. They get us! While some may have additional counseling outside of school, our clients will vary greatly with needs and wants. We need to be ready to assist them in the best way and that means while we may operate from a particular lens (say Solution-Focused), we need to be flexible to adapt to and use what lens (or chair!)will serve our client the best.




Nelson, M.L. (2002). An assessment-based model for counseling strategy selection. Journal
     Counseling & Development, 80, 416-421.

Week 6 - Nelson Article

I asked myself several questions while reading Nelson’s (2002) article this week.  First of all, I wondered how much of the process of systematic eclecticism in the practice of counseling is actually feasible for school counselors.  Nelson brings up this point in her article: “Indeed, school counselors, when they do have opportunities to conduct individual interventions with students, are typically required to keep such interventions brief” (p. 420).  However, Nelson later adds that recent developments in brief counseling models allow counselors to provide insight-based interventions in a short-term format. What does Nelson mean by insight-based interventions?  She defines them as interventions which help clients to understand why they act in certain ways, repeat interpersonal patterns, and the impact of their family history on their current relationships.  She also notes that clients may express a desire to become more self-aware.  In considering these aspects, I am reminded of a question that Dr. Garner posed to us last semester as a journal entry for our own Solution-Focused process: “What do you think caused the problems versus what do you do to maintain it?”  While Nelson categorizes Solution-Focused counseling as a cognitive intervention, I believe that there is some crossover with insight-based interventions here.  Another similarity between these two types of interventions that I noticed is the use of metaphorical language.  In Solution-Focused lingo, we might find that a client refers to themselves with certain labels and absolutes which can often be metaphorical in nature. 

                In Theory & Practice, we have discussed several theories other than Solution-Focused, and I have often found that it works pretty well to use Solution-Focused as your framework theory of practice and to supplement it with ideas from other psychologists.  For instance, I have found Ellis’ theory of replacing irrational thoughts with rational ones to complement the Solution-Focused process very nicely.  That being said, I don’t think that at this point in time I would be able to completely change my counseling strategy according to client needs.  If nothing else, this article demonstrated to me the importance of becoming familiar with licensed counselors within one’s geographic area in order to make referrals when students present issues that cannot be worked through in brief sessions in the school environment.  Not only that, it would be helpful to know what approach each counselor tends to use so that we can make appropriate referrals based on student needs.

                Another takeaway from this article was the concept of assessment as a continual process that occurs during counseling sessions.  The counselor is always making assessments of the client and is hopefully using the information gained through the sessions to facilitate productive sessions in the future.  The counselor’s awareness of the client’s levels of capacity and desire for insight and reactance can help the counselor to better tailor sessions to meet the client’s needs.

Reference:

Nelson, M.L. (2002). An assessment-based model for counseling strategy selection. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80, 416-421.