School Counseling Program Versus Position 

School counselors have learned that the American School Counselor Association recommends in its 2012 third edition of The ASCA National Model, that counselors should aim to spend at least 80% of their time delivering direct and indirect services to their students. While school counselors can have an idea of who they aim to be professionally and stand firm on their moral position as a school counseling professional, it would be impossible to know how to deliver preventative and remediate services without having a comprehensive school counseling program. Foxx, Baker, and Gerler (2017) write that programs are based on “the knowledge of the developmental needs of children and adolescents” (p.41).  This type of prevention required the ASCA (2012) to remodel their ideology from position towards program. They sought out to have all school counselors able to answer, “How are students different as a result of what school counselors do?”

The difference between a position and program lies in the work put into the foundation of the program itself, the management of the program, the delivery of services to students, and maintaining accountability as a professional. In sum, creating program goals based on the assessed needs of the school and community, researching and implementing methods for delivering services, and effectively evaluating program outcomes are wildly different than having an overarching mission statement. Gysbers and Stanley (2014) wrote, “A benefit of the program concept is that the program’s delivery system of direct and indirect services provides authoritative descriptions for all of the school counselor’s duties” (p.25). The American School Counselor Association advocates for the cohesiveness of school counselors and an across-the-board job description. It is widely known that not all school counselors share the same job tasks, creating a divide within the school counseling community and an uncertainness outside of it. However, with ASCA’s “One Vision One Voice” motto, they implore all school counseling professionals to evaluate their duties and how much time they spend on their school counseling program. Gysbers and Stanley (2014) also write that implementing a school counseling program and recording results can show administrators that full program implementation requires 100 percent of a school counselor’s time” (p.26). This, in turn, will generate more time allotted for school counseling services, encouragement of further professional development opportunities, and revenue. These actions will further unify all school counselors and as NC State’s counseling program themselves recognize, counselors are more effective when they work together and produce and share research.

Another benefit of creating school counseling programs is the use of data and having accountability of the school counselor’s effectiveness in the school and community. Using data to decipher progress and stagnation allows counselors to evaluate the effectiveness of their school counseling program. Thus, they know how to continue and how to change. This is how progress is made. At the end of the day, that is what we want as professional counselors – progress in our schools and communities.

References 

American School Counselor Association (2012). The ASCA National Model: A Framework for School Counseling Programs, Third Edition. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Gysbers, N. C., & Stanley, B. (2014). From Position to Program. ASCA SCHOOL COUNSELOR, 22-27. Retrieved January 21, 2018, from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/LeadershipSpecialist/FromPositiontoProgram.pdf.

Foxx, S. P., Baker, S. B., & Gerler, E. R., Jr. (2017). School counseling in the 21st century (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.