Improving the Effectiveness of School Counselling: Consensus, Collaboration, and Clinical Supervision Amélioration de l'efficacité du counseling scolaire : consensus, collaboration, et supervision clinique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMEDans cette revue de la litterature, on examine les facteurs qui influencent l'efficacite des services et des programmes offerts par les conseillers scolaires. Les facteurs d'influence specifiquement examines sont l'identite professionnelle, les pratiques de travail collaboratif, et la supervision clinique. L'analyse a revele que les principes d'egalitarisme, de relation, et d'interdependance sont omnipresents dans tout ce que font les conseillers scolaires, et que les pratiques de travail collaboratif, la supervision clinique, et la notion d'identite professionnelle sont intimement liees. On discute des implications pour la pratique et l'on formule des recommandations pour les recherches a venir. On met les chercheurs au defi de s'attaquer a la penurie de litterature sur les pratiques du counseling dans les ecoles canadiennes.Canadian schools are dynamic, energetic, and diverse. At heart of Canadian schools are school counsellors, who act in many roles: educational leaders, advocates, and change agents (British Columbia School Counsellors Association, n.d.; Manitoba School Counsellors' Association, 2002; New Brunswick Department of Education, 2002; Northwest Territories Education, Culture, and Employment, 2004; Nova Scotia Department of Education, 2010; Ontario School Counsellors' Association, n.d.; Prince Edward Island Department of Education, 2005).1 Now, as their profession develops, school counsellors are taking on a broader range of duties and facing new challenges (Culbreth, Scarborough, Banks-Johnson, & Solomon, 2005). Therefore, it is becoming increasingly necessary to reexamine how school counsellors will continue to support students in their care.In this article, I analyze and synthesize literature on school counselling to determine what factors contribute to, or detract from, effectiveness of services and programs that school counsellors offer. I then evaluate this information to determine how literature can inform-and ultimately improve- practice of school counsellors. I review variations in conceptualizations of school counsellor's role across Canada, as well as how these views have changed over time. School settings are unique in that many people are involved in lives of students. Therefore, I also examine extent to which school counsellors collaborate with other stakeholders in order to support students, as well as any barriers to collaboration. Finally, I discuss nature of supervision that school counsellors receive, as well as how this helps to support them in their various roles.The existing literature has not examined role of Canadian school counsellors and effectiveness of services and programs they offer. In this article, I aim to highlight some of these knowledge gaps and make recommendations for future research studies. I propose that consensus on role of school counsellor, collaborative working practices, and clinical supervision are key factors influencing effectiveness of school counselling.THE STORY SO FARMy main focus in this article is to examine how school counsellors help to make a difference to lives of their students. For purposes of this article, I have defined an effective school counselling program (SCP) as one that helps students to make positive changes in one or more domains of their lives. The definition is in line with this guideline in Prince Edward Island (PEI) Department of Education's (2005) handbook for counsellors: the primary goal of school counselling services is to enhance and promote student learning (p. 5), and to address personal, social, emotional, and career needs of students. The term has been similarly defined by Alberta Education (2012), BC Ministry of Education (2013), Manitoba SCA (2002), and NS Department of Education (2010).School counsellors face a double challenge: they must show how services they provide positively influence student outcomes, and they must also demonstrate their worth in order to ensure that their services continue to receive funding (Oberman, Studer, & Womack, 2006). …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".