- Email: [email protected]
Psychotherapy in the school
Journal of School Psychology S u m m e r 1966 • Vol. IV, No. 4
PSYCHOTHERAPY IN THE SCHOOL C. H. Patterson
The early counseling programs in the public schools were almost entirely vocationally oriented. It is doubtful that most of what was done in these programs would qualify as counseling as it is defined today. In fact, counseling was not used in reference to such work, which was rather referred to as vocational guidance. Parsons, defining vocational guidance as "the choice of a vocation, adequate preparation for it, and the attainment of efficiency ana success," described the process to youth as including "(1) a clear understanding of yourself, your aptitudes, abilities, interests, ambitions, resources, limitations and their causes; (2) a knowledge of the requirements and conditions of success, advantages, compensations, opportunities, and prospects in different lines of work; (3) true reasoning on the relations of these two groups of facts" (Parsons, 1908, p. 5). While not all who worked with youth ignored affective aspects of vocational choice, it is apparent that the vocational guidance process was seen as a rational, cognitive one. This model was accepted and persisted. A committee of the National Education Association in 1918 defined vocational guidance as "a continuous process designed to help the individual choose, to plan his preparation for, to enter upon, and to make progress in an occupation" (National Education Association, 1918). This definition was adopted by the National Vocational Guidance Association in 1920, and it persisted, unchanged except for minor revisions in wording, for two decades or more. The nature of the helping process may be indicated by a variation of the statement given in 1924: "Vocational guidance is the giving of information, experience and a d v i c e . . . " (National Vocational Guidance Association, 1924). In the 1940's the counseling movement experienced the impact of a strong influence away from the logical, rational model. This was the rise of psychotherapy in psychology, stimulated by, if not beginning with, the development of the client-centered approach (Rogers, 1942). The development of interest in psychotherapy or therapeutic counseling overshadowed vocational counseling, to the point where it was feared by many that vocational counseling had disappeared. At the 1959 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, the topic for one of the meetings was entitled "What has happened to vocational guidance?" In a recent article, Wrenn (1963) has suggested reasons for the decrease in emphasis of vocational counseling in the The author C(ecil H(olden) Patterson, is chairman of the Division of Counseling and Guidance and professor of educational psychology at the University of Illlnols. He holds a PhD from the University of Minnesota.
15
school. Among them he lists "a kind of vocational snobbery" in which personal adjustment counseling is considered a higher form of activity. There have been developments in the field of vocational counseling in the last decade which have gone beyond the matching of the square peg in the square hole concept. The non-rational, or attitudinal, aspects of vocational development and choice have been recognized and studied, especially self attitudes or the self concept. This recognition is epitomized in Super's (1963) definition of vocational development as the developing and implementing of a self concept. Vocational counseling has thus been brought into relationship with the field of psychological counseling, therapeutic counseling or psychotherapy. The nature of the resulting approach to vocational counseling has been described elsewhere (Patterson, 1963a). What Is Counseling?
With the movement from vocational guidance to vocational counseling, questions arise regarding the differentiation between counseling, especially as it involves personal-social-emotional problems, and psychotherapy. The writer has taken the position (Patterson, 1963b) that counseling and psychotherapy are in all essential respects identical. First, the nature of the relationship which is considered basic in both counseling and psychotherapy is identical whether it is counseling or psychotherapy about which one is talking. Second, the process of counseling cannot be distinguished from the process of psychotherapy. Third, the methods or techniques are identical. Finally, in the matter of goals or outcomes there may appear to be essential differences, but again no distinction is possible. The objectives of counseling have been identified by the Committee on Definition, Division of Counseling Psychology, American Psychological Association (1956) as "to help individuals toward overcoming obstacles to their personal growth, wherever these may be encountered, and toward achieving optimum development of their personal resources." Most psychotherapists would accept these as goals of psychotherapy. Tyler (1958), attempting to differentiate counseling from psychotherapy, states that it is not the job of counselors "to remove physical and mental handicaps or to get rid of limitations." This is presumably the job of the therapist, which "is aimed essentially at change in developmental structures rather than at fulfillment." Counseling does not attempt to "repair damage done to (the client) in the past, to stimulate inadequate [sic] development of some stunted aspect of his personality," but is the process of "helping a person attain a clear sense of personal identity," along with acceptance of limitations. Again, many would accept these as goals of psychotherapy. Other attempts to differentiate counseling and psychotherapy in terms of goals involve 16
similar disagreements, overlapping and confusion. The general objectives of assisting individuals towards responsible independence, development of maximum potentials, or self-actuafizafion, would appear to be accepted as general goals by both those who call themselves counselors and those who call themselves psychotherapists. The differences between counseling and psychotherapy resolve themselves, then, into two, which are not essential in that they do not involve the nature of the relationship, the process, the methods or the goals. The first is the level of adjustment---or maladjustment--of the client. Where the client is seriously emotionally disturbed, the process is called psychotherapy, and is seen more as a remedial process, to bring the individual up to a normal level of functioning. Where the client is not seriously disturbed, but rather has the problems of the so-called "normal" person, then we speak of counseling and of developing the client's potential or of assisting him in actualizing his best self. In any case, however, the counselor or psychotherapist takes the client where he is and allows him to go as far as he can or desires to go. The second difference concerns the setting in which services are provided: if a medical setting, we use the term psychotherapy; if a nonmedical setting, then we speak of counseling. There is a further distinction which is sometimes made. This involves the nature or content of the problem which the client brings to the counselor. A distinction is sometimes attempted between reality oriented problems and those problems which inhere in the personality of the individual. Here again, of course, no line can be drawn. Educational and vocational problems have been considered to be reality oriented, but they need not be so. Cognitive, rational approaches have been considered to be appropriate methods for dealing with reality problems. But if there is concern only with the rational solution of reality problems, then this is not counseling, but teaching. Nor is the providing of information, which may be a part of counseling, by itself counseling. Counseling deals with the conative or affective realm, with attitudes, feelings and emotions. These are almost always present with problems of educational and vocational choice, and thus these problems must be dealt with through counseling or therapeutic methods. While we are not accustomed to think of vocational therapy, there is no essential difference between vocational counseling, which is concerned with attitudes and feelings as well as reality and rational factors in vocational decisions, and psychotherapy. We may thus define counseling o r psychotherapy as the relationship, and the process developing out of the relationship, between an individual or individuals who are not functioning adequately or up to their potentials, who face problems which they feel unable to resolve 17
longer is restricted to the teaching of the three R's, but is concerned with the preparation of the young for making a living and for functioning as responsible citizens in a democracy. For effective, mature, responsible functioning as a citizen, it may be maintained that the individual must be relatively free from the handicap of emotional disturbances, and that the school has some responsibility to this end. If it is argued that this goes beyond the assignment of the school, it may be pointed out that the school, as the servant of society, may be assigned whatever functions society desires it to perform. There is nothing preordained about the function of "the school. The introduction of pupil personnel services in our schools is the result of the expression of the desires of parents and the community as much as the decision of professional educators. The public in many instances has exerted pressure for more counseling and other psychological services in the school. Where they desire such services, and are wilting to pay for them through taxes for the school, they should be entitled to receive them. There is sometimes opposition by some groups to the providing of treatment by a public institution, on the basis that it leads to socialized medicine. Thus, the schools do not provide medical treatment, and, since psychotherapy is considered by some as a form of medical treatment, it is contended that it should not be provided in the schools. But treatment is provided by other institutions of society such as mental hospitals, schools for the retarded, and by community mental health clinics supported in part by taxes. Interestingly enough, the providing of speech therapy by the schools has never been questioned. Landy and Scanlon (1962) note that the development of guidance services in the school has been focused upon the normal or relatively healthy child, with limitation of the role of the school to identification and referral of the abnormal child. Thus, they note, "The idea of therapeutically oriented services might well be viewed as a function that is not appropriate to the school. This position can be understood historically, but this does not mean that the position is justifiable in terms of the individual child who has a need for collaborative treatment service." It should be noted, however, that these authors do not advocate psychotherapy in the school. They suggest that the school provide "relationship counseling," which is "more than supportive and leads to some insight with actual re-educative goals," whereas psychotherapy works towards "reconstructive goals." They recognize the difficulty of drawing a hard and fast line between the two, which is probably the reason for the problems that they find in attempting to integrate the school's counseling with psychotherapy provided by outside sources. Society may of course decide that counseling and psychotherapy should be provided by other agencies or institutions. In France voca1?
alone, and a trained professional who provides the kind of relationship in which the individual is able to change in ways which lead to the development of his potentials and the ability to resolve his problems. Notice that we are not concerned here with whether there is a "basic" change in personality "structure" (Tyler, 1958, 1960), whatever that is. Attitudes, feelings, interests, goals, self-esteem, and related behaviors are considered to be basic elements of personality, and it is these which are changed in counseling or psychotherajpy.
Should the Schools Provide Counseling? During the period of the development of counseling, education has progressed from the essentialist position of concern only with the intellect. There was first recognition of the concept of mens sana in corpora sano, leading to concern of the school with the physical condition of the child. This was followed by interest in the social conditions of home life as a factor in the child's readiness to learn. Then the importance of psychological or emotional influences in learning received attention. So there is now recognition that the whole child comes to school, and thus the school is interested in the physical, social and emotional characteristics of the child as well as his intelligence. But the question has been, how far does, or should, the school go in its concern about the whole child? What services should the school provide to remedy deficiencies in the various areas? In the physical area, the school does not provide medical care or treatment. It is thus concluded that the school should not provide counseling or psychotherapy. Vocational counseling, yes, but therapeutic or personal counseling, no. In a recent workshop conducted by the writer for school counselors on counseling theory and practice, a school administrator, after visiting one of the sessions, remarked "I hope the), don't think they are going to do psychotherapy." But if, as has been suggested above, there is no essential difference between counseling and psychotherapy, and if, further, vocational counseling is counseling and is concerned with affecfive and attitudinal factors, can the schools say they are not concerned with psychotherapy? What is the responsibility of the school for the personal-social-emotional development of the student? To quote Allinsmith, (1962, p. 29): "Is it to be the obligation of schools to aid in the development of healthy personalities, and, if so, are teachers or other school personnel such as guidance specialists the ones to have responsibility?" The function of the school in society is a broad one--the preparation of the young for taking their places in society as informed, responsible adults. The performance of this function has broadened considerably, and although there have been some who have objected, the school no 18
who are competent as counselors, rather than simply testers and information givers. A second objection is the cost; the extension of counseling services to include help with personal-social-emotional problems would require many more counselors and increase the cost of pupil personnel services in schools. This of course is true. But failure to provide such services in our schools, from the earliest grades, will add indirectly to the costs of other functions of the school, as well as to the costs to society, which, if it doesn't provide such services outside the school will bear the later costs of emotionally disturbed citizens. And of course, the maintenance of community clinics is also paid for by the community. It would appear in summary that the schools can provide broad counseling services, and that there are good reasons why they should provide such services. There are of course some problems involved in doing so. These will be discussed in terms of questions or issues. Some Questions 1. Who does counseling in the school? The days when the teacher was seen as a part-time counselor are past. It appears that in general the schools are accepting counseling as a separate function from teaching, requiring special preparation and training. With the acceptance of counseling as a function of the school, however, the question arises as to who should perform this function. The school counselor is seen by many as the appropriate person. However, there are some who feel that the counselor has so many other duties that he has no time for counseling. Another aspect of the problem of who should do counseling relates to the overlap of functions of the counselor, the psychologist and the school social worker or visiting teacher. The social worker may feel that personal counseling is casework, and thus a social work responsibility. The psychologist may see personal counseling as psychotherapy, and thus to be performed by a psychologist. The point of view of the writer on this question is that counseling or psychotherapy is not the monopoly of any single group, but may be performed by members of various professions, including psychology, medicine or psychiatry, social work, sociology and the ministry, providing they have had adequate education and preparation. In the area of human behavior, there will be an inevitable but not necessarily undesirable overlap. Whether school psychologists should do counseling or psychotherapy has been a matter for considerable discussion. Psychologists could not agree upon this question at the Thayer conference on school psychology (Cutts, 1955). There are two reason why it appears that we cannot look to school psychologists for providing adequate counseling services. First, there are not enough of them. The schools are far from the 21
tional counseling is provided by the central government outside the schools. There are a number of reasons, however, for counseling services being offered in the school. In the first place, the school has the child for a greater proportion of his daily life, and for a longer period of time, than any other institution. Thus the child is accessible, and is well known by the school personnel. It would appear to be convenient and efficient, in terms of time and transportation, to provide counseling services in the school setting. Second, there are inadequate community counseling services. Not only are there waiting lists, but such agencies must limit their services to those who are more seriously disturbed. There are many children and youth who need more help with personal problems than can be provided by parents or teachers, but who do not require the services of a psychiatrist. Not all students with any degree of emotional disturbance can or should be referred for psychiatric help. Even if such services were plentiful and easily available, there is still some stigma attached to seeing a psychologist or psychiatrist, and students and parents are often reluctant to accept such services. Third, if the school is to oiler adequate vocational counseling services it can and should provide personal counseling services. It is not possible to separate vocational problems from personal problems. Fourth, "the inclusion of mental health services within a school in conjunction with the physical health facilities offer the possible advantage to a student of disguising from others the fact that a consultation is about emotional illness. Having the services at school may make it easier for parents to seek advice, since some may feel less strange in going to a school for help than to a clinic . . . . Many workers believe that to be effective a clinician whose job it is to aid students must spend his working hours within the social system of the school in order to have the necessary understanding to capitalize both diagnostically and therapeutically upon the situation as it exists uniquely in each institution" (Allinsmith & Goethals, 1962, pp. 127-128). There are some practical reasons advanced against the school offering such counseling services. The first reduces to the fact that school personnel, including those currently functioning as counselors in the school, are not competent to engage in therapeutic or personal counseling and therefore should not attempt it (Moore, 1961). This may be the case. No one would advocate staff members perfomaing functions for which they are not prepared. But if so-called counselors are not prepared for working with students with personal-sodal-emotional problems, then they are not prepared for working with students with vocational problems. Counselor education programs are currently training counselors 20
Currently, perhaps in part reflecting interest an prevention of emotional disturbance, and in part the result of inadequate numbers of counselors, there has been some question about the counselor working with students with problems. This is reflected in the Wrenn report (1962), which recommends that counselors not devote their major time "to crisis situations in the lives of the relatively few," (p. 73) but should "place the focus upon the developmental and preventive rather than upon the curative and remedial." (p. 183) There are a number of aspects of_this question which might be pursued, and only brief comments on a few of them can be made here. First, there are more than a few students who, at some time or other, have problems which to them are serious or crisis problems and thus are suitable for counseling. Second, there is no sharp line between the preventive and curative or remedial. What is curative or remedial in terms of an existing situation is preventive for the future. Thus counseling for current problems in the elementary school may be preventive of problems at the secondary school level. Third, for the professionally trained counselor to withhold his services from students who have real problems, and give his time to the normal students who have no serious problems, is in my opinion to be criminally negligent and unethical. Prevention is of course desirable, but it will be a long time in the future before prevention of problems will be successful, even if it is possible or desirable to prevent all problems. In the meantime, as Arbuckle (1962b) points out, "We may stress the need to take action so that future accidents will not occur, but we cannot in the meantime ignore the victims of the latest accidents." However much preventive action (or research aimed at prevention) is desirable, help to those who currently need it is also justified and an obligation of society. It is unfortunate that we do not--nor perhaps will never--have adequate manpower for both research directed toward prevention and attempts to remedy or cure. But even if we concede that the only real solution to emotional disturbance is through prevention, it is not justified, as Albee (1963) proposes, to attempt to force or direct all our efforts toward prevention and neglect treatment. Not only is concern for those who are suffering necessary, but the rights of those who would prefer to give their time and lives to treatment or attempts to cure must be respected. The solution to the problem is more manpower, not neglecting an aspect of the problem.
3. What is the preparation [or counseling in the schools? Preparation for counseling has been a concern for a number of years. Various groups and organizations have made recommendations and issued statements. In 1949, eight organizations cooperated in outlining a program of counselor preparation (Miller, 1949). In the same year the recom23
recommended standards for psychological services, which vary from one psychologist for every 1000 pupils to one for every 3,000 (Cutts, 1955, p. 4). The psychologist is usually assigned to several schools, which he serves on an itinerant basis. Many schools have no psychological services. As Gray (1963, p. 110) notes, "The manpower situation is the most cogent argument against engaging in psychotherapy. There are few school systems blessed with sufficient personnel and other auxiliary services for psychotherapy to be feasible as an activity for its psychologists." A second reason is that counseling or psychotherapy is not a function which is accepted by the school psychologist as a main duty, and, related to this, is not a function for which he is usually adequately trained. "The school psychologist is not in the school for the primary purpose of rendering psychotherapy" (White & Harris, 1961, p. 278). Thus, the school psychologist is not prepared to accept counseling as his lesponsibility. The situation in regard to the school social worker or visiting teacher is similar. They are in short supply, especially at the secondary school level. And although one of their functions is casework with individual children, this is not a major function, or one for which they' have adequate time. It would appear that the major source of counseling service must be the school counselor. While they are also in short supply, this situation is being remedied. While it is also true that, for various reasons, school counselors have often done little counseling, it is now being accepted that their major role is counseling, and that they have a responsibility for working with students with personal problems as well as with students with educational and vocational problems. In line with this acceptance of the function of counseling, the education of counselors is moving towards adequate preparation for personal counseling. It appears that we can look in the future to the qualified school counselor as the source of counseling services. 2. What is the role and [unction o[ the school counselor? If the counselor is to engage in counseling, both educational-vocational and personal counseling, how does this affect the concept of the school counselor? It is apparent that, as suggested above, the concept of the school counselor is changing. There has been considerable interest and concern about the role and function of the school counselor. The American School Counselor Association has published a tentative statement on the role and function of the school counselor (American School Counselor Association, 1963). The counseling function is emphasized as a major function of the school counselor, both in terms of its importance and the proportion of time devoted to it. 22
mendations of a committee of the National Association of Guidance Supervisors and Counselor Trainers (1949) were published by the U. S. Office of Education. In the next few years a number of other reports and recommendations were published (Institute for Human Adjnstment, 1950, American Psychological Association, 1955, American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1958, American Assodation for the Advancement of Science, 1958). In addition there have been many articles by individuals, too numerous to cite. More recently there has been a statement by the Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association (1962) on the Scope and Standards of Preparation in Psychology for School Counselors, a tentative policy statement by the American Personnel and Guidance Association (1961), and the so-called Wrenn Report of the Commission on Guidance in American Schools (Wrenn, 1962). While there are differences among the recommendations, there has been substantial agreement on the basic fundamentals. On the basis of discussion and conferences (American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1962) the 1961 APGA Policy Statement has been revised (American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1964) and the resulting recommendations or standards represent the concensus of counselor educators and other professional persons about the preparation of counselors. The Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (1964) has prepared a set of standards for counselor education in the preparation of secondary school counselors. Counselors prepared in line with these standards will be qualified to engage in therapeutic counseling with students. On the basis of these statements, it appears that there is agreement that adequate preparation for counseling requires two academic years of study. It is therefore to be expected that counselor education institutions will move toward the development of two year programs of counselor preparation. There will be emphasis upon the desirability of full-time training in a program of patterned sequences of courses. Second, the professional training of counselors, while not ordinarily conducted in a psychology department, will be psychological in nature. Students will be exposed to work in human development and behavior in its normal and abnormal aspects, and to methods and techniques of evaluation of human performance and potential by psychological means, including tests and their statistical basis. While it is important that the individual person be seen in relation to his social and cultural background, it will in general be expected that the student coming for graduate work in counseling will have had a grounding in the behavioral and social sciences and the humanities, so that it will not be necessary to include elementary or introductory training in these areas as part of the graduate program. The study of the nature of the social, economic and occupational world to b e faced 24
by the client, or student, will of course be included as part of the education of the counselor. Related to the work in the basic science of psychology will be work in the theory and practice of counseling, including group counseling. Third, supervised experience in counseling will be an important part of the training of the counselor. In addition, the counselor must be enabled to acquire an understanding of education and the school setting. Students who have been teachers will have developed this understanding. But while there are still some who insist that this understanding must be obtained through preparation for and experience in teaching, it is being recognized that this is not the only way. The substitution of internship in the school setting is proposed as an alternative to teacher preparation and teaching experience. This represents a recognition that counseling is a separate profession from teaching, and that it is unreasonable to require that a person be trained in another profession before being permitted to function as a counselor in a school. The acceptance of counseling as being different from teaching, and as a full-time profession, will eliminate the use of the counselor as a part-time teacher, and thus eliminate any practical basis for the requirement that he be a teacher. 4. How [ar does the counselor go? One of the concerns of those who question the place of counseling in the school is to what extent the counselor should become involved in intensive or extensive relationships with a student-client. With how severely disturbed students does the counselor work? It is not possible to define sharply the limits of counseling in the schools. At one extreme, the counselor cannot spend all his time working with the so-called "normal" student who has no problem. As Arbuckle (1962a, p. 394) points out, "The counselor should be prepared to work with disturbed children, and if he must refer a child who mentions that he feels like kilting his mother, or that he's sick of living in the same house with his mother, then he should not be working as a counselor." On the other hand, he does not necessarily work with a child whose behavior is so disturbed that he cannot be tolerated in the school, nor even with any child who is acceptable in the school. Referrals will be made at times, although "if the school counseling services are as they should be very few children will ever be referred (to a mental health clinic) since the professional school counselors will be able to work with the vast majority of the more disturbed children" (Arbuckle, 1962a, pp. 393-394). There will be differences among schools in the kinds and degrees of disturbed behavior with which the counselors will deal. These differences will depend upon a number of factors. One will be the competence and confidence of the counselor. Another will be the time that he has available. Another will be the nature and extent of other resources in the school and the community. The question of when and 25
whom to refer is a difficult one. The more training the counselor has, and the more competent he is, the better he will be able to recognize his limitations and the need for referral. It is desirable that the counselor have psychiatric consultation available, and certainly medical consultation should be available. In terms of the intensity of the counselor's work with a student, it would not seem to be unreasonable to expect that he could engage in counseling students over a period of a semester or a year, or even longer, on a weekly or even twice weekly bails where this was considered desirable.
Some Problems in Counseling in Schools There are a number of problems in counseling which are related either to the school setting itself or to the age level of counselees. Space is lacking to consider these in detail. Some of them are dealt with in another place (Patterson, 1962). 1. Students, especially younger children, may be relatively nonverbal. A purely verbal type of counseling may be inadequate with some students. Thus, particularly at the elementary school level, there should be facilities for play therapy. This also means that elementary school counselors especially should have training in play therapy. 2. It is well known that children, and adolescents especially, are reluctant to admit to having problems, or to seek help for them, or to accept help when it is offered. There are a number of reasons for this attitude. Students do not want their peers to know they have problems or are seeing a counselor. They do not always trust adults, who are the only source of help. And in their desire for independence they may resist help and insist on working out their problems alone. 3. On the other hand, there are many students whose dependence constitutes a problem for approaches to counseling which require that the counselee take responsibility for the content of the counseling relationship and which have as goals responsibility and independence in the individual. It is a paradox of our educational system that, while lip service is given to the development of independence as one of its goals, the natural result of much of the practice in education leads to the development of dependence in students. Some have suggested (see Patterson, 1962) that students who are dependent need a counseling relationship in which they can be dependent upon the counselor. A more positive and effective approach, however, is to recognize the desire for dependence, but not to allow the student to develop a dependency relationship in counseling. Otherwise, it would seem that we would be abandoning one of the goals of counseling before beginning the relationship. It is recognized that dependent cfients do constitute a difficult problem for counselors who want to help them overcome their dependence. 26
4. The school is often, or may be seen by students as, an authoritarian environment, controlled by adults. A counselor working in this situation may have a difficult time with students who perceive him as part of the authoritarian atmosphere. Such students may be submiss i v e - r a t h e r than dependent--and not able or willing to accept the non-authoritarian counseling relationship. Perhaps a part of this aspect of the problem of counseling in schools is the lack of trust and confidence students often have which leads to reluctance to discuss personal problems with counselors. It is well known among students that records are kept on them, that staff meetings are devoted to discussion of them, and that information about them circulates among the staff. It is perhaps no wonder then that they doubt the confidentiality of the counseling relationship. So-called counselors have too often been guilty of violating confidentiality in the school situation. It is to be hoped, and expected, that as counselors become professionally trained this problem will be eliminated. 5. There are a number of studies (Patterson, 1962) which indicate that students do not perceive the counselor as a source of help with problems. Instead they perceive him as a special teacher, administrator, or source of information. There is no doubt that in many instances the perceptions of students are correct, since the counselor is not a counselor in the professional sense but in name only. On the other hand, a counselor will not be perceived as a source of help with problems--educational, vocational, social, personal or emotional--unless efforts are made to inform students of the nature of the counseling services which are available. Experience indicates that when a professionally competent counselor makes clearly known the nature of his services, students do bring their personal problems to him. 6. It is still the case that even in schools where counseling is accepted and valued, the facilities which the counselor has are inadequate. Private sound-proof offices, adequate in size and ventilation, are a necessity for counseling, yet they are generally lacking. Many administrators, though claiming that they support counseling, do not recognize or accept the requirements in terms of physical facilities and equipment for professional counseling. There is still the misconception that the counselor who goes out and throws the ball around with students is a better counselor than the counselor who spends 45-50 minutes with a student behind a closed door. This misconception is fostered by a recent film which was prepared with the aid of a national advisory committee which included several prominent individuals in the counseling field? 1ChaUenge o[ Change: The Case [or Counselors. Available from NET Film
Service, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. 27
Summary Counseling a n d psychotherapy are two terms for the same function; there is no essential difference in the nature of the relationship, the process, the methods a n d techniques, the purposes or goals, or the results. Vocational counseling is not a different kind or level of counseling, requiring less background or preparation. If anything, preparation for vocational counseling requires more time t h a n does preparation for therapeutic or personal c o u n s e l i n g - - t h e f o r m e r includes the latter. Therefore, if counseling has a place in our schools, it cannot be limited to vocational counseling. I t appears t h a t there is a need or place for counseling and counselors in our schools, a n d that recognition a n d acceptance of this need is growing. T h e school has the opportunity, a n d the responsibility, for providing counseling, broadly conceived, to its students. T h e staff m e m b e r w h o has been designated as a school counselor appears to be the logical person to provide counseling services. While it is true that in the past the school counselor has not in fact been a counselor, nor adequately prepared to function as a counselor, counseling is presently accepted as the m a j o r function of the school counselor, a n d his preparation is becoming essentially preparation for performing the counseling function. While there are some who resist this trend, it appears to be well established.
References Albee, G. American psychology in the sixties. Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 18, 90-95. Allinsmith, W., & Goethals, G. W. The role of the school in mental health. Joint Commission on Mental Illness and Health, No. 7. New York: Basic Books, 1962. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Identification and guidance of able students. Washington: Author, 1958. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Committee on Professional Training, Licensing, and Certification. Professional training, licensing, and certification. Personnel guid. ]., 1958, 37, 162-166. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Standards for the preparation of school counselors. Personnel guid. ]., 1961, 40, 402-407. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Counselor education: a progress report on standards. Washington: Author, 1962. American Personnel and Guidance Association. The counselor: professional preparation and role: a statement of policy. Personnel guid. ]., 1964, 42, 536-541. American Psychological Association. Committee on Subdoctoral Education, Education and Training Board. The training of technical workers in psychology at the subdoctoral level. Amer. Psychologist, 1955, I0, 279-282. American Psychological Association. Division of Counseling Psychology, Committee on Definition. Counseling psychology as a specialty. Amer. Psychologist. 1956, 11, 282-285. American Psychological Association. Division of Counseling Psychology. The scope and standards of preparation in psychology for school counselors. Amer. Psychologist, 1962, 17, 149-152. American School Counselor Association. Tentative statement of policy for secondary school counselors. Personnel guid. ]., 1963, 42, 194-198. Arbuckle, D. S. Pupil personnel services in American schools. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1962. (a)
28
Arbuckle, D. S. A semantic excursion. Personnel guid. 1., 1962, 41, 64-66. (b) Association for Counselor Education and Supervision. Standards for counselor education in the preparation of secondary school counselors. Personnel guid. 1., 1964, 42, 1061-1073. Cutts, Norma (Ed.) School psychologist at mid-century. Washington: Amer. Psyrhol. Ass., 1955. Gray Susan. The psychologist in the schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963. Institute for Human Adjustment. Training psychological counselors. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Univer. Mich. Press, 1950.
Land)', E., & Scanlon, E. Relationship between school guidance and psychotherapy for adolescents. Amsr. I. Orthopsychiat., 1962, 32, 682-690. Miller, L. M. (Ed.) Counselor preparation.Washington: Nat. Voc. Guid. Ass., 1949. Moore, G. A. A negative view toward therapeutic counseling in the pupil schools. Counsel. Ed. Buparvis. t 1961, 1, 60-68. "
National Association of Gmdance Supervisors and Counselor Trainers, Committee on Duties, Standards and Qualifications. Duties, standards and qualifications o[ counselors. W~ahlngton: U. S. Office of Ed., 1949. National Education Association, Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education, Committee on Vocational Guidance. Vocational guidance in secondary education. Washington: U. S. Govern. Printing Office, 1918. National Vocational Guidance Auociation. Principles of vocational guidance. Cambridge, Mass.: Bur. Voc. Guid., Grad. Sch. Ed. Harvard Univer., 1924. Parsons, F. Choosing tz vocation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1908. Patterson, C. H. Counseling and guidance in schools: A /irst course. New York: Harper & Row, 1962, Chap. 13. Patterson, C. H. Counseling, self-clarification and the helping relationship. In H. Borrow (Ed.) Man in ~ world at work. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1963. (a) Patterson, C. H. Counseling and/or psychotherapy? Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 18, 667-669. (b) Rogers, C. R. Counseling and psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1942. Super, D. E. A theory of vocational development. Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 8, 185190. Tyler, Leona. Theoretical principles underlying the counseling process. I. counsel. Psychol., 1958, 5, 3-10. Tyler, Leona. Minimum change therapy. Personnel guid. ]., 1960, 38, 475-479. White, Mary A., & Harris, M. W. The school psychologist. New York: Harper & Row, 1961. Wrenn, C. G. The counselor in a changing world. Washington: Amer. Personnel Guid. Ass., 1962. Wrenn, G. G. What has happened to vocational counseling in our schools? Sch. Counselor, 1963, I0, 101-107.
SKOLEPSYKOLOGI The editorial office has received copies of a Danish periodical by this name, which h distributed to all school psychologists in Denmark (i.e. 250). The journal publishes articles of international educational interest in both the Danish and English language. Skolepsykologi is the third journal for school psychologists in Europe. There is one in Germany, Der Schul-psychologe, and another in France, Psychologic scholaire. The editor of Skolepsykologi is Dr. Arne Soegard, Skolepsykologisk Kontor, Lundtofte Skolestraede 2, Lyngby, Denmark.
29
PSYCHOTHERAPY IN THE SCHOOL C. H. Patterson
The early counseling programs in the public schools were almost entirely vocationally oriented. It is doubtful that most of what was done in these programs would qualify as counseling as it is defined today. In fact, counseling was not used in reference to such work, which was rather referred to as vocational guidance. Parsons, defining vocational guidance as "the choice of a vocation, adequate preparation for it, and the attainment of efficiency ana success," described the process to youth as including "(1) a clear understanding of yourself, your aptitudes, abilities, interests, ambitions, resources, limitations and their causes; (2) a knowledge of the requirements and conditions of success, advantages, compensations, opportunities, and prospects in different lines of work; (3) true reasoning on the relations of these two groups of facts" (Parsons, 1908, p. 5). While not all who worked with youth ignored affective aspects of vocational choice, it is apparent that the vocational guidance process was seen as a rational, cognitive one. This model was accepted and persisted. A committee of the National Education Association in 1918 defined vocational guidance as "a continuous process designed to help the individual choose, to plan his preparation for, to enter upon, and to make progress in an occupation" (National Education Association, 1918). This definition was adopted by the National Vocational Guidance Association in 1920, and it persisted, unchanged except for minor revisions in wording, for two decades or more. The nature of the helping process may be indicated by a variation of the statement given in 1924: "Vocational guidance is the giving of information, experience and a d v i c e . . . " (National Vocational Guidance Association, 1924). In the 1940's the counseling movement experienced the impact of a strong influence away from the logical, rational model. This was the rise of psychotherapy in psychology, stimulated by, if not beginning with, the development of the client-centered approach (Rogers, 1942). The development of interest in psychotherapy or therapeutic counseling overshadowed vocational counseling, to the point where it was feared by many that vocational counseling had disappeared. At the 1959 Convention of the American Personnel and Guidance Association, the topic for one of the meetings was entitled "What has happened to vocational guidance?" In a recent article, Wrenn (1963) has suggested reasons for the decrease in emphasis of vocational counseling in the The author C(ecil H(olden) Patterson, is chairman of the Division of Counseling and Guidance and professor of educational psychology at the University of Illlnols. He holds a PhD from the University of Minnesota.
15
school. Among them he lists "a kind of vocational snobbery" in which personal adjustment counseling is considered a higher form of activity. There have been developments in the field of vocational counseling in the last decade which have gone beyond the matching of the square peg in the square hole concept. The non-rational, or attitudinal, aspects of vocational development and choice have been recognized and studied, especially self attitudes or the self concept. This recognition is epitomized in Super's (1963) definition of vocational development as the developing and implementing of a self concept. Vocational counseling has thus been brought into relationship with the field of psychological counseling, therapeutic counseling or psychotherapy. The nature of the resulting approach to vocational counseling has been described elsewhere (Patterson, 1963a). What Is Counseling?
With the movement from vocational guidance to vocational counseling, questions arise regarding the differentiation between counseling, especially as it involves personal-social-emotional problems, and psychotherapy. The writer has taken the position (Patterson, 1963b) that counseling and psychotherapy are in all essential respects identical. First, the nature of the relationship which is considered basic in both counseling and psychotherapy is identical whether it is counseling or psychotherapy about which one is talking. Second, the process of counseling cannot be distinguished from the process of psychotherapy. Third, the methods or techniques are identical. Finally, in the matter of goals or outcomes there may appear to be essential differences, but again no distinction is possible. The objectives of counseling have been identified by the Committee on Definition, Division of Counseling Psychology, American Psychological Association (1956) as "to help individuals toward overcoming obstacles to their personal growth, wherever these may be encountered, and toward achieving optimum development of their personal resources." Most psychotherapists would accept these as goals of psychotherapy. Tyler (1958), attempting to differentiate counseling from psychotherapy, states that it is not the job of counselors "to remove physical and mental handicaps or to get rid of limitations." This is presumably the job of the therapist, which "is aimed essentially at change in developmental structures rather than at fulfillment." Counseling does not attempt to "repair damage done to (the client) in the past, to stimulate inadequate [sic] development of some stunted aspect of his personality," but is the process of "helping a person attain a clear sense of personal identity," along with acceptance of limitations. Again, many would accept these as goals of psychotherapy. Other attempts to differentiate counseling and psychotherapy in terms of goals involve 16
similar disagreements, overlapping and confusion. The general objectives of assisting individuals towards responsible independence, development of maximum potentials, or self-actuafizafion, would appear to be accepted as general goals by both those who call themselves counselors and those who call themselves psychotherapists. The differences between counseling and psychotherapy resolve themselves, then, into two, which are not essential in that they do not involve the nature of the relationship, the process, the methods or the goals. The first is the level of adjustment---or maladjustment--of the client. Where the client is seriously emotionally disturbed, the process is called psychotherapy, and is seen more as a remedial process, to bring the individual up to a normal level of functioning. Where the client is not seriously disturbed, but rather has the problems of the so-called "normal" person, then we speak of counseling and of developing the client's potential or of assisting him in actualizing his best self. In any case, however, the counselor or psychotherapist takes the client where he is and allows him to go as far as he can or desires to go. The second difference concerns the setting in which services are provided: if a medical setting, we use the term psychotherapy; if a nonmedical setting, then we speak of counseling. There is a further distinction which is sometimes made. This involves the nature or content of the problem which the client brings to the counselor. A distinction is sometimes attempted between reality oriented problems and those problems which inhere in the personality of the individual. Here again, of course, no line can be drawn. Educational and vocational problems have been considered to be reality oriented, but they need not be so. Cognitive, rational approaches have been considered to be appropriate methods for dealing with reality problems. But if there is concern only with the rational solution of reality problems, then this is not counseling, but teaching. Nor is the providing of information, which may be a part of counseling, by itself counseling. Counseling deals with the conative or affective realm, with attitudes, feelings and emotions. These are almost always present with problems of educational and vocational choice, and thus these problems must be dealt with through counseling or therapeutic methods. While we are not accustomed to think of vocational therapy, there is no essential difference between vocational counseling, which is concerned with attitudes and feelings as well as reality and rational factors in vocational decisions, and psychotherapy. We may thus define counseling o r psychotherapy as the relationship, and the process developing out of the relationship, between an individual or individuals who are not functioning adequately or up to their potentials, who face problems which they feel unable to resolve 17
longer is restricted to the teaching of the three R's, but is concerned with the preparation of the young for making a living and for functioning as responsible citizens in a democracy. For effective, mature, responsible functioning as a citizen, it may be maintained that the individual must be relatively free from the handicap of emotional disturbances, and that the school has some responsibility to this end. If it is argued that this goes beyond the assignment of the school, it may be pointed out that the school, as the servant of society, may be assigned whatever functions society desires it to perform. There is nothing preordained about the function of "the school. The introduction of pupil personnel services in our schools is the result of the expression of the desires of parents and the community as much as the decision of professional educators. The public in many instances has exerted pressure for more counseling and other psychological services in the school. Where they desire such services, and are wilting to pay for them through taxes for the school, they should be entitled to receive them. There is sometimes opposition by some groups to the providing of treatment by a public institution, on the basis that it leads to socialized medicine. Thus, the schools do not provide medical treatment, and, since psychotherapy is considered by some as a form of medical treatment, it is contended that it should not be provided in the schools. But treatment is provided by other institutions of society such as mental hospitals, schools for the retarded, and by community mental health clinics supported in part by taxes. Interestingly enough, the providing of speech therapy by the schools has never been questioned. Landy and Scanlon (1962) note that the development of guidance services in the school has been focused upon the normal or relatively healthy child, with limitation of the role of the school to identification and referral of the abnormal child. Thus, they note, "The idea of therapeutically oriented services might well be viewed as a function that is not appropriate to the school. This position can be understood historically, but this does not mean that the position is justifiable in terms of the individual child who has a need for collaborative treatment service." It should be noted, however, that these authors do not advocate psychotherapy in the school. They suggest that the school provide "relationship counseling," which is "more than supportive and leads to some insight with actual re-educative goals," whereas psychotherapy works towards "reconstructive goals." They recognize the difficulty of drawing a hard and fast line between the two, which is probably the reason for the problems that they find in attempting to integrate the school's counseling with psychotherapy provided by outside sources. Society may of course decide that counseling and psychotherapy should be provided by other agencies or institutions. In France voca1?
alone, and a trained professional who provides the kind of relationship in which the individual is able to change in ways which lead to the development of his potentials and the ability to resolve his problems. Notice that we are not concerned here with whether there is a "basic" change in personality "structure" (Tyler, 1958, 1960), whatever that is. Attitudes, feelings, interests, goals, self-esteem, and related behaviors are considered to be basic elements of personality, and it is these which are changed in counseling or psychotherajpy.
Should the Schools Provide Counseling? During the period of the development of counseling, education has progressed from the essentialist position of concern only with the intellect. There was first recognition of the concept of mens sana in corpora sano, leading to concern of the school with the physical condition of the child. This was followed by interest in the social conditions of home life as a factor in the child's readiness to learn. Then the importance of psychological or emotional influences in learning received attention. So there is now recognition that the whole child comes to school, and thus the school is interested in the physical, social and emotional characteristics of the child as well as his intelligence. But the question has been, how far does, or should, the school go in its concern about the whole child? What services should the school provide to remedy deficiencies in the various areas? In the physical area, the school does not provide medical care or treatment. It is thus concluded that the school should not provide counseling or psychotherapy. Vocational counseling, yes, but therapeutic or personal counseling, no. In a recent workshop conducted by the writer for school counselors on counseling theory and practice, a school administrator, after visiting one of the sessions, remarked "I hope the), don't think they are going to do psychotherapy." But if, as has been suggested above, there is no essential difference between counseling and psychotherapy, and if, further, vocational counseling is counseling and is concerned with affecfive and attitudinal factors, can the schools say they are not concerned with psychotherapy? What is the responsibility of the school for the personal-social-emotional development of the student? To quote Allinsmith, (1962, p. 29): "Is it to be the obligation of schools to aid in the development of healthy personalities, and, if so, are teachers or other school personnel such as guidance specialists the ones to have responsibility?" The function of the school in society is a broad one--the preparation of the young for taking their places in society as informed, responsible adults. The performance of this function has broadened considerably, and although there have been some who have objected, the school no 18
who are competent as counselors, rather than simply testers and information givers. A second objection is the cost; the extension of counseling services to include help with personal-social-emotional problems would require many more counselors and increase the cost of pupil personnel services in schools. This of course is true. But failure to provide such services in our schools, from the earliest grades, will add indirectly to the costs of other functions of the school, as well as to the costs to society, which, if it doesn't provide such services outside the school will bear the later costs of emotionally disturbed citizens. And of course, the maintenance of community clinics is also paid for by the community. It would appear in summary that the schools can provide broad counseling services, and that there are good reasons why they should provide such services. There are of course some problems involved in doing so. These will be discussed in terms of questions or issues. Some Questions 1. Who does counseling in the school? The days when the teacher was seen as a part-time counselor are past. It appears that in general the schools are accepting counseling as a separate function from teaching, requiring special preparation and training. With the acceptance of counseling as a function of the school, however, the question arises as to who should perform this function. The school counselor is seen by many as the appropriate person. However, there are some who feel that the counselor has so many other duties that he has no time for counseling. Another aspect of the problem of who should do counseling relates to the overlap of functions of the counselor, the psychologist and the school social worker or visiting teacher. The social worker may feel that personal counseling is casework, and thus a social work responsibility. The psychologist may see personal counseling as psychotherapy, and thus to be performed by a psychologist. The point of view of the writer on this question is that counseling or psychotherapy is not the monopoly of any single group, but may be performed by members of various professions, including psychology, medicine or psychiatry, social work, sociology and the ministry, providing they have had adequate education and preparation. In the area of human behavior, there will be an inevitable but not necessarily undesirable overlap. Whether school psychologists should do counseling or psychotherapy has been a matter for considerable discussion. Psychologists could not agree upon this question at the Thayer conference on school psychology (Cutts, 1955). There are two reason why it appears that we cannot look to school psychologists for providing adequate counseling services. First, there are not enough of them. The schools are far from the 21
tional counseling is provided by the central government outside the schools. There are a number of reasons, however, for counseling services being offered in the school. In the first place, the school has the child for a greater proportion of his daily life, and for a longer period of time, than any other institution. Thus the child is accessible, and is well known by the school personnel. It would appear to be convenient and efficient, in terms of time and transportation, to provide counseling services in the school setting. Second, there are inadequate community counseling services. Not only are there waiting lists, but such agencies must limit their services to those who are more seriously disturbed. There are many children and youth who need more help with personal problems than can be provided by parents or teachers, but who do not require the services of a psychiatrist. Not all students with any degree of emotional disturbance can or should be referred for psychiatric help. Even if such services were plentiful and easily available, there is still some stigma attached to seeing a psychologist or psychiatrist, and students and parents are often reluctant to accept such services. Third, if the school is to oiler adequate vocational counseling services it can and should provide personal counseling services. It is not possible to separate vocational problems from personal problems. Fourth, "the inclusion of mental health services within a school in conjunction with the physical health facilities offer the possible advantage to a student of disguising from others the fact that a consultation is about emotional illness. Having the services at school may make it easier for parents to seek advice, since some may feel less strange in going to a school for help than to a clinic . . . . Many workers believe that to be effective a clinician whose job it is to aid students must spend his working hours within the social system of the school in order to have the necessary understanding to capitalize both diagnostically and therapeutically upon the situation as it exists uniquely in each institution" (Allinsmith & Goethals, 1962, pp. 127-128). There are some practical reasons advanced against the school offering such counseling services. The first reduces to the fact that school personnel, including those currently functioning as counselors in the school, are not competent to engage in therapeutic or personal counseling and therefore should not attempt it (Moore, 1961). This may be the case. No one would advocate staff members perfomaing functions for which they are not prepared. But if so-called counselors are not prepared for working with students with personal-sodal-emotional problems, then they are not prepared for working with students with vocational problems. Counselor education programs are currently training counselors 20
Currently, perhaps in part reflecting interest an prevention of emotional disturbance, and in part the result of inadequate numbers of counselors, there has been some question about the counselor working with students with problems. This is reflected in the Wrenn report (1962), which recommends that counselors not devote their major time "to crisis situations in the lives of the relatively few," (p. 73) but should "place the focus upon the developmental and preventive rather than upon the curative and remedial." (p. 183) There are a number of aspects of_this question which might be pursued, and only brief comments on a few of them can be made here. First, there are more than a few students who, at some time or other, have problems which to them are serious or crisis problems and thus are suitable for counseling. Second, there is no sharp line between the preventive and curative or remedial. What is curative or remedial in terms of an existing situation is preventive for the future. Thus counseling for current problems in the elementary school may be preventive of problems at the secondary school level. Third, for the professionally trained counselor to withhold his services from students who have real problems, and give his time to the normal students who have no serious problems, is in my opinion to be criminally negligent and unethical. Prevention is of course desirable, but it will be a long time in the future before prevention of problems will be successful, even if it is possible or desirable to prevent all problems. In the meantime, as Arbuckle (1962b) points out, "We may stress the need to take action so that future accidents will not occur, but we cannot in the meantime ignore the victims of the latest accidents." However much preventive action (or research aimed at prevention) is desirable, help to those who currently need it is also justified and an obligation of society. It is unfortunate that we do not--nor perhaps will never--have adequate manpower for both research directed toward prevention and attempts to remedy or cure. But even if we concede that the only real solution to emotional disturbance is through prevention, it is not justified, as Albee (1963) proposes, to attempt to force or direct all our efforts toward prevention and neglect treatment. Not only is concern for those who are suffering necessary, but the rights of those who would prefer to give their time and lives to treatment or attempts to cure must be respected. The solution to the problem is more manpower, not neglecting an aspect of the problem.
3. What is the preparation [or counseling in the schools? Preparation for counseling has been a concern for a number of years. Various groups and organizations have made recommendations and issued statements. In 1949, eight organizations cooperated in outlining a program of counselor preparation (Miller, 1949). In the same year the recom23
recommended standards for psychological services, which vary from one psychologist for every 1000 pupils to one for every 3,000 (Cutts, 1955, p. 4). The psychologist is usually assigned to several schools, which he serves on an itinerant basis. Many schools have no psychological services. As Gray (1963, p. 110) notes, "The manpower situation is the most cogent argument against engaging in psychotherapy. There are few school systems blessed with sufficient personnel and other auxiliary services for psychotherapy to be feasible as an activity for its psychologists." A second reason is that counseling or psychotherapy is not a function which is accepted by the school psychologist as a main duty, and, related to this, is not a function for which he is usually adequately trained. "The school psychologist is not in the school for the primary purpose of rendering psychotherapy" (White & Harris, 1961, p. 278). Thus, the school psychologist is not prepared to accept counseling as his lesponsibility. The situation in regard to the school social worker or visiting teacher is similar. They are in short supply, especially at the secondary school level. And although one of their functions is casework with individual children, this is not a major function, or one for which they' have adequate time. It would appear that the major source of counseling service must be the school counselor. While they are also in short supply, this situation is being remedied. While it is also true that, for various reasons, school counselors have often done little counseling, it is now being accepted that their major role is counseling, and that they have a responsibility for working with students with personal problems as well as with students with educational and vocational problems. In line with this acceptance of the function of counseling, the education of counselors is moving towards adequate preparation for personal counseling. It appears that we can look in the future to the qualified school counselor as the source of counseling services. 2. What is the role and [unction o[ the school counselor? If the counselor is to engage in counseling, both educational-vocational and personal counseling, how does this affect the concept of the school counselor? It is apparent that, as suggested above, the concept of the school counselor is changing. There has been considerable interest and concern about the role and function of the school counselor. The American School Counselor Association has published a tentative statement on the role and function of the school counselor (American School Counselor Association, 1963). The counseling function is emphasized as a major function of the school counselor, both in terms of its importance and the proportion of time devoted to it. 22
mendations of a committee of the National Association of Guidance Supervisors and Counselor Trainers (1949) were published by the U. S. Office of Education. In the next few years a number of other reports and recommendations were published (Institute for Human Adjnstment, 1950, American Psychological Association, 1955, American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1958, American Assodation for the Advancement of Science, 1958). In addition there have been many articles by individuals, too numerous to cite. More recently there has been a statement by the Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association (1962) on the Scope and Standards of Preparation in Psychology for School Counselors, a tentative policy statement by the American Personnel and Guidance Association (1961), and the so-called Wrenn Report of the Commission on Guidance in American Schools (Wrenn, 1962). While there are differences among the recommendations, there has been substantial agreement on the basic fundamentals. On the basis of discussion and conferences (American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1962) the 1961 APGA Policy Statement has been revised (American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1964) and the resulting recommendations or standards represent the concensus of counselor educators and other professional persons about the preparation of counselors. The Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (1964) has prepared a set of standards for counselor education in the preparation of secondary school counselors. Counselors prepared in line with these standards will be qualified to engage in therapeutic counseling with students. On the basis of these statements, it appears that there is agreement that adequate preparation for counseling requires two academic years of study. It is therefore to be expected that counselor education institutions will move toward the development of two year programs of counselor preparation. There will be emphasis upon the desirability of full-time training in a program of patterned sequences of courses. Second, the professional training of counselors, while not ordinarily conducted in a psychology department, will be psychological in nature. Students will be exposed to work in human development and behavior in its normal and abnormal aspects, and to methods and techniques of evaluation of human performance and potential by psychological means, including tests and their statistical basis. While it is important that the individual person be seen in relation to his social and cultural background, it will in general be expected that the student coming for graduate work in counseling will have had a grounding in the behavioral and social sciences and the humanities, so that it will not be necessary to include elementary or introductory training in these areas as part of the graduate program. The study of the nature of the social, economic and occupational world to b e faced 24
by the client, or student, will of course be included as part of the education of the counselor. Related to the work in the basic science of psychology will be work in the theory and practice of counseling, including group counseling. Third, supervised experience in counseling will be an important part of the training of the counselor. In addition, the counselor must be enabled to acquire an understanding of education and the school setting. Students who have been teachers will have developed this understanding. But while there are still some who insist that this understanding must be obtained through preparation for and experience in teaching, it is being recognized that this is not the only way. The substitution of internship in the school setting is proposed as an alternative to teacher preparation and teaching experience. This represents a recognition that counseling is a separate profession from teaching, and that it is unreasonable to require that a person be trained in another profession before being permitted to function as a counselor in a school. The acceptance of counseling as being different from teaching, and as a full-time profession, will eliminate the use of the counselor as a part-time teacher, and thus eliminate any practical basis for the requirement that he be a teacher. 4. How [ar does the counselor go? One of the concerns of those who question the place of counseling in the school is to what extent the counselor should become involved in intensive or extensive relationships with a student-client. With how severely disturbed students does the counselor work? It is not possible to define sharply the limits of counseling in the schools. At one extreme, the counselor cannot spend all his time working with the so-called "normal" student who has no problem. As Arbuckle (1962a, p. 394) points out, "The counselor should be prepared to work with disturbed children, and if he must refer a child who mentions that he feels like kilting his mother, or that he's sick of living in the same house with his mother, then he should not be working as a counselor." On the other hand, he does not necessarily work with a child whose behavior is so disturbed that he cannot be tolerated in the school, nor even with any child who is acceptable in the school. Referrals will be made at times, although "if the school counseling services are as they should be very few children will ever be referred (to a mental health clinic) since the professional school counselors will be able to work with the vast majority of the more disturbed children" (Arbuckle, 1962a, pp. 393-394). There will be differences among schools in the kinds and degrees of disturbed behavior with which the counselors will deal. These differences will depend upon a number of factors. One will be the competence and confidence of the counselor. Another will be the time that he has available. Another will be the nature and extent of other resources in the school and the community. The question of when and 25
whom to refer is a difficult one. The more training the counselor has, and the more competent he is, the better he will be able to recognize his limitations and the need for referral. It is desirable that the counselor have psychiatric consultation available, and certainly medical consultation should be available. In terms of the intensity of the counselor's work with a student, it would not seem to be unreasonable to expect that he could engage in counseling students over a period of a semester or a year, or even longer, on a weekly or even twice weekly bails where this was considered desirable.
Some Problems in Counseling in Schools There are a number of problems in counseling which are related either to the school setting itself or to the age level of counselees. Space is lacking to consider these in detail. Some of them are dealt with in another place (Patterson, 1962). 1. Students, especially younger children, may be relatively nonverbal. A purely verbal type of counseling may be inadequate with some students. Thus, particularly at the elementary school level, there should be facilities for play therapy. This also means that elementary school counselors especially should have training in play therapy. 2. It is well known that children, and adolescents especially, are reluctant to admit to having problems, or to seek help for them, or to accept help when it is offered. There are a number of reasons for this attitude. Students do not want their peers to know they have problems or are seeing a counselor. They do not always trust adults, who are the only source of help. And in their desire for independence they may resist help and insist on working out their problems alone. 3. On the other hand, there are many students whose dependence constitutes a problem for approaches to counseling which require that the counselee take responsibility for the content of the counseling relationship and which have as goals responsibility and independence in the individual. It is a paradox of our educational system that, while lip service is given to the development of independence as one of its goals, the natural result of much of the practice in education leads to the development of dependence in students. Some have suggested (see Patterson, 1962) that students who are dependent need a counseling relationship in which they can be dependent upon the counselor. A more positive and effective approach, however, is to recognize the desire for dependence, but not to allow the student to develop a dependency relationship in counseling. Otherwise, it would seem that we would be abandoning one of the goals of counseling before beginning the relationship. It is recognized that dependent cfients do constitute a difficult problem for counselors who want to help them overcome their dependence. 26
4. The school is often, or may be seen by students as, an authoritarian environment, controlled by adults. A counselor working in this situation may have a difficult time with students who perceive him as part of the authoritarian atmosphere. Such students may be submiss i v e - r a t h e r than dependent--and not able or willing to accept the non-authoritarian counseling relationship. Perhaps a part of this aspect of the problem of counseling in schools is the lack of trust and confidence students often have which leads to reluctance to discuss personal problems with counselors. It is well known among students that records are kept on them, that staff meetings are devoted to discussion of them, and that information about them circulates among the staff. It is perhaps no wonder then that they doubt the confidentiality of the counseling relationship. So-called counselors have too often been guilty of violating confidentiality in the school situation. It is to be hoped, and expected, that as counselors become professionally trained this problem will be eliminated. 5. There are a number of studies (Patterson, 1962) which indicate that students do not perceive the counselor as a source of help with problems. Instead they perceive him as a special teacher, administrator, or source of information. There is no doubt that in many instances the perceptions of students are correct, since the counselor is not a counselor in the professional sense but in name only. On the other hand, a counselor will not be perceived as a source of help with problems--educational, vocational, social, personal or emotional--unless efforts are made to inform students of the nature of the counseling services which are available. Experience indicates that when a professionally competent counselor makes clearly known the nature of his services, students do bring their personal problems to him. 6. It is still the case that even in schools where counseling is accepted and valued, the facilities which the counselor has are inadequate. Private sound-proof offices, adequate in size and ventilation, are a necessity for counseling, yet they are generally lacking. Many administrators, though claiming that they support counseling, do not recognize or accept the requirements in terms of physical facilities and equipment for professional counseling. There is still the misconception that the counselor who goes out and throws the ball around with students is a better counselor than the counselor who spends 45-50 minutes with a student behind a closed door. This misconception is fostered by a recent film which was prepared with the aid of a national advisory committee which included several prominent individuals in the counseling field? 1ChaUenge o[ Change: The Case [or Counselors. Available from NET Film
Service, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. 27
Summary Counseling a n d psychotherapy are two terms for the same function; there is no essential difference in the nature of the relationship, the process, the methods a n d techniques, the purposes or goals, or the results. Vocational counseling is not a different kind or level of counseling, requiring less background or preparation. If anything, preparation for vocational counseling requires more time t h a n does preparation for therapeutic or personal c o u n s e l i n g - - t h e f o r m e r includes the latter. Therefore, if counseling has a place in our schools, it cannot be limited to vocational counseling. I t appears t h a t there is a need or place for counseling and counselors in our schools, a n d that recognition a n d acceptance of this need is growing. T h e school has the opportunity, a n d the responsibility, for providing counseling, broadly conceived, to its students. T h e staff m e m b e r w h o has been designated as a school counselor appears to be the logical person to provide counseling services. While it is true that in the past the school counselor has not in fact been a counselor, nor adequately prepared to function as a counselor, counseling is presently accepted as the m a j o r function of the school counselor, a n d his preparation is becoming essentially preparation for performing the counseling function. While there are some who resist this trend, it appears to be well established.
References Albee, G. American psychology in the sixties. Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 18, 90-95. Allinsmith, W., & Goethals, G. W. The role of the school in mental health. Joint Commission on Mental Illness and Health, No. 7. New York: Basic Books, 1962. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Identification and guidance of able students. Washington: Author, 1958. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Committee on Professional Training, Licensing, and Certification. Professional training, licensing, and certification. Personnel guid. ]., 1958, 37, 162-166. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Standards for the preparation of school counselors. Personnel guid. ]., 1961, 40, 402-407. American Personnel and Guidance Association. Counselor education: a progress report on standards. Washington: Author, 1962. American Personnel and Guidance Association. The counselor: professional preparation and role: a statement of policy. Personnel guid. ]., 1964, 42, 536-541. American Psychological Association. Committee on Subdoctoral Education, Education and Training Board. The training of technical workers in psychology at the subdoctoral level. Amer. Psychologist, 1955, I0, 279-282. American Psychological Association. Division of Counseling Psychology, Committee on Definition. Counseling psychology as a specialty. Amer. Psychologist. 1956, 11, 282-285. American Psychological Association. Division of Counseling Psychology. The scope and standards of preparation in psychology for school counselors. Amer. Psychologist, 1962, 17, 149-152. American School Counselor Association. Tentative statement of policy for secondary school counselors. Personnel guid. ]., 1963, 42, 194-198. Arbuckle, D. S. Pupil personnel services in American schools. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1962. (a)
28
Arbuckle, D. S. A semantic excursion. Personnel guid. 1., 1962, 41, 64-66. (b) Association for Counselor Education and Supervision. Standards for counselor education in the preparation of secondary school counselors. Personnel guid. 1., 1964, 42, 1061-1073. Cutts, Norma (Ed.) School psychologist at mid-century. Washington: Amer. Psyrhol. Ass., 1955. Gray Susan. The psychologist in the schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963. Institute for Human Adjustment. Training psychological counselors. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Univer. Mich. Press, 1950.
Land)', E., & Scanlon, E. Relationship between school guidance and psychotherapy for adolescents. Amsr. I. Orthopsychiat., 1962, 32, 682-690. Miller, L. M. (Ed.) Counselor preparation.Washington: Nat. Voc. Guid. Ass., 1949. Moore, G. A. A negative view toward therapeutic counseling in the pupil schools. Counsel. Ed. Buparvis. t 1961, 1, 60-68. "
National Association of Gmdance Supervisors and Counselor Trainers, Committee on Duties, Standards and Qualifications. Duties, standards and qualifications o[ counselors. W~ahlngton: U. S. Office of Ed., 1949. National Education Association, Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education, Committee on Vocational Guidance. Vocational guidance in secondary education. Washington: U. S. Govern. Printing Office, 1918. National Vocational Guidance Auociation. Principles of vocational guidance. Cambridge, Mass.: Bur. Voc. Guid., Grad. Sch. Ed. Harvard Univer., 1924. Parsons, F. Choosing tz vocation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1908. Patterson, C. H. Counseling and guidance in schools: A /irst course. New York: Harper & Row, 1962, Chap. 13. Patterson, C. H. Counseling, self-clarification and the helping relationship. In H. Borrow (Ed.) Man in ~ world at work. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1963. (a) Patterson, C. H. Counseling and/or psychotherapy? Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 18, 667-669. (b) Rogers, C. R. Counseling and psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1942. Super, D. E. A theory of vocational development. Amer. Psychologist, 1963, 8, 185190. Tyler, Leona. Theoretical principles underlying the counseling process. I. counsel. Psychol., 1958, 5, 3-10. Tyler, Leona. Minimum change therapy. Personnel guid. ]., 1960, 38, 475-479. White, Mary A., & Harris, M. W. The school psychologist. New York: Harper & Row, 1961. Wrenn, C. G. The counselor in a changing world. Washington: Amer. Personnel Guid. Ass., 1962. Wrenn, G. G. What has happened to vocational counseling in our schools? Sch. Counselor, 1963, I0, 101-107.
SKOLEPSYKOLOGI The editorial office has received copies of a Danish periodical by this name, which h distributed to all school psychologists in Denmark (i.e. 250). The journal publishes articles of international educational interest in both the Danish and English language. Skolepsykologi is the third journal for school psychologists in Europe. There is one in Germany, Der Schul-psychologe, and another in France, Psychologic scholaire. The editor of Skolepsykologi is Dr. Arne Soegard, Skolepsykologisk Kontor, Lundtofte Skolestraede 2, Lyngby, Denmark.
29