University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Secondary school counselor-principal relationships: impact on counselor accountability

(USC Thesis Other)

Secondary school counselor-principal relationships: impact on counselor accountability

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 1
SECONDARY SCHOOL COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS:
IMPACT ON COUNSELOR ACCOUNTABILITY
by
Narineh Makijan
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2014
Copyright 2014 Narineh Makijan
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my amazing sons, Leon and Liam; they were both
my motivation and drive to start the program and it is because of them that I had the
confidence and strength to complete the program. They are the reason I completed this
program, and I will forever be grateful.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 3
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I thank my husband, Hamlet, for providing guidance and
support to complete my journey. As my soul mate, best friend, and confidant, he has been
with me every step of the way. He encouraged me and guided me through difficult times.
I am forever indebted to him for taking the responsibility to care for our boys while I
completed the program. He is an amazing husband and partner and I am forever grateful.
My sister Selineh and my parents, Albert and Sonik, have always supported me in
my endeavors. I thank Selineh for being there for me, believing in me, and listening when
I needed her most. I thank mom and dad for encouraging me and for supporting me to
accomplish my goals.
My dissertation chair, Dr. Rudy Castruita, has given continuous support,
guidance, assistance, and dedication throughout the dissertation process. I am
wholeheartedly thankful for the encouragement and leadership he has provided from start
to completion.
I acknowledge and thank Dr. Pedro Garcia and Dr. Paul Jimenez, dissertation
committee members, for their continuous support and encouragement. As a leader and
professor, Dr. Garcia provided insight, experience, and preparation needed to complete
this dissertation. I am grateful for his kindness, thoughtfulness, and time. Dr. Jimenez, an
amazing mentor and leader, guided me graciously with insightfulness for excellence and
dedication. I appreciate the encouragement, advice, and thoughtfulness.
Principals and counselors generously spent their time in the interview process.
The school community is lucky to have them as advocates for students; they serve them
well.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 9
The High School Principal 11
The High School Counselor 11
Statement of the Problem 13
Purpose of the Study 13
Research Questions 14
Significance of the Study 14
Assumptions 15
Delimitations 15
Limitations 16
Definition of Terms 16
Organization of the Dissertation 17

Chapter Two: Review of Literature 18
Introduction 18
ASCA National Standards and Model 19
Theoretical Framework 20
Counselor Role Identity: Views of the Principal and School Counselor 22
Principals’ Perceptions of School Counselors’ Implementation of the
ASCA Model 24
School Counselors’ Perceptions of Counselors’ Roles and Activities 26
Leadership and Accountability Among Professional School Counselors 29
Chapter Summary 33

Chapter Three: Methodology 35
Restatement of the Problem 35
Restatement of the Purpose 35
Research Design 36
Participants and Setting 37
Instrumentation 38
Data Collection 39
Data Analysis 40
Ethical Considerations 41
Chapter Summary 41

Chapter Four: The Findings 42
Participants in the Study 43
Demographics of Survey Participants 43
Demographics of Interview Participants 44
Results 47
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 5
Research Question 1 47
Frequent communication 48
Personal touch/communication 49
Support and direction 49
Use of data 51
Summary 52
Research Question 2 54
Research Question 3 57
Discussion 61
Summary of the Findings 65
Chapter Summary 70

Chapter Five: Conclusions 71
Background and Purpose of the Study 71
Summary of Findings 72
Research Question 1 72
Frequent communication 72
Use of personal touch/open communication 73
Providing support and direction 73
Research Question 2 74
Career/college counseling 74
Academic guidance 75
Social-emotional support 75
Communication and making connections 76
Research Question 3 76
Evaluation 77
Frequent meetings/communication 77
Monitoring 77
Implications for Practice 78
Recommendations for Future Research 79
Conclusion 80

References 82
Appendices
Appendix A: Invitation to Participate 88
Appendix B: Survey 89
Appendix C: Consent Form 93
Appendix D: Pairing of the Variables to the Survey Items 94
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Gender Distribution of Respondents 43
Table 2: Distribution of Ages of Respondents 43
Table 3: Respondents’ Years of Experience in Education 44
Table 4: Demographics of Interviewees 46
Table 5: Themes and Categories of Participants’ Views of Counselor Roles 58
Table 6: Themes and Categories of Participants’ Views on Accountability 62
Table 7: Comparison of Principals’ and Counselors’ Mean Response
Scores on Survey Items 64
Table 8: Bivariate Correlations Between Variables 67
Table 9: Regression Analysis Predicting Counseling Program Quality 68
Table 10: Regression Analysis Predicting Service Delivery (Career, Social,
College) 69
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 7
Abstract
The purposes of this study were (a) to understand the counselor-principal
relationship and its impact on development and implementation of a comprehensive
counseling program to increase student success, and (b) to explore how the collaborative
relationship of counselors and principals affects counselors’ effectiveness in
implementing a comprehensive school counseling program that demonstrates counselors’
accountability for student success. Three research questions guided the study: (a) What
strategies do principals utilize to help counselors execute a successful counseling
program? (b) How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the
counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at the school site? and (c)
What key elements of the principal-counselor relationship influence counselor
accountability reform for a successful American School Counselor Association (ASCA)-
based counseling program? In a mixed-methods approach, qualitative data came from
responses to an open-ended survey by 31 high school principals and 33 high school
counselors. Quantitative data came from interviews with 2 high school principals and 3
high school counselors. Data showed that, while participant counselors and principals
communicated frequently and had consistent collaboration through weekly or biweekly
meetings that held counselors accountable, their actions did create an ASCA-based
counseling program to increase student success. Results indicated that counseling
program quality is significantly predicted by three variables: involving counselors,
noncounseling duties (inverse relationship), and understanding of ASCA standards and
domains. Service delivery resulting in an ASCA-based model (academic, personal/social,
career) was not significantly predicted by any of the variables. The principals focused on
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 8
communication with counseling staff and close relationships to ensure accountability of
counselors to influence student achievement positively. Development and
implementation of an ASCA-based comprehensive counseling program that addresses the
academic, personal/social and college/career counseling domains were not encouraged by
principals and counselors at the high schools in this study. Overall, the study provides
hope that principals can play a valuable role in improving accountability among their
counseling staff to create an ASCA-based comprehensive school counseling program.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides an introduction to this study on the principal-counselor
relationship and its impact on accountability. The chapter begins with the background of
the study, followed by the statement of the problem, research questions, and purpose and
significance of the study. Then the assumptions, delimitations, limitations, and definition
of terms are provided, and the chapter concludes with a presentation of the organization
of the dissertation.
Background of the Problem
Professional school counselors play an important role in helping students to
succeed (Dahir & Stone, 2009). School counselors are licensed and have earned a
master’s degree, as well as a pupil personnel services credential. The school counselor’s
role is to address students’ academic, personal/social, and career development needs by
developing, enhancing, and promoting a comprehensive school counseling program
(Clemons, Milsom, & Cashwell, 2009; Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008; Wilkerson, 2010).
Through their leadership and advocacy, counselors are collaborators and change agents to
ensure equity and access for all students (American School Counselor Association
[ASCA], 2005).
Twenty-first-century educators, including teachers, administrators, and
counselors, are subject to high-stakes accountability due to the No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001 (NCLB), and all professionals are expected to contribute to improving school
achievement. The counseling profession has no specific mandates through NCLB, and,
due to budget constraints, the profession does not have adequate resources (Dahir &
Stone, 2009). Further, the principal and district do not have a clear sense of the role and
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 10
function of the counseling profession. For many years, a major issue of the counseling
profession has been the discrepancy between what school counselors do and what is
considered the best practice regarding counselors’ role and accountability (Hatch &
Chen-Hayes, 2008; Scarborough & Culbreth, 2008).
Historically, boards of education have had differing understandings of what the
counselor’s job entails. To establish guidelines and to enhance the school counselor’s
role, ASCA has developed a code of ethics and a comprehensive set of expectations
(Monteiro-Leitner, Asner-Self, Milde, Leitner, & Skelton, 2006). The three domains
established by ASCA are (a) academic development, (b) career development, and (c)
personal/social development. Within each of the three domains are three standards, which
are divided into competencies that students should know as a result of a school
counseling program (Perusse, Goodnough, Donegan, & Jones, 2004).
School counselors are integral to student success. Although the role of school
counselors has not been addressed by school reform efforts and accountability mandates
for student success, it is time to include counselors as part of the reform to ensure student
success (House & Hayes, 2002). House and Hayes explained the need for counselors to
work as leaders and advocates to remove the systematic barriers that affect student
success. School counselors, through collaboration with principals and school community,
as well as through leadership and advocacy, can effectively use a data-driven counseling
program to minimize barriers to and increase opportunities for student success (House &
Hayes, 2002).
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 11
The High School Principal
ASCA developed standards that shape the role of the school counselor on national
and state levels. In this regard, it is important to identify the school principal who, at a
local level, determines the role of the school counselor. In secondary schools, principals
are the school leaders, with the authority and power to initiate and implement the
direction of the school’s counseling program (Dollarhide, Smith, & Lemberger, 2007).
Dahir (2004) stated that both ASCA and the National Association of Secondary
School Principals (NASSP) found that the success of a counseling program is dependent
on the principal’s understanding and support of the counseling profession at the school-
site level. Dollarhide et al. (2007) explained that, as school counselors work to implement
the ASCA National Model at their school site, the principals have the power to structure
the timing and the results of the counselors’ efforts. Dollarhide et al. identified the
important characteristics that principals desire in school counselors: being
communicative, systematic, and student-focused, as well as willing and able to take on
leadership roles in the school. A principal who values counselors looks for what the
counselors add to the school site with regard to impact on parents, students, teachers,
administrators, and the entire school community (Dollarhide et al., 2007).
The High School Counselor
Historically, the counseling profession has struggled to identify its role in school
reform. With the ASCA national standards, the counselor’s role has shifted to an
advocate for the profession and for the students. Niebuhr and Niebuhr (1999) found that
counselors perceived their role and what they could or could not do based on their
relationship with the principal. The researchers explained that counselors focus most of
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 12
their time and energy on trying to explain and demonstrate the importance of the role of
the counselor rather than on developing a comprehensive counseling program. Further,
counselors, in an effort to avoid performing their assigned noncounseling duties,
sometimes distance themselves from the principal by working independently (Niebuhr &
Niebuhr, 1999).
As 21st-century leaders, counselors are part of a paradigm shift with regard to
their role. The counseling profession has shifted from service provider to full partner in
the education system, as change agents and advocates for all students, the school
community, and the counseling profession (Dollarhide, 2003). Due to omission of a
mandate for counselors in school reform efforts, ASCA created national standards and
domains for the counseling profession (Perusse et al., 2004). Because school counselors
can have an impact on student achievement, they are important members of school
communities (Bickmore & Curry, 2013). Bickmore and Curry stated that school
counselors are among the few professionals who have been trained in conflict resolution,
communication, positive behavior support, and parent engagement, as well as college and
career readiness.
Counselors and principals have different perceptions and ideals with regard to the
amount of time that counselors should spend, versus how much they actually spend, on
school counseling. Monteiro-Leitner et al. (2006) stated that these differing perceptions
or role confusion can be traced to the early 1950s and remain an issue. This role
confusion is based on three factors: (a) failure of supervisors and school officials to
understand or agree on the role of counselors, (b) power differences among school
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 13
officials that make it difficult for counselors to institutionalize their role, and (c) student
factors, such as socioeconomic status and community.
Statement of the Problem
To increase student achievement, school counselors should spend the majority of
their time in providing direct services to students in four essential domains, as set forth by
ASCA (2005): academic, personal/social, career, and college. Because school principals
often have little or no training with regard to the role of the school counselor and assign
duties and activities that are not counseling related, school counselors face challenges in
assisting students in these four domains (Dahir, 2004; Monteiro-Leitner et al., 2006;
Perusse et al., 2004). These noncounseling duties, such as scheduling, discipline, clerical
work, and testing, consume the school counselors’ time and leave little time to address
the four domains (Perusse et al., 2004) or to develop a school counseling program and
show accountability, as encouraged by the ASCA National Model. To develop such a
program, show accountability, and address the four student domains, school counselors
need the understanding and support of the school principal. Thus, the relationship
between the counselor and principal has an impact on school counselors’ ability to carry
out their responsibilities.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to improve understanding of the counselor-
principal relationship and its impact on the development and implementation of a
comprehensive counseling program that increases student success. An additional purpose
was to provide an exploration of how the collaborative relationship of counselors and
principals affects counselors’ effectiveness in implementing a comprehensive school
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 14
counseling program that demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success. The
study was designed to determine whether counselors and principals working
collaboratively to create a data-driven, ASCA standards-based comprehensive program
leads to counselor accountability for student success.
Research Questions
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What strategies do principals utilize to help counselors execute a successful
counseling program?
2. How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the
counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at their school site?
3. What key elements of the principal-counselor relationship influence counselor
accountability for a successful ASCA-based counseling program?
Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is that it adds to the body of scholarly literature on
the school counseling profession by identifying how counselor-principal relationships
contribute to counselor effectiveness, accountability, and implementation of an ASCA-
based counseling program. The results of this study provide guidance to current
principals and counselors for planning and implementing an effective comprehensive
counseling program that will have an impact on student achievement. An understanding
of how the principal and counselor collaborate to create a program can provide a
foundation for best practices for counselor accountability. Further, the results of this
study can be used to encourage district officials and teachers to acknowledge and support
the importance of the role of the school counselor.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 15
The findings of this study, which identify the effectiveness of a collaborative
relationship between counselors and principals, can be used to contribute to the mandate
for student achievement set by NCLB. Finally, the results of this study will provide
understanding and examples of ways in which counselors and principals can work
together to support the implementation of a school reform for student success using a
data-driven comprehensive counseling program.
Assumptions
The researcher assumed that the responses of the principals and counselors who
were interviewed were truthful, honest, and trustworthy. The researcher further assumed
that the interviews were candid, natural, and genuine when participants were describing
their relationships and collaboration. The researcher also assumed that the conflicting
ideas about counseling and counselor accountability can be used to identify ways in
which strong collaborative relationships influence effective comprehensive counseling
programs.
Delimitations
This study was conducted with two principals and three counselors from Southern
California comprehensive public high schools. These participants were selected through
the following criteria:
1. The principals and counselors held positions in public schools in districts in
California.
2. The principals and counselors had held their positions for 3 to 5 years in the
same school.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 16
3. The public comprehensive high school that they served had an average
population of 2,500 students.
Limitations
The data for this study were gathered through interviews and surveys of two
principals and three counselors at two comprehensive high schools in California. The
data may not represent the perceptions of other counselors and principals in private or
charter high schools. The validity of this research is limited to the design of the
methodology and the development of the inquiry methods. This study also is limited by
the integrity of the responses in the interviews and on the survey.
Definition of Terms
American School Counselor Association (ASCA). An organization that supports
school counselors’ efforts to help students to focus on academic, personal/social, and
career development so that they achieve success in school and are prepared to lead
fulfilling lives as responsible members of society. The association has developed national
standards, presented below, for all school counselors.
High school counselor. A counselor and an educator who works in high schools to
provide academic, career, college readiness, and personal/social competencies to all K–
12 students through a school counseling program.
National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). A national
organization of and voice for middle and high school principals, assistant principals, and
aspiring school leaders in the United States and more than 45 countries.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 17
National standards. Standards developed by ASCA for academic development
that guide school counseling programs to implement strategies and activities to support
and maximize each student’s ability to learn.
Public school. A school supported by public funds.
Secondary school principal. An educator who has executive authority for a
secondary school.
Organization of the Dissertation
The dissertation is organized into five chapters, the first of which provides an
overview of the study. Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature on counselor-principal
relationships and priorities and how these affect counselor accountability and
effectiveness in implementing a data-driven, comprehensive ASCA-based counseling
program. Chapter 3 describes the methodology used in the study, which included surveys
and interviews of counselors and principals in California comprehensive high schools.
Chapter 4 presents the results of the data analysis, and Chapter 5 presents a discussion of
findings, implications, and recommendations for counselor-principal relationships in
regard to counselor effectiveness and accountability.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 18
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter provides a review of literature on the school counseling profession in
terms of its accountability. The chapter begins with an introduction, followed by the
literature on the ASCA National Model and Standards and the theoretical framework.
Then, the research on the differing perspectives and philosophies of school counselors
and principals is reviewed, followed by an assessment of the impact of the principal’s
perception of the school counselor’s roles. Finally, the research on leadership and
accountability with regard to the counseling profession is reviewed.
Introduction
Professional school counselors are asked to engage in accountability practices to
support the effectiveness of their comprehensive counseling program on students’
academic achievement (Monteiro-Leitner et al., 2006; Myrick, 2003; Perera-Diltz &
Mason, 2010). School counselors strive to implement the ASCA National Model, which
outlines a comprehensive school counseling program that includes a framework for
delivery, accountability, and evaluation that is data driven and incorporates the academic,
personal/social, and career development of all students (Dahir & Stone, 2009; Mason,
2010). With the implementation of the ASCA National Model, school counselors are
increasingly becoming part of schools’ educational mission and goals (Myrick, 2003). In
this regard, Zalaquett and Chatters (2012) noted the importance of the principal’s role in
determining the definition and direction of the school counseling program.
The role of the professional school counselor, as set forth by ASCA, is to provide
students with the skills needed for achievement and psychosocial growth (Bodenhorn,
Wolfe, & Airen, 2010; Monteiro-Leitner et al., 2006; Myrick, 2003; Spink & Edwards,
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 19
2008). Further, professional school counselors are expected to be leaders and to be
accountable for student success. However, certain factors prevent them from performing
their role, the most important of which is the role ambiguity or confusion related to the
differing perceptions of counselors and principals with regard to the counselor’s role and
activities (Curry & Bickmore, 2012; Dahir & Stone, 2009; Scarborough & Culbreth,
2008) and the impact of the principal’s power in this regard.
ASCA National Standards and Model
In 1997, ASCA developed its national standards. These standards identify the
skills, behaviors, and attitudes that all students should present as a result of a
comprehensive school counseling program (Dahir, 2009; Perusse et al., 2004). The
competencies were based on four domains: academic, personal/social, career, and
college. In 2002, ASCA developed the ASCA National Model that defines what school
counselors should do to serve as leaders in a comprehensive school counseling program,
as well as the appropriate organizational structure to enable school counselors to perform
their roles and to demonstrate accountability (ASCA, 2005; Dahir & Stone, 2009). The
standards and components set forth by ASCA guide school counselors to implement a
data-driven, standards-based school counseling profession and to support the school’s
mission and goals (Amatea & Clark, 2005; ASCA, 2005; Dollarhide, Gibson, & Saginak,
2008).
The ASCA model has four components: (a) the foundation, which incorporates
philosophy, mission, and beliefs of the counseling program; (b) the delivery system,
which includes the activities that address the national standards; (c) the management
system, which includes the Principal-Counselor Agreement and collaboration; and (d) the
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 20
accountability system, which encourages use of data to generate program results for
evaluative purposes (ASCA, 2005; Mason, 2010). As part of the model, ASCA developed
a code of ethics for counseling practice (ASCA, 2005). The code of ethics call for (a)
student advocacy; (b) delineating, promoting, and practicing roles that meet the needs of
students; (c) informing officials when there are conditions that limit the effectiveness of
the program; and (d) functioning within boundaries of professional competency and
avoiding all activities that are outside the scope of responsibility and training (ASCA,
2005; Mason, 2010). The accountability measures, expectations, and ethics of the ASCA
model have contributed to student outcomes in course enrollment, test scores, grades, and
school satisfaction (Dahir & Stone, 2009; Mason, 2010).
ASCA (2005) maintains that professional school counselors in the 21st century
should be leaders, collaborators, advocates, and agents of change. Specifically, school
counselors should work in collaboration with all stakeholders, including principals, to
implement a program that addresses students’ personal/social, academic, and career
development needs (Clemons et al., 2009; Dahir & Stone, 2009; Mason, 2010). However,
school counselors and principals have different ideas about the role of the counselor with
regard to counselor responsibilities and tasks and their impact on counselor
accountability.
Theoretical Framework
The framework for this study is the counselor-principal relationship and its impact
on school counselor accountability. Principals are key stakeholders who can influence the
role of counselors. The ASCA model calls for school counselors to collaborate with
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 21
stakeholders to meet all students’ needs and to support the school’s mission and goals
(Amatea & Clark, 2005; ASCA, 2005; Dollarhide et al., 2008).
Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory provides a framework to evaluate the
impact of superior-subordinate relationships in organizations. LMX posits difference in
the quality of leaders and their impact on the member-subordinate relationship, in this
case, the counselor-principal relationship. According to LMX theory, the quality of the
relationship is a predictor of outcomes at the individual, group, and organizational levels
(Chan & Mak, 2012; Dienesch & Linden, 1986; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Northouse,
2007). Graen and Uhl-Bien found that high-quality LMXs resulted in less employee
turnover, positive performance evaluations, high frequency of promotions, greater
organizational commitment, more desired work assignments, better job attitudes, more
attention, and support from leaders, which led to faster career progress.
Clemens et al. (2009) used the LMX model to examine multiple dimensions of the
school counselor-principal relationship. The researchers found that the principal-school
counselor relationship and school counselors’ use of advocacy skills had a significant
effect on how the counselors defined their role and implemented programs. Clemens et
al. found that the stronger the relationship between the principal and the school
counselor, the more closely the counseling program aligned with the counselor’s ideal
role and satisfaction with the role, which had a positive impact on counselor
accountability. These findings were consistent with LMX theory and research (Gerstner
& Day, 1997).
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 22
Counselor Role Identity: Views of the Principal and School Counselor
Although the ASCA national standards define the appropriate roles for school,
research indicates that role confusion still exists in the counseling profession (Kirchner &
Setchfield, 2005). School counselors and principals have different philosophical views
about the purpose, duties, and responsibilities of a school counselor. School principals
determine what tasks are given to counselors and thus have the greatest impact on the
counselor’s role and implementation of a comprehensive counseling program, as
compared to other stakeholders in the school or district. Kirchner and Setchfield found
that principals’ perceptions of the counselor did not always align with the ASCA
standards. They surveyed 23 school counselors and 42 principals who had taken a
leadership course. Results indicated that counselor roles such as consulting, providing,
and coordinating students with appropriate resources for wellness and empathetic
communication were not seen as important by principals. The principals indicated that
tasks such as registration/scheduling, administering tests, and maintaining school records
were the most important component of the counselors’ roles in a school. Overall, the
results indicated that principals may not understand the counselor’s role because schools
are short staffed, and the principal needs to focus on getting certain tasks accomplished.
While there is a need for school counselors to work collaboratively with school
principals, counselors and principals have differing views of the counselor’s role. Janson,
Militello, and Kosine (2008) used a Q-methodology to investigate how school counselors
and principals viewed their relationship; participants were 22 school counselors and 17
principals. The findings indicated that successful collaboration between the school
counselor and principal did not occur due to a lack of understanding and communication.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 23
Further, there was no centering leadership from the principal on school improvement
tasks for the counselors. Most counselors felt that the principals would let them work
autonomously and that there would be no shared leadership.
Monteiro-Leitner et al. (2006) and Ross and Herrington (2006), through
quantitative research, studied counselors’ and principals’ perceptions of the school
counselor’s role. Both studies found that school counselors and principals had differing
perceptions. The differences occurred in relation to addressing students’ needs. School
principals expressed that the counselor’s role was to do administrative and clerical duties,
while school counselors expressed frustration at not being able to perform counseling
standards as set by ASCA (Monteiro-Leitner et al., 2006; Ross & Herringon, 2006).
Militello and Janson (2008), using a Q-methodology, investigated how school
counselors and principals perceived their relationships. Participants were 22 counselors
and 17 principals. Perceptions fell into four themes. The first theme, working alliance,
concerned the principal trusting the counselor expertise. The second theme, impediments
to alliance, focused on issues such as a lack of communication or of understanding each
other’s goals and a lack of shared engagement in decision making. The third theme,
shared leadership, involved principals’ support of counselors’ developing leadership roles
in schools. The fourth theme, purposeful collaboration, concerned the importance of the
school counselor-principal relationship being neither antagonistic nor problematic. The
findings indicated that the capacity for school counselors to affect student academic
achievement was contingent on their ability to function collaboratively as leaders.
Louis, Jones, and Barajas (2001), in a study of school counselors and principals,
found that the principals usually had little knowledge of the counselors’ work and that
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 24
administrator preparation programs rarely addressed what principals needed to know
about the school counselor. Some of the counselor respondents explained that the more
experienced counselors educated their principals about the role of the professional school
counselor. Louis et al. found that paperwork dominated the counselors’ role, as did
administering tests and acting as clerks, while other professionals interpreted the data.
Louis et al. provided three suggestions for school districts and administrators. First,
district level administrators should realign the school counselor role to the ASCA Model
and standards to improve student achievement, and counselors should be part of this
effort. Second, principals should play a crucial role in ensuring that counselors are
redirected to implementing their responsibilities in keeping with a comprehensive school
counseling program. Third, principals should provide training and professional
development for counselors to guide the counselors in using data to show accountability
in their profession.
Principals’ Perceptions of School Counselors’ Implementation of
the ASCA Model
The school counseling profession focuses on creating and implementing a
comprehensive, data-driven, results-based guidance program (ASCA, 2005). Several
studies have found that the efforts of the school counselor to develop an ASCA-based
comprehensive counseling program were not successful due to a lack of principal support
(Amatea & Clark, 2005; Dollarhide et al., 2007; Perusse et al., 2004; Wilkerson, 2010).
Amatea and Clark (2005), in a qualitative study, assessed the perceptions of the
school counselor role held by 26 principals at elementary, middle, and high schools. Six
principals were interviewed with regard to their perceptions of the school culture and
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 25
their expectations of school counselors in terms of duties and activities and how their
time was allocated. The results indicated that, overall, the principals preferred a
traditional role for their counselors, engaging engage in registration, testing, monitoring
student records, and advising students. Nevertheless, the principals valued the role of the
school counselor as a collaborator, leader, and case consultant.
Perusse et al. (2004) conducted a nationwide survey of 1,000 school counselors
and 500 school principals with regard to the extent to which counselors were performing
their roles as set forth by the ASCA national standards. The results indicated that 50% of
the counselors and 80% of the principals viewed three tasks as appropriate for
counselors: registration/scheduling, administering aptitude/achievement tests, and student
record keeping. Perusse et al. found a discrepancy between what the ASCA national
standards identify as appropriate/inappropriate and what the respondents identified.
Principals maintained that scheduling, registration, testing, and maintaining school
records were appropriate for school counselors; in fact, they are not.
Dollarhide et al. (2007) conducted a qualitative study in which they interviewed
19 principals about critical incidents related to a principal’s support for a school
counseling program. The participating principals were known to be supportive of school
counseling to ascertain the critical incidents that they identified as meaningful and
significant in their appreciation of school counseling. Also, the study examined the
critical incidents that positively affected the responding principals’ perspective on school
counseling. The results indicated that the principals preferred school counselors who
were communicative, systemic in their work, student focused, and able to take on
leadership roles in the school.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 26
Curry and Bickmore (2012) conducted a qualitative investigation to determine
how the perceptions held by seven novice school counselors (with less than 2 years of
experience) regarding how and whether their personal and professional needs were met
(and whether through a formal or informal induction process) and five principals to
identify the influence of the principal on ASCA program development. Curry and
Bickmore found that, if counselors who felt that they were an integral part of the
leadership team experienced their work as important and were encouraged by the
principal to follow the ASCA national standards to contribute to students’ academic,
personal/social, and career development. Novice counselors also stated that the principals
did not develop formal induction structures, which led to their experiencing a lack of
support and a sense of mattering by the principal (Curry & Bickmore, 2012).
School Counselors’ Perceptions of Counselors’ Roles and Activities
Professional school counselors have an ongoing problem within the profession
between what actual practice and best practice based on the ASCA model. Researchers
have identified implications of the discrepancies between what school counselors are
actually doing versus what they need to practice to best serve students (Dahir, Burnham,
& Stone, 2009; Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008; Louis et al., 2001; Nelson, Robles-Pina, &
Nichter, 2008; Scarborough & Culbreth, 2008).
Scarborough and Culbreth (2008), with 361 elementary, middle, and high school
counselors, and Nelson et al. (2008), with a sample of 425 high school counselors,
conducted quantitative analyses using school counselor rating scales to investigate
differences between preferred and actual practices of school counselors. Both studies
found that high school counselors spent less time on preferred activities and elementary
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 27
counselors spent more time on preferred activities. The researchers identified that school
counselors with more experience were more likely to practice as they preferred. Further,
the results indicated that it takes years of experience to be able to implement a variety of
interventions that the school counselor is expected to perform. Participants indicated that
most of their time was spent on noncounseling activities and challenges of role
ambiguity, conflict, work overload, and job stress (Nelson et al., 2008; Scarborough &
Culbreth, 2008). These studies indicated a gap in theory and practice in the counseling
profession and recommended that school counselors and principals use the School
Counselor Activity Rating Scale (SCARS) to identify their counseling program strengths
and weaknesses.
Hatch and Chen-Hayes (2008) and Dahir et al. (2009) analyzed the beliefs and
readiness of professional school counselors with regard to delivery of a comprehensive
school counseling program based on the ASCA national standards. The researchers used
the School Counseling Program Component Scale to assess the beliefs and values of
school counselors regarding the ASCA National Model program implementation. The
highest-rated items were the importance of having explicit goals for the program and the
student-counselor ratio. The lower-rated items included using data to identify
achievement gaps, monitoring students’ academic progress, and addressing
personal/social development. The findings indicated that the use of data for program
planning and accountability was less important than goal setting. Overall, the researchers
found that programming foundations, such as mission and goals, were most important,
followed by administrative support for a lower counselor-student ratio and a reduction in
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 28
noncounseling activities. Finally, counselors indicated a lack of training in how to use
data to implement an effective counseling program (Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008).
Anctil, Smith, and Dahir (2012) studied the practice of professional school
counselors with regard to the career counseling domain. Participants were 1,016 school
counselors who were members of ASCA. Participants compared a 29-item survey
questionnaire on counselors’ role and functions related to career guidance and
development. The results indicated that 70% of the school counselors viewed career
development as a low priority for their school. Anctil et al. also compared time spent and
priorities for duties assigned related to academic, personal/social, and career development
delivery. The results indicated that 16% of respondents reported spending less than 20%
of their time on academic and personal/social development and 46% reported spending
less than 20% of their time on career development services. The researchers explored
school counselors’ perceptions of their training with regard to career development.
Approximately 75% of the participants indicated a need for more training on how to help
students in career development and 82% reported that they attended at least two inservice
sessions per year in career development.
Foster, Young, and Hermann (2005) used a job analysis survey to identify
counselors’ perceptions of their most important work activities with regard to the
academic, personal/social, and career development domains. Participants were 526
counselors who had a wide range of educational experience. The four activities that were
most often performed by the counselors to promote academic, personal/social, and career
development were general counseling related to academic and personal/social
competencies of students, encouraging students’ decision-making skills, career and
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 29
personal/social development, and planning classroom activities centered on career
development.
Dahir, Burnham, Stone, and Cobb (2010) conducted a quantitative study with 999
Tennessee school counselors regarding the influence of the counselor-principal
relationship on counseling program implementation. The findings indicated that
counselors should work collaboratively with principals to address national standards. To
do so, the principal-counselor relationship should be strengthened and collaboration
should be purposeful. Dahir et al. also found that principals who valued school
counselors recognized the importance of the counselor in terms of the relationship
between home and school. They found that a strong working relationship between the
principal and the counselor ensured alignment between the stated desires for student
academic success and actual practice.
Leadership and Accountability Among Professional School Counselors
The literature identifies the importance of leadership and accountability in the
counseling profession. Dollarhide et al. (2008) conducted a year-long qualitative study of
five new counselors to examine leadership from the perspective of school counselors in
the field. Participants were interviewed by telephone regarding their perceptions of the
prior month’s leadership activities conducted by the counselors. Based on an analysis of
the interview data, Dollarhide et al. found five themes: leadership attitude, goals, external
conditions, reactions to resistance, and biggest challenges. The analysis indicated that
counselors who were successful as leaders took responsibility for leadership, had clear
goals, self-defined their roles as a counselor, secured support from others, demonstrated
resistance and growth, and were willing to expand their leadership skills. Successful
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 30
counselors mentioned that mentoring another counselor helped to increase their self-
esteem and competence as a leader. Counselors who were not successful as leaders and
did not take responsibility for their actions were those whose actions were in keeping
with district-level goals, over which they had no control. They also did not maximize any
sources of support and did not expand their leadership skills. Notably, all participants
expressed willingness to engage in leadership, but the successful leaders took
responsibility and empowered themselves to bring about change even in the face of
resistance, doubt, and lack of initial support. Dollarhide et al. concluded that districtwide
goals were not aligned with the ASCA National Model and standards for school
counselors to become leaders and to develop a comprehensive school counseling
program.
Meany-Walen, Carnes-Holt, Barrio-Minton, Purswell, and Pronchenko-Jain
(2013) conducted a mixed-methods study to explore the progression of counselor leaders
in their leadership roles and to learn how leadership development could be supported.
The 58 participants were elected and appointed leaders from ASCA. Respondents
indicated that the top three factors that encouraged them to assume leadership in the field
were the desire to make a contribution, intrinsic motivation to become a leader, and
enjoyment of challenges and learning. Faculty’s modeling leadership skills, mentoring
students, teaching leadership skills, and providing opportunities for students to get
involved in counseling organization increased the likelihood that students would assume
leadership positions during the program of study and after graduation. The researchers
also found that 65% of leadership was related to family support.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 31
Research has shown the importance of counselor leadership and accountability
and how a data-driven comprehensive counseling program can support leadership and
accountability. Perera-Diltz and Mason (2010), Dahir and Stone (2009), and Young and
Kaffenberger (2011) studied accountability practices among school counselors. To
determine accountability practices as they relate to the use of data, Perera-Diltz and
Mason conducted a nationwide survey of 1,704 counselors. The results indicated that
54% of the school counselors engaged in data gathering related to school counseling
services and 32% distributed such data to some or all stakeholders. The results also
showed that needs assessments were conducted by counselors less than 5% of the time
and that needs assessments were important to the development of a counseling program.
Perera-Diltz and Mason suggested that counselors should be trained in effective ways to
distribute accountability information.
Dahir and Stone (2009) conducted a 3-year qualitative study on school counselor
improvement goals. Participants were 175 high school, middle school, and elementary
school counselors who were asked to submit and implement an action plan based on the
MEASURE model. The MEASURE model is a framework for developing accountability
standards in school counseling programs. The results indicated that more than 50% of
elementary school counselors made improving grades and raising test scores their
primary goal, while 50% of middle school and high school counselors chose improving
grades as their priority. Only 9% of the goals based on MEASURES standards were
focused on personal/social development and only 6% focused on school climate goals
such as attendance improvement or reducing discipline. Eighty-nine percent of the
MEASURE-based program goals were focused on academic development.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 32
ASCA advocates for data-driven implementation of a comprehensive school
counseling program and has implemented the Recognized ASCA Model Program
(RAMP) for collection, analysis, integration, and dissemination of data, guided by the
ASCA model (ASCA, 2005). The ASCA model encourages school counselors to use data
to be accountable for student success in alignment with the school’s goals and missions
(ASCA, 2005). Young and Kaffenberger (2011) studied school counselors involved in
RAMP to determine their understanding of the data and how they used data to inform
program decisions. Participants were 250 school counselors who were studied during a
3-year training and implementation period. The results indicated that 82.5% of RAMP
school counselors used data to inform program decisions. The participants reported a
clear understanding of quantitative and qualitative data collection and decision making.
The results also indicated that 91% of the school counselors increased their data use due
to RAMP and 84% indicated that they maintained their use of data.
Young and Kaffenberger (2011) found a significant difference between principals
at RAMP and non-RAMP schools with regard to appropriate counselor roles. Principals
at RAMP schools rated the importance of activities related to the standards and
competencies of counseling, such as individual student meetings, interpreting data, group
counseling, and guidance lessons, higher than did their non-RAMP counterparts. Based
on these findings, Young and Kaffenberger concluded that the RAMP process encourages
use of data and supports counselors’ confidence in using data to address students’ needs.
Research has shown the importance of counselor leadership and accountability
and how a data-driven comprehensive counseling program can support leadership and
accountability (Dahir & Stone, 2009; Dollarhide et al., 2008; Perera-Diltz & Mason,
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 33
2010; Young & Kaffenberger, 2011). That research indicates that school counselors
should engage in leadership roles in their schools to develop and implement a data-driven
ASCA model program to improve students’ achievement and close the achievement gap.
Chapter Summary
The ASCA National Model defined the competencies that school counselors need
to serve as leaders in a comprehensive school counseling program, as well as the
organizational structure that will enable school counselors to perform their roles and to
demonstrate accountability. The competencies are based on four domains: academic,
personal/social, career, and college (ASCA, 2005). Despite the existence of the model
and of standards for the profession, the counselor role and responsibilities are defined
differently by school counselors and principals. Kirchner and Setchfield (2005),
Monteiro-Leitner et al. (2006), and Militello and Janson (2008) found that principals
influence the counselor’s role, which often means that counselors are assigned
administrative tasks. Principals maintain that scheduling, registrations, testing, and
maintaining school records are appropriate for school counselors when, in fact, they are
not. Districts and school administrators found that the absence of a clear job description
was the cause of counselors not performing actual preferred duties, such as an advocating
for academic achievement (Louis et al., 2001). School counselors should define their
roles so that the roles are not defined for them (Perusse et al., 2004).
Researchers (Anctil et al., 2012; Dahir et al., 2009; Dahir et al., 2010; Foster et
al., 2005; Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008; Nelson et al., 2008; Scarborough & Culbreth,
2008) have found that school counselors want to perform activities that are related to
developing and implementing a comprehensive school counseling program based on the
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 34
ASCA National Model. To do so, counselors must engage in leadership and
accountability (Dahir & Stone, 2009; Dollarhide et al., 2008; Perera-Diltz & Mason,
2010; Young & Kaffenberger, 2011).
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 35
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methodology used in the study. The chapter begins
with a restatement of the problem, the purpose, and research questions. This is followed
by a presentation of the research design, participants and setting, instrumentation, data
collection, data analysis, and ethical considerations. The chapter concludes with a
summary.
Restatement of the Problem
According to ASCA (2005), school counselors should spend the majority of their
time in providing direct services to students in four essential domains: academic,
personal/social, career, and college. Because school principals often have little or no
training regarding the role of the school counselor and assign duties and activities that are
noncounseling related, school counselors are left with little time to address the four
domains or to develop a school counseling program and show accountability (Dahir,
2004; Monteiro-Leitner et al., 2006; Perusse et al., 2004). To develop such a program,
show accountability, and address the four student domains, school counselors need the
understanding and support of the school principal. Thus, the relationship between the
counselor and principal has an impact on school counselors’ ability to carry out their
responsibilities.
Restatement of the Purpose
The purpose of this study was to improve understanding of the counselor-
principal relationship and its impact on development and implementation of a
comprehensive counseling program that increases student success. An additional purpose
was to explore how the collaborative relationship of counselors and principals affects
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 36
counselors’ effectiveness in implementing a comprehensive school counseling program
that demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success. The goal was to
determine whether if counselors and principals working collaboratively to create a data-
driven, ASCA standards-based comprehensive program leads to counselor accountability
for student success. To this end, three research questions guided the study.
1. What strategies do principals utilize to help counselors execute a successful
counseling program?
2. How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the
counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at their school site?
3. What key elements of the principal-counselor relationship influence counselor
accountability for a successful ASCA-based counseling program?
Research Design
The design of this study was guided by Creswell’s (2009) six steps for conducting
research: identify the research problem, review the literature, specify the purpose of the
research, collect the data, analyze and interpret the data, and report and evaluate the data.
This study used a mixed-methods approach. Quantitative data were collected through a
survey and qualitative data were collected through open-ended survey questions and
interviews with three counselors and two principals in three California public high
schools. The quantitative data provided information on the demographics of the
counselors and principals and their California high schools. The qualitative data provided
in-depth information on principal-counselor relationships and their influence on
counselor accountability.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 37
A mixed-methods design combines the theoretical and procedural elements of
quantitative and qualitative approaches and includes triangulation of the findings to check
for consistency (Creswell, 2009). Creswell stated that triangulation helps the researcher
to maximize the strength of the quantitative research that provides descriptive
information and the qualitative research that provides an in-depth understanding as
provided by participants.
Participants and Setting
This was a people-centric study in which the unit of analysis was principals and
counselors in California public high schools. The people-centric model is designed to
study people with common experiences in the same location (Patton, 2002). Based on
Patton’s recommendations, the minimum sample size was identified as 40 for the survey
and 5 for the interviews.
The sample was drawn from a population of six comprehensive high schools in
three districts in southern California. The researcher reviewed documents, such as those
pertaining to school’s mission, counseling office mission and goals, and academic
performance index, as well other data from the schools’ and districts’ websites and from
the California Department of Education. The researcher then selected three districts in
Los Angeles County (Burbank, Arcadia, and La Canada) and an email of invitation to
participate (Appendix A) and the online survey (Appendix B) was sent to all counselors
and principals in these school. All counselors and principals received the invitation to
avoid researcher bias (Creswell, 2009).
The next level of data collection involved interviews in which the researcher
engaged in a conversation focused on the research questions (Merriam, 2009). Six
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 38
interviews were conducted. The research questions guided the interview questions to
provide the researcher understanding about the topic (Maxwell, 2013). Interviews allow
researcher to address the research questions in depth and, thus, maximize the researcher’s
time (Patton, 2002).
The researcher reviewed the data from the survey questionnaire and identified
important themes that provided the basis for selection of interview participants. The first
criterion was whether the participant indicated willingness to be interviewed as a follow-
up for additional information. The other criterion was serving as a department chair for
the counseling program at his or her school site and having created an ASCA program.
Instrumentation
Using Creswell’s (2009) recommendations for how to create a survey instrument,
the researcher developed a list of questions to gather information on the principal-
counselor relationship and how principals hold counselors accountable. Survey questions
were developed based on the literature review, as well as on gaps in the literature that
were relevant to the study. Survey questions were created to elicit structured responses
about demographic information and feelings, perceptions, and behaviors. The open-ended
questions on the survey allowed the respondent to provide in-depth information that
helped to inform the interview process. The survey was administered through
Surveymonkey.com™.
Semistructured interviews were conducted to allow respondents to be unique in
their responses while remaining focused on the topic (Merriam, 2009). In the
semistructured interviews used in this study, all questions were flexibly worded. There
was no specific order in which the questions were asked; the order was based on the
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 39
respondent’s lead (Merriam, 2009). Semistructured interviews are recommended for
interview sessions that are within a 45-minute time frame. This allows the researcher and
participant to remain focused on the topic and provides data that can be analyzed easily
(Creswell, 2009; Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002).
Patton (2002) and Merriam (2009) noted the importance of naturalistic inquiry,
which allows the researcher the flexibility to explore and expand on important themes
that emerge from the data. Merriam (2009) noted that probing questions enable the
research to gain detailed information and to clarify information that needs further
explanation. Probing questions allow a full discussion of a topic and contribute to
addressing the research questions (Patton, 2002).
To establish rapport and build a relationship with the interviewees, the researcher
spent time on the school campuses and conducted the interviews in a setting that was
comfortable for the interviewees: the office of either the principal or the counselor.
Maxwell (2013) stated that it is critical to build a positive and interactive relationship
with the participant. The researcher followed Maxwell’s guidelines, which included
maintaining neutrality throughout the process and using interviewing skills such as
listening, questioning, and paraphrasing to build rapport and to help the interviewee to
feel comfortable.
Data Collection
For the survey, an email with general information about the study was sent to
potential participants, who were later sent an email that contained an invitation to
participate and a link to the survey. The survey took approximately 10 minutes to
complete. The researcher followed recommendations by Creswell (2009), who noted that,
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 40
to have a high response rate and reliable results, the researcher should send follow-up
emails as needed. After the survey was completed, respondents received a thank-you
email for their participation.
For the open-ended interviews, an initial email was sent to the principals to
determine their willingness to participate and to allow their counselors to participate. The
researcher then called the principals’ administrative assistants to ensure that they had
received the email and were aware of the study. In the email, the researcher identified
herself, explained the background and purpose of the interview, and asked to schedule a
time for the interview. A follow-up telephone call was made to answer questions or
address concerns that the principal might have. Finally, an email confirmation with the
date of the interview was sent to the principals and counselors.
Five participants (three counselors and two principals) met with the researcher in
person. The interviews were recorded with an electronic voice recorder, with the
permission of the interviewee, to ensure the quality of the responses and to allow the
researcher to listen actively rather than to take detailed notes (Creswell, 2009; Merriam,
2009). An independent contractor professionally transcribed the interview recording.
Data Analysis
The quantitative data from the survey were downloaded to SPSS™, Version 20,
for data analysis. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine the items related
to the counselor-principal relationship. Next, a linear regression analysis was used to
examine the relationship between the principal-counselor relationship and counselor
accountability, and a coefficient of determination was used to determine how the
principal-counselor relationship predicted counselor accountability.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 41
The qualitative data analysis involved a content-analysis approach in which
categories, patterns, and themes were identified (Patton, 2002). Specifically, qualitative
data were organized by developing category levels based on response patterns, and then
data were assigned to each category, which was then defined. Conclusions were drawn
and verified, and, in keeping with recommendations by Patton (2002), connections were
made with the quantitative data.
Ethical Considerations
The researcher completed the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI)
offered through the University of Southern California (USC) Institutional Review Board
(IRB), which maintains and enforces appropriate guidelines for research. The researcher
used pseudonyms for the districts, principals, and counselors. Participation in this study
was entirely voluntary, and no information was reported without the written consent
(Appendix C) of the persons from whom the information was elicited. All collected data,
including survey results, audio recordings, and transcribed interviews, were stored in a
secure location, and access was limited to the researcher, dissertation chairperson, and the
USC IRB. The researcher will destroy all data in 2017.
Chapter Summary
This study used a mixed-methods approach that incorporated quantitative data
from survey questionnaires and qualitative data from responses to open-ended questions
on the surveys and semistructured interviews. According to the data analysis plan,
quantitative data were analyzed though ANOVAs and linear regression analysis, while
qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis. Connections were made between
the quantitative and qualitative data, and the results were compared to the literature.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 42
CHAPTER FOUR: THE FINDINGS
In this chapter the findings of this study are presented to illustrate how secondary
school counselor-principal relationships affect counselor accountability. The purpose of
this study was to improve understanding of the counselor-principal relationship and its
impact on development and implementation of a comprehensive counseling program that
increases student success. In addition, the purpose was to provide an exploration of how
the collaborative relationship of counselors and principals affects counselors’
effectiveness in implementing a comprehensive school counseling program that
demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success.
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What strategies do principals utilize to help counselors execute a successful
counseling program?
2. How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the
counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at their school site?
3. What key elements of the principal-counselor relationship influence counselor
accountability for a successful ASCA-based counseling program?
The findings are presented in three sections. The first section describes
demographic information. The second section describes the background of the
participants. The third section reports results from the mixed-methods approach of
qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results of the interviews and survey are presented in
tables and figures, as well as in narrative, to address the research questions.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 43
Participants in the Study
Demographics of Survey Participants
The survey was sent to 140 principals and 140 counselors. There were 64 survey
respondents (31 principals and 33 counselors) for response rates of 22.14% for principals
and 23.57% for counselors. The majority of the counselors were females and the majority
of the principals were males (Table 1).
Table 1

Gender Distribution of Respondents

Participant category f % f % f %

High school principal 9 29.0 22 71.0 31 100.0

High school counselor 25 75.8 8 24.2 33 100.0

Almost half of the principals were in the age bracket 35–45 and the rest were
roughly equally distributed in the brackets 46–56 and 57+ (Table 2).
Table 2

Distribution of Ages of Respondents

High school principal High school counselor
Age bracket f % f %

24–34 0 0.0 7 21.2
35–45 14 45.2 11 33.3
46–56 9 29.0 11 33.3
57+ 8 25.8 4 12.1
Total 31 100.0 33 100.0

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 44
One third of the counselors were in the age bracket 35–45 and one third in the
bracket 45–56. More than half of the principals and almost half of the counselors reported
more than 21 years of service in the education profession (Table 3).
Table 3

Respondents’ Years of Experience in Education

High school principal High school counselor
Years f % f %

0–5 0 0.0 1 3.0
6–10 0 0.0 7 21.2
11–15 3 9.7 6 18.2
16–20 10 32.3 5 15.2
21+ 18 58.1 14 42.4
Total 31 100.0 33 100.0

The majority of the principals and counselors were in the same age bracket and
the principals had more experience in education than the counselors. The disparity
between years of experience was not significant and did not influence data outcomes.
Demographics of Interview Participants
Two southern California high school principals and three high school counselors
participated in face-to-face interviews. This section provides a brief description of each
interview participant.
Susan, a counselor in a comprehensive high school in southern California, has
been in education for 17 years. She has worked for her district as a school counselor for 7
years and, prior to her current district, she worked as a high school counselor and middle
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 45
school counselor in a different district. She currently works with at-risk students, whom
she defined as students who have “504s” or Individual Education Plans (IEPs) and who
are English Language Learners. She facilitates personalized high school plans and
intervention groups for the students whom she serves. Susan has a caseload of 480
students; each of the other four counselors at her site have 600 students in the caseload.
Mary, a counselor at a comprehensive high school in southern California, has
been a high school counselor for 8 years. Mary decided to pursue higher education and
become a counselor due to mentors who encouraged her to pursue higher education and
her goals of becoming a counselor. She stated that her mentor had influenced her and she
wanted to have the same influence on young people. Mary works with four other
counselors at her site, where they serve about 2,500 students with caseloads of about 480
students each.
Janet, a counselor at a comprehensive high school in southern California, had
experience as a marriage and family therapist in private practice for 17 years and
currently is in her 14th year as a high school counselor. Janet has spent all 14 years at her
current site, where she and 11 counselor colleagues serve about 3,600 students. Each has
a caseload of 400 students and has access to support staff to serve students. Janet shared
that her department has a few counselors who are cross-trained as therapists, which she
stated helps with students’ social/emotional problems.
Dave, a high school principal at a large comprehensive high school that serves
3,600 students in southern California, has been a principal for 3 years. Prior to becoming
a principal, Dave was a coach, teacher, and assistant principal for about 12 years. Both of
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 46
his parents were educators, which led him to appreciate and want to pursue becoming a
teacher, coach and now an administrator.
Kelly is a high school principal at a comprehensive high school in southern
California that serves about 2,000 students. Prior to becoming a principal, she had 13
years of experience in education in various positions, including teacher, counselor, and
Dean of Discipline. Kelly decided to become an educator to help students who were at
risk and needed support and care to turn their lives around. In her previous role as Dean
of Discipline, she enjoyed understanding the root of students’ problems so she could help
to change behavior. She stated that nothing is more rewarding than helping students to
understand their behavior and make a positive change.
Demographic information about the two principal and three counselor
respondents is summarized in Table 4.
Table 4

Demographics of Interviewees

Years in
current Years in
Interview date Pseudonym Job title Gender job education Level

March 19, 2014 Amanda Counselor F 17 17 High school
March 27, 2014 Mary Counselor F 8 8 High school
April 1, 2014 Janet Counselor F 14 14 High school
April 1, 2014 Dave Principal M 3 15 High school
April 5, 2014 Kelly Principal F 3 22 High school

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 47
Results
Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked, What strategies do principals utilize to help
counselors execute a successful counseling program? Research conducted by Monteiro-
Leitner et al. (2006) and Ross and Herrington (2006) examined counselors’ and
principals’ perceptions of the school counselor’s role. Both studies found that school
counselors and principals had differing perceptions, particularly in relation to addressing
students’ needs. School principals expressed that the counselor’s role was to do
administrative and clerical duties, while school counselors expressed frustration at not
being able to perform counseling standards as set by ASCA (Monteiro-Leitner et al.,
2006; Ross & Herrington, 2006). Curry and Bickmore found that counselors who felt like
an integral part of the leadership team experienced their work as important and were
encouraged by the principal to follow ASCA national standards to contribute to students’
academic, personal/social, and career development. Novice counselors stated that the
principals did not develop formal induction structures, which led to lack of support from
the principal and a sense of mattering (Curry & Bickmore, 2012).
Previous research indicated that school principals and counselors had differing
perceptions. The current study investigated what principals in comprehensive high
schools provided with regard to strategies to help counselors execute a successful
counseling program. Through qualitative analysis of open-ended responses to the survey
and interviews, three strategies emerged: (a) frequent communication, (b) use of personal
touch/communication, and (c) providing support and direction.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 48
Frequent communication. Frequent communication was a common strategy
used by principals to help counselors to create and maintain a successful counseling
program. Frequent communication occurred in weekly team meetings that provided an
opportunity for counselors to share concerns. In some cases, biweekly meetings with the
counseling team and daily meetings with the head counselor and administrator helped
counselors to maintain a strong counseling program. Frequent communication, clear
expectations, and follow-up helped principals to maintain strong relationships with
counselors. Frequency was typically weekly. For example, principals established weekly
meetings with the counseling team and the administrative team to address concerns
regarding the counseling program, to look at data, and to communicate effectively.
School principals recognize the importance of communication and establishing
trust and building relationships with the counseling staff. Survey responses showed that
communication was important to establishing a relationship, as 36% of counselors and
62% of principals indicated that administrators and counselors met frequently and 58% of
counselors and 97% of principals reported a good working relationship with their
counterparts. As principal Kelly indicated, “Communication and strong relationships are
in place so that counselors feel comfortable to express concerns regarding their ability to
support their students and need for additional support.”
Counselors seemed to appreciate this strategy.
He just trusts us. He backs us. He supports us. We’re a pretty independent
department. Basically I just know I can go to the principal and so can anybody
else. He will come to us and we just talk about, “Hey we have a need, is there
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 49
money? Are there resources? What do you think?” It’s very informal and really
good. (Counselor interviewee Janet)
Personal touch/communication. Personal touch/communication emerged as a
theme from open-ended survey responses and the interviews. This strategy was defined
as personal contact with counselors on a daily basis by building relationships and trust.
Communication and strong relationships were created to display personal touch and
communication for counselors to feel comfortable to express concerns regarding their
ability to support students and the need for additional support. Principals used the
strategy of personal touch by meeting individually with counselors to identify the best
assignment of responsibilities to maximize each counselor’s potential for positive impact
on individual students and school programs. Personal touch/communication was used to
create a dialogue and revise programs. This strategy helped to make changes in
noncounseling responsibilities, such as testing administration, discipline, and
administrative work.
The counselors expressed appreciation of open communication with the principal.
Counselor interview respondent Janet said, “Our administration is wonderful. They
understand what we need. We go to them and they’ll give us a decision or they’ll say,
‘Let’s talk about it.’ It’s an excellent working relationship.”
Support and direction. The third strategy that emerged from the data was the
principal providing support and direction. The principal is instrumental in creating a
supportive environment for counselors, discussing the importance of the work at staff
meetings, and encouraging full participation by staff.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 50
From the survey responses, 39% of the counselors and 47% of the principals
agreed that counselors inform school staff about their role and what programs and
interventions are parts of the counseling program. Furthermore, 30% of the counselors
and 50% of the principals stated that counselors considered this to be a somewhat
accurate reflection of what the counselor did with the staff; 2% of the principals and 30%
of the counselors agreed that the counselors did not inform the school staff about
counseling programs. Survey responses showed that counselors did not feel valued on
campus and did not feel that teachers and staff understood the importance of their role, as
only 21% of counselors agreed that they were valued. The principals expressed a
different view; 62% agreed that the counselors’ role is valued and appreciated. The
counselors’ role seems to be unclear and, based on survey responses, 55% of the
counselors stated that that they were somewhat valued and understood and 38% of the
principals indicated that counselors were somewhat valued.
From the open-ended survey responses, principals and counselors agreed that
providing support and direction helped counselors to execute a successful counseling
program. Providing support and direction to counselors toward successful completion of
their duties helped to motivate and support counselors in their role.
The data reflected that the principals provided support and direction to counselors
to help with completion of duties. Counselor interviewee Janet said,
We are provided release time. We are allowed to do it at an alternate site. There is
a lot of master schedule work and there’s a lot of support. I’d say there’s a lot of
support from administration and working through scheduling. And in the late
summer when we come back, providing and creating lists of students who have
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 51
met certain prerequisites for whatever courses and students that did work over the
summer. So there’s a lot of support and technology and the creation of list for
them to disaggregate students, so they won’t have to look up each student.
Use of data. The fourth strategy indicated in open-ended responses to be effective
was to present data (attendance, A-G readiness for college, graduation rates, and college
plans) to help counselors to focus on the most important areas. The principal provides
data to justify counseling policies that are to be met and the principal is supportive of
counseling programs and realization of district’s non-support at the higher level. In
frequent or regular meetings principals (or delegated administrators) express and provide
support for counselor efforts. The often-mentioned support was in the form of strategic
direction and necessary input data. Principals typically delegate management of
counseling functions to the assistant principal. Close monitoring and inclusion of
counselors in decision making and giving some level of autonomy were employed by
some school principals.
Based on survey responses and interviews, the counselors appreciated inclusion in
decision making and some level of autonomy. According to counselor interviewee Susan,
We have deadlines. So I guess there’s like a check-in with the deadline. I don’t
have very clear guidelines; I’m no given something like that. When I started here,
I wasn’t given, “Here’s what is expected of you.” It’s like, “Okay, you know what
you’re doing. Go do it.” So he could do things behind the scenes that I’m not
aware of. But I know at the beginning of the year, it was the kind of thing where it
was, “Hey, only 80% of theses have gotten done, you’ve got a week; you need to
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 52
get it done.” It wasn’t a direct one-on-one with me, but it was more in our
counseling meeting, a general conversation.
Summary. Based on the findings, the strategies that principals utilize to help
counselors to execute successful counseling program have an impact on counselor
program accountability. The findings indicated that the high school principals and
counselors who were participants in this study reported strategies that were utilized to
exert a positive impact on counseling program effectiveness and success. The strategies
that were explored and the main focus for this study were frequent communication, use of
personal touch/open communication, and providing support and direction.
Frequent communication is a fundamental and important aspect of the counselor-
principal relationship to hold counselors accountable. Frequency of communication was
explained as weekly meetings in which counselors and principals participated. This
helped the school principals to recognize the importance of establishing and building
relationships with the counseling staff. The personal touch and open communication
between counselors and principals allowed the counselors to express concerns about
additional support needed to help students to succeed. The frequent communication took
the counselor-principal relationship to a comfortable level in which the counselors felt
supported to ask to be provided additional resources to improve their counseling program
to ensure student success.
Survey respondents indicated that frequent communication helped to maintain
communication and held counselors accountable for their role: 51% indicated that the
principal, assistant principal, and counselors met to discuss parent/student concerns,
which helped to maintain communication among team members, and 62% indicated that
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 53
counselors providing consultation/update to administrators and school staff regarding
counseling programs was important to identify and maintain the accountability of the
counseling programs.
The personal touch and open communication between principals and counselors
encouraged open communication, which in turn helped counselors to express the
importance of their counseling program and to advocate for changing and removing
noncounseling responsibilities. Principals and counselors agreed that it was crucial to
have the principal provide support and direction to counselors toward successful
completion of their duties. The motivation that counselors received led them to feel
supported and in turn helped them to focus on areas that data showed were important
(e.g., attendance, A-G readiness for college, graduation rates, and college plans). Data
provided by the principals justified to the counselors that their program was or was not
working; it became a support for the counseling program to improve in certain areas or to
celebrate success. Counselors considered the principal to be the main course of support
and encouragement and agreed that the principal has an instrumental role in open
discussion in staff meetings about the important work that counselors do. Although the
counselors agreed that it was important for the principal to support counselors, only 27%
of counselor respondents stated that their principals supported them, while 64% of
principal respondents stated that the principal monitored and helped counselors with time
spent on counseling activities; 40% of counselors and 15% of principals reported that the
principal did not monitor counseling activities. By providing support, principals help
counselors to realize the importance of their role, regardless of a lack of support at the
district level.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 54
Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked, How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of
knowledge regarding the counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at
their school site? Analysis of qualitative and quantitative data indicated that the way
counselors are viewed at their school site can be defined, understood, and addressed by
the roles assigned to the counselors.
The interview responses indicated that the counselors were very aware of their
primary roles in the area of academic, career, and social/emotional support of students.
Raising student achievement and acting as student advocates were the most common
roles that the counselors identified as most important. Although the counselors knew their
roles in the school, 76% of the counselor survey respondents and 59% of the principal
survey respondents stated that the counselors were overworked at their school. The
survey responses indicated that the average case load for 63% of the respondents was 450
to 500 students, the case load for 19% was 250 to 350, and the case load for 18% of the
respondents was 600 to 650 students.
The survey respondents indicated that the counselors were involved with creating
mission statements and school goals: 79% of principal respondents and 30% of counselor
respondents agreed that counselors were directly involved, 55% of counselors and 18%
of principals rated them as somewhat involved, and 33% of counselors and 3% of
principals stated that they were not involved. The survey responses also indicated that the
counselors were working toward raising student achievement by presenting in classrooms
information related to registration and college and career planning. Of the 64 survey
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 55
respondents, 97% of counselor respondents and 94% of principal respondents stated that
counselors presented in classrooms.
Counselors and teachers were reported to collaborate and work toward the same
goal: student achievement. In the survey responses, 55% of the counselor respondents
and 82% of the principal respondents indicated that counselors and teachers worked
collaboratively toward the same goals, 33% of counselors and 18% of principals
somewhat agreed that there was a collaborative relationship, and 12% of counselors and
no principals stated that the teachers and counselors did not work toward the same goals.
Other duties, such as proctoring and managing concerns about discipline, tardy
contracts, and behavior contracts, were reported as minimal or handled entirely by
somebody else. When asked about these extra duties, counselor Janet said,
All of that goes to the dean. The reason they have done that is because we’re
supposed to be supportive. If we’re disciplining them, it’s not a support. We do
talk with him about the contracts very often. I’ll say, “Look, this doesn’t work. I
know you’re on contract. You’ve got to be here.” That kind of stuff. But they
have taken that and put it in the dean’s office, which we’re very grateful for.
As indicated by the survey respondents, 30% of counselors and 35% of principals
indicated that counselors were involved with discipline, standardized testing, and other
noncounseling duties as assigned. Furthermore, 42% of counselors and 38% of principals
indicated that they somewhat agreed that counselors were involved with discipline,
standardized testing, and other noncounseling duties as assigned, and 27% of counselors
and principals stated that counselors were not involved with those noncounseling duties.
Interviewee Dave described the counselor’s role as putting out fires.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 56
It’s a lot of putting out fires. There are over a hundred teachers, and then there’s
administration. We’re not an administrator, but we’re not an instructor. And there
are more instructors, than there are counselors. So counselors are considered less
than, I believe.
Lack of understanding and appreciation were similarly expressed by Counselor
Mary:
Counselors, I don’t believe, are valued the way that they should be. But it begins
with the leadership, and if administration has us putting out fires, then that’s what
we’re looked as. That’s the perception of us, just people that put out fires, and we
do it by an email directive. And that’s pretty much. I think the counseling role is
really, really important. And it’s just really sad and really demoralizing. At times,
dehumanizing, that counselors are not valued. Because the work that I particularly
do with the teen mothers, the undocumented students, the trio programs. I think
it’s really important, because it not only just impacts the students, but it impacts
the community, because of the guardians that they’re connected to. I mean, like
the teen mothers, sometimes have to deal with custody battles with restraining
orders. Bringing attorneys that are not going to charge them anything for those
services that impacts a home, because they are dealing with this abuse, because
they don’t have that resource. And yet, that is not valued. On the contrary, that’s
taking time away from my case slips, so that’s looked at as negative. I think, the
fact that administration does not know, the ASCA model does not know the value
of the counseling role. I think that really affects the functionality of the counseling
department.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 57
Table 5 presents a summary of the themes and exemplar verbatim data strands
regarding the participants’ views of counselor roles.
Analysis of qualitative and quantitative results indicated that the way counselors
are viewed at the school site can be defined, understood, and addressed by the roles
assigned to the counselors. In the interviews the counselors were aware of their primary
role as addressing academic, career and social-emotional support for students and
expressed that they were student advocates with the main goal of raising student
achievement. Noncounseling duties, such as proctoring exams, discipline, and tardy
contracts were minimal and were handled mostly by administrators.
Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked, What key elements of the principal-counselor
relationship influence counselor accountability reform for a successful ASCA-based
counseling program? The variable “counselor accountability reform for a successful
ASCA-based counseling program” was framed as “counseling program quality” as
operationalization based on the survey items. “Service delivery” was another closely
linked variable, which was operationalized and measured in the survey.
In survey responses, 51% of the counselors and 77% of the principals agreed that
counselors coordinate and maintain a comprehensive school counseling program based
on ASCA counseling standards and domains, 30% of the counselors and 21% of the
principals somewhat agreed, and 18% of the counselors and 3% of the principals
disagreed that they followed the ASCA model. In the survey responses, 58% of the
counselors and 74% of the principals indicated that the counseling program uses data to
identify and address needs of students, 27% of the counselors and 26% of the principals
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 58
Table 5

Themes and Categories of Participants’ Views of Counselor Roles

Role Responses and verbatim data strands

Career and
college
counseling
Ensuring that every student graduates and is eligible to attend a 4-year
college or university and knows exactly which college and/or career
matches their interests.
College preparedness graduation assurance
To assist our kids academically so they graduate and are college and
career ready
To make sure students stay on track, take appropriate courses, and
find appropriate alternatives, when necessary. It is our expectation that
all students will be college ready.
To monitor A-G requirements, NCAA requirements, 4-year student
plans
Understanding the academic program and how it relates to college
entrance
To ensure that all students are placed correctly in the classes that they
need to achieve the goal of college and career readiness
Preparing students for graduation and their post secondary career or
college. Often when working with first-generation and minority
students, educators do not understand how much personal assistance
students really need.
Meeting college and graduation requirements, scheduling, problem
solving and exploration of student and parent concerns/problems,
helping with scholarships/applications/forms,
We do a lot of conflict mediation, but our biggest role is credit
checking, enrolling kids in the right classes, making sure they meet
graduation and A-G requirements, etc.
Ensuring students are taking the right classes to fulfill graduation plan
Supporting students towards academic success
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 59
Table 5 (continued)

Role Responses and verbatim data strands

Academic
guidance
Working with students! As a Model Continuation High School with
over 500 “of promise” students, our kids need daily support. Aca-
demic counseling is next in importance. Our grad rate is 96% with
81% of our students enrolling in community colleges, universities,
tech schools, or the military.
Being an advocate for our students and making sure they stay on track
to graduate and go to college, follow their 4-year plan
Correct academic placement of students to give students the best
chance to graduate. Second tier is to work to help students become a-g
qualified.
Socio-emotional
support
Social emotional counseling for students who have multiple
environmental barriers
I believe the most important role of the counselor is to be another
contact besides the classroom teacher that students feel comfortable
going to in regards to their academic and social emotional needs.
Social/emotional response services. We are kept extremely busy with
crisis assessment (threat/risk of harm to self/others).
Communication
and making
connections
Making student connections and communicating to parents
Integrate and develop relationships with students to ensure that they
are meeting their own goals and school goals
Providing students and families with accurate information regarding
graduation, A-G, NCAA Clearing House information, scheduling
students based on data, providing supports and intervention as needed,
and addressing personal-emotional challenges that affect learning

stated that the counseling program somewhat addresses student needs, and 15% of the
counselors and none of the principals indicated that they did not believe that the
counseling program addresses student needs. Furthermore, 64% of the counselors and
76% of the principals agreed that the counseling program was data driven to help keep
counselors accountable to ensure student success, 24% of the counselors and 21% of the
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 60
principals somewhat agreed that the counseling program was data driven, and 12% of the
counselors and 3% of the principals did not agree that the program was data driven.
Evaluation seemed to be the primary formal accountability mechanism cited by
both school principals and school counselors. In the survey responses, 91% of counselors
and 71% of principals stated that they understood the ASCA national standards and
domains for a comprehensive school counseling program, 6% of counselors and 27% of
principals somewhat agreed, and 3% of principals and counselors stated that they did not
know the ASCA national standards. However, most counselors reported that it was
through frequent meetings and communications that they felt the pressure of
accountability. Various monitoring mechanisms were used. Deadlines and target/goals
were driven mostly by data.
We have deadlines. So I guess there’s like a check-in with the deadline. I don’t
have any very clear guidelines; I’m not given something like that. When I started
here, I wasn’t given, “Here’s what is expected of you.” It’s like, “Okay. You
know what you’re doing. Go do it.”
So, he could do things behind the scenes that I’m not aware of. But I know
at the beginning of the year, it was the kind of thing where it was, “Hey, only 80%
of these have gotten done, you’ve got a week, you need to get it done.” It wasn’t a
direct one-on-one with me, but it was more in our counseling meeting, a general
conversation.
The counselors were conscious of the ASCA model as a basis for defining their
duties and responsibilities and shaping their counseling programs. Unfortunately, it seems
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 61
that the reality is very different. When asked whether the ASCA model was followed in
their department, one interviewee stated,
No, not that I know of. It’s not something that’s openly discussed, that we are
tweeting. . . . I guess it would just be sight driven and that we have, we do our
4-year plans. We just do what is directed by the principal. Even the beginning of
this interview, you asked about testing. Counselors should not be proctoring
exams, none of that, and we’ve always done it. We do a lot of things that go
against the ASCA National Model.
Table 6 summarizes the themes and presents exemplar verbatim data strands
regarding accountability.
The variable “counselor accountability reform for a successful ASCA-based
counseling program” was framed as “counseling program quality”; this was the
operationalization based on the survey items. “Service delivery” was another closely
linked variable, operationalized and measured in the survey. Evaluation seemed to be the
primary formal accountability mechanism cited by both school principals and school
counselors. However, most counselors expressed that it was through frequent meetings
and communications that they felt the pressure of accountability. Various monitoring
mechanisms were also used. Deadlines and target/goals were driven mostly by data. The
themes that emerged for holding counselors accountable were evaluation, frequent
meetings/communication, and monitoring.
Discussion
This chapter began with presentation of demographic data collected through
survey responses and interviews. Two principals and three counselors participated in a
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 62
Table 6

Themes and Categories of Participants’ Views on Accountability

How the principal
holds the counselor
accountable Responses and verbatim data strands

Evaluation Formal evaluations process every 2 years and discussion of job
related duties as needed
Evaluations and communication on a regular basis
Through the evaluation process and weekly meetings
Through the Stull evaluation as well as working through the Head
Counselor in monitoring the successful completion of their
assigned duties
2-year evaluation cycle
The principal evaluates counselors as stipulated by the union
contract. However, unofficially, the principal evaluates the
counselor based upon parent, student and teacher information.
Frequent meetings,
communication
Accountability is accomplished mainly through weekly meetings
with the assistant principal who consults with the principal.
Weekly meetings, yearly calendar that is followed by all
counselors with lessons and guidance activities, personal
observations and formal yearly evaluations
Meetings, evaluation, notification of complaints and rectifying
issues together
The Assistant Principal who oversees the Counseling Department
works closely with Counselors, meeting with them regularly
providing direction and getting feedback.
We meet every Monday morning for 2 hours. It is their forum to
discuss student and school issues.
Weekly meetings to build mutual interests
I hold my counselors accountable by meeting with them weekly to
monitor their work and ensure that the expectation that everything
we do is to prepare every student to be college and career ready.
The weekly meeting serves as a performance dialogue.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 63
Table 6 (continued)

How the principal
holds the counselor
accountable Responses and verbatim data strands

Communication, collaboration, and building positive, productive
working relationships with counseling team
Frequent communication, clear expectations, follow up
Monthly meetings, individual meetings, evaluation process
We meet with our principal and admin staff weekly. At those
meetings, we review the calendar and progress of the counseling
department.
Monitoring We have a variety of data points that we track - graduation rates,
college enrollment rates, remediation rates, etc.
Individual monitoring
Use of student achievement data, student placement, students and
parent feedback and social/emotional services.
We have tasks we report on and have a counseling calendar we
adhere to.
Our principal checks data often and discusses it with us.
Individual conferences, A-G readiness data, graduation rates,
queries of Aeries data base codes.

face-to-face qualitative interview. Demographics included information about the
principals’ and counselors’ years of service in the current position and in education.
The statistical data were analyzed, using means and standard deviations for each
of the study variables presented in Table 7. Appendix D pairs the survey items to each of
the variables. The comparisons between principal and counselor responses (Table 7)
indicated significant (p < .05) differences between responses by principals and counselors
on all variables, indicating that the differences are of practical importance. Based on
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 64
Table 7

Comparison of Principals’ and Counselors’ Mean Response Scores on Survey Items

Respondents

Principals
(n = 31)
Counselors
(n = 33)
Variables M SD M SD t df p d
Counseling program
quality 3.10 0.56 2.73 0.94 1.85 62 .069 0.48
Service (career, social,
college) 3.54 0.41 3.09 0.94 3.09 62 .003 0.66
Collaboration 2.89 0.93 2.09 0.92 3.46 62 .001 0.87
Involving counselors 3.02 0.77 2.38 0.79 3.27 62 .002 0.82
Counselors providing
update 2.98 0.72 2.45 0.78 2.80 62 .007 0.70
Counselor-principal
relationship 2.45 0.78 3.45 0.57 2.81 62 .007 1.47
Counselor-teacher
relationship 3.45 0.57 2.58 1.00 4.27 62 .000 1.12
Professional develop-
ment activities 2.58 1.00 3.13 0.72 4.34 51 .000 0.64
Monitoring by the
principal 3.13 0.72 2.64 0.96 2.31 62 .024 0.59
Value for role of
counselors 2.64 0.96 3.58 0.67 2.33 59 .023 1.16
Noncounseling duties 3.58 0.67 2.91 0.91 3.33 62 .001 0.85
Work load 2.91 0.91 2.90 1.04 3.36 59 .001 0.01
Understanding of ASCA
standards and domains 2.90 1.04 1.91 0.88 4.13 62 .000 1.03

survey responses, the counselors and principals presented significantly different views of
the counselor’s role, the program, and their relationship.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 65
Summary of the Findings
This chapter addressed each of the three research questions and relevant data from
the survey responses and interviews from principals and counselors.
Research Question 1 asked, What strategies do principals utilize to help
counselors execute a successful counseling program? Findings indicated that frequent
communication, use of a personal touch, and support emerged as themes from the open-
ended responses to the survey and the interviews. The principals recognized the
importance of communication and establishing trust and building relationships with
counselors. Support was perceived through weekly meetings with principals or
administrators assigned to counselors. Less significance was found for team approach,
delegation to assistant principal, autonomy, inclusion of counselors in decision making,
close monitoring, and use of counseling interns.
Research Question 2 asked, How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of
knowledge regarding the counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at
their school site? It is apparent that the counselors saw their roles as providing academic,
personal/social, and career support and advocates for students to increase student
achievement. Although counselors did not report that they proctored tests or deal with
discipline issues, their role was still not clear to principals, as it was indicated that the
role was mainly seen as “putting out fires.” Responses indicated that the counselors were
caught in quasi-administrative roles and definitely were not seen as teachers. Although
the perception was that counselors were not valued, the counselors were following the
ASCA model and working with students to support students’ academic, personal/social,
and career/college growth.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 66
Research Question 3 asked, What key elements of the principal-counselor
relationship influence counselor accountability reform for a successful ASCA-based
counseling program? The key element that influenced counselor accountability was not
the pressure to follow an ASCA-based model and evaluations that were conducted were
not based on ASCA standards. The findings indicated that principals held counselors
accountable through formal evaluations, frequent meetings and data monitoring (e.g.,
attendance, A-G readiness for college, graduation rates, and college plans). Counselors
reported that the frequent meetings and check-ins created pressure for accountability, and
various monitoring mechanisms were reported by respondents.
An independent samples t test compared mean scores of principals and
counselors. Results indicated significantly different ratings between groups across all
variables except for the ratings pertaining to the quality of the counseling program.
Principals gave significantly higher ratings except for the counselor-principal
relationship, professional development activities, and value of the role of counselors.
Bivariate correlations between variables are summarized in Table 8 (correlation
matrix) and Tables 9 and 10. Table 9 indicates predictors linked to counseling program
quality: collaboration, involving counselors, noncounseling duties, and understanding of
ASCA standards and domains. Table 10 indicates predictors linked to service delivery:
collaboration, relationships, professional development, workload, and understanding of
ASCA standards and domains. The significance correlates based on the regression
analysis in Table 8 for program quality were involving counselors, counselors providing
updates, counselor-teacher relationship, professional development activities, value of the
role of counselors, and understanding ASCA standards and domains. Significant
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 67

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 68

Table 9

Regression Analysis Predicting Counseling Program Quality

Dependent variable (predictor) B SE β t p

Collaboration -0.060 0.114 -0.076 -0.532 .597
Involving counselors 0.397 0.123 0.418 3.223 .002
Counselors providing update 0.163 0.126 0.163 1.294 .201
Counselor-principal relationship 0.070 0.136 0.082 0.517 .607
Counselor-teacher relationship 0.123 0.135 0.136 0.908 .368
Professional development activities 0.195 0.101 0.213 1.930 .059
Monitoring by the principal 0.088 0.077 0.119 1.136 .261
Value for role of counselors -0.155 0.145 -0.166 -1.070 .290
Noncounseling duties -0.210 0.081 -0.267 -2.607 .012
Work load -0.045 0.095 -0.049 -0.471 .640
Understanding ASCA
standards and domains 0.321 0.099 0.331 3.225 .002

Note. ASCA = American School Counselor Association. Model summary: adjusted R
2
=
0.483, F = 6.353, df 1 = 11, df 2 = 52, p < .001.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 69
Table 10

Regression Analysis Predicting Service Delivery (Career, Social, College)

Dependent variable (predictor) B SE β t p

Collaboration 0.111 0.102 0.181 1.089 .281
Involving counselors -0.014 0.111 -0.019 -0.123 .902
Counselors providing update 0.071 0.114 0.091 0.622 .537
Counselor-principal relationship 0.082 0.123 0.124 0.669 .506
Counselor-teacher relationship 0.179 0.122 0.256 1.470 .148
Professional development activities 0.177 0.091 0.250 1.942 .058
Monitoring by the principal 0.012 0.070 0.021 0.174 .862
Value for role of counselors -0.028 0.131 -0.039 -0.218 .829
Noncounseling duties -0.104 0.073 -0.170 -1.429 .159
Work load -0.065 0.086 -0.092 -0.759 .451
Understanding ASCA
standards and domains 0.104 0.089 0.139 1.165 .249

Note. ASCA = American School Counselor Association. Model summary: adjusted R
2
=
0.2938, F = 3.436, df 1 = 11, df 2 = 52, p < .001.
correlates based on the regression analysis for service delivery were collaboration,
involving counselors, counselors providing update, counselor-principal relationship,
counselor-teacher relationship, professional development activities, and value of the role
of counselors.
The main analysis involved multiple linear regressions to identify significant
predictors of the two main outcome variables of the study: counseling program quality
and service delivery. Results indicated that counseling program quality was significantly
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 70
predicted by three variables: involving counselors, noncounseling duties (inverse
relationship), and understanding ASCA standards and domains. Service delivery, with
regard to providing an ASCA-based model (academic, personal/social, and career) was
not significantly predicted by any of the variables.
Chapter Summary
This chapter reported results of interviews with two high school principals and
three high school counselors and survey responses from principals and counselors. The
results were analyzed to explain the importance of the counselor-principal relationship
and its correlation to counselor accountability based on the ASCA model. Major
emergent themes were reported.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 71
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS
Background and Purpose of the Study
The position of the school counselor has evolved over the past few years into a
demanding role that requires principals and counselors to follow ASCA national
standards. In secondary schools, principals are the school leaders and have the authority
and power to initiate and implement the direction of the school’s counseling program
(Dollarhide et al., 2007). Dahir (2004) stated that both ASCA and the NASSP found that
the success of a counseling program is dependent on the principal’s understanding and
support of the counseling profession at the school-site level. Dollarhide et al. (2007)
explained that, as school counselors work to implement the ASCA national model at their
school site, principals have the power to structure the timing and the results of the
counselors’ efforts.
As 21st-century leaders, counselors are part of a paradigm shift with regard to
their role. The counseling profession has shifted from service provider to full partner in
the education system, becoming change agents and advocates for all students, the school
community, and the counseling profession (Dollarhide, 2003). Due to omission of a
mandate for counselors in school reform efforts, ASCA created national standards and
domains for the counseling profession (Perusse et al., 2004). Because school counselors
can have an impact on student achievement, they are important members of school
communities (Bickmore & Curry, 2013).
The purpose of this study was to improve understanding of the counselor-
principal relationship and its impact on development and implementation of a
comprehensive counseling program to increase student success. An additional purpose
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 72
was to explore how the collaborative relationship of counselors and principals affects
counselors’ effectiveness in implementing a comprehensive school counseling program
that demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success. The aim was to
determine whether counselors and principals working collaboratively to create a data-
driven, ASCA standards-based comprehensive program would lead to counselor
accountability for student success.
Three research questions were developed around the study’s purpose and an
extensive review of literature pertinent to the topic. A mixed-methods methodology was
used to address the research questions and quantitative and qualitative data were collected
and analyzed to address the research questions.
Summary of Findings
Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asked, What strategies do principals utilize to help
counselors execute a successful counseling program? The high school principals and
counselors who participated in this study reported strategies that were utilized to affect
counseling program effectiveness and success positively: frequent communication, use of
personal touch/open communication, and providing support and direction. The levels and
frequencies of these strategies varied by school site.
Frequent communication. Frequent communication is a fundamental and
important aspect of the counselor-principal relationship to hold counselors accountable.
Frequency of communication was explained as weekly meetings in which the counselors
and principals participated. This helped the school principals to recognize the importance
of establishing and building relationships with the counseling staff. Weekly and biweekly
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 73
meetings were held so the team, including counselors and administrators, could take the
opportunity to share concerns regarding students or the counseling department. These
meetings were usually held to look at data and communicate openly about the counseling
program and what is working and what needs improvement. The counseling team uses
these meetings to reflect on academic issues that impede students from success and uses
the support of the administrator to implement practices to help students to succeed.
Use of personal touch/open communication. The personal touch and open
communication between counselors and principals allowed the counselors to express
concerns if they felt the need for additional support to help students succeed. The
frequent communication took the counselor-principal relationship to a comfortable level
in which the counselors felt supported to ask to be provided additional resources to
improve their counseling program to ensure student success. The personal touch
encouraged open communication that in turn helped counselors to express the importance
of their counseling program and to advocate to change and remove noncounseling
responsibilities. The importance of building relationships and trust helped the counselors
to feel supported and in turn implement an effective counseling program.
Providing support and direction. Principals and counselors agreed that it was
crucial for the principal to provide support and direction to counselors toward fulfilling
their duties. The motivation that counselors received led them to feel supported and in
turn helped them to focus on areas that data showed were important (e.g., attendance, A-
G readiness for college, graduation rates, and college plans). The principals provided data
to the counselors to show that their program was or was not working; it became a support
for the counseling program to improve in certain areas or to celebrate success. Counselors
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 74
reported that the principal was the main course of support and encouragement and had an
instrumental role in discussing at staff meetings the important work that the counselors
do. By providing support, the principals helped the counselors to realize the importance
of their role, regardless of any lack of support from the district level. Inclusion of
counselors in decision making and giving some level of autonomy were included in the
strategies employed by high school principals. These strategies allowed counselors to
make decisions based on what they felt would address student success and to approach
data with flexibility.
Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asked, How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of
knowledge regarding the counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at
their school site? Analysis of qualitative and quantitative data indicated that the way
counselors were viewed at their school site could be defined, understood, and addressed
by the roles assigned to the counselors. Interviewed counselors were aware of their
primary role of addressing academic, career and social emotional support for students and
expressed that they were student advocates with the main goal of raising student
achievement. Noncounseling duties, such as proctoring exams, discipline, and tardy
contracts were minimal and were handled mostly by administrators. Areas that identified
the counselors’ roles were career and college counseling, academic guidance,
socioemotional support, and communication/making connections.
Career/college counseling. The counselors’ role was seen as ensuring that
students graduate and are eligible to attend a 4-year college or university. The counselors
also monitored and helped students to stay on track with appropriate course work and
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 75
were prepared for A-G requirements and National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA) requirements by developing 4-year student plans. The counselors’ role is to
ensure that every student is correctly placed in appropriate coursework to meet the
student’s college and career goals. The counselors’ role was described as having frequent
meetings with students regarding scheduling, graduation requirements, problem solving,
exploration of personal/social concerns, and help with the college application process.
The most common emergent theme was that counselors were responsible for conflict
mediation and that their main role was credit monitoring to enroll students in the right
courses for graduation and to meet A-G requirements.
Academic guidance. The counselors’ main role under academic guidance was
supporting students toward academic success by ensuring that they took the right courses.
Working with students to ensure that they are supported through their academic struggles
is one of the most important roles for the counselor. Being an advocate for students is the
way the role was preserved by interviewees. The counselors’ main role was seen as
helping students and keeping track of student successes and failures to monitor progress
toward graduation and college readiness. According to the data strands, the best way
counselors provided academic support was through correct academic placement of
students to ensure high school graduation; the second way was to work with students to
ensure that they meet A-G requirements for college admission.
Social-emotional support. In the data strands the role of counselors was
described as providing social-emotional support. The social-emotional counseling for
students with multiple environmental barriers can be challenging for counselors.
Counselors are trained to provide social-emotional support within the scope of their
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 76
training; if students require more in-depth professional help, counselors are trained to
utilize resources in the district and community. Counselors at most sites were seen as
adults with whom the students felt comfortable in seeking help regarding academic and
social-emotional needs. Counselors work with students on social-emotional needs and in
response services. Counselors are kept busy with crisis assessments for suicide ideation
or risks of harm to self or others.
Communication and making connections. The counselors’ role is seen as
making student connections and communicating with parents, teachers, administrators,
and community members. The counselors’ role is to integrate and develop relationships
with students to ensure that they are on track to meet personal and academic goals. The
counselors also provide students, their families, and the community information
regarding graduation requirements, A-G requirements, NCAA clearing house
information, and resources regarding personal/social needs. The counselors’ role is to
address personal/social challenges that students facie that affect their learning and
academic success.
Research Question 3
Research Question 3 asked, What key elements of the principal-counselor
relationship influence counselor accountability reform for a successful ASCA-based
counseling program? The variable “counselor accountability reform for a successful
ASCA-based counseling program” was framed as “counseling program quality”; this was
the operationalization based on survey items. “Service delivery” was another closely
linked variable, operationalized and measured in the survey. Evaluation was the formal
accountability mechanism most frequently cited by both principals and counselors.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 77
However, most counselors expressed that it was through frequent meetings and
communications that they felt the pressure of accountability. Various monitoring
mechanisms were used. Deadlines and targets/goals were generally driven by data. The
themes that emerged for holding counselors accountable were evaluation, frequent
meetings/communication, and monitoring.
Evaluation. Participant responses indicated that the counselors were held
accountable by the principals through an evaluation process that was conducted every 2
years. These evaluations with the counselor included a discussion of job-related duties as
needed. Principals also evaluated counselors on a regular basis through communication
and weekly meetings. Some principals, working with the head counselor, monitored the
counselors’ completion of their assigned duties. The principal’s evaluation process was
stipulated in the union contract. However, it seemed that the principals unofficially
evaluated counselors based on parent, student, and teacher information.
Frequent meetings/communication. Accountability was accomplished mainly
through weekly meetings and personal and formal yearly evaluations that held counselors
accountable. The principals’ weekly meetings with the counselors held the counselors
accountable for monitoring their work and reinforced the expectation that counselors do
everything possible to help every student to prepare for college and career. The weekly
meetings held counselors accountable as they served as a time for performance dialogue
and a review of the calendar and progress on counseling department goals.
Monitoring. Counselor accountability was also based on monitoring various data
provided to the principals. The principals monitored data points and tracked graduation
rates, college enrollment rates, and remediation rates and conducted individual meetings
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 78
with counselors to understand the data. This allowed the principals to do individual
monitoring and ensure that the counseling department goals and program addressed
student success. The principals used student achievement data, student placement data,
and student and parent feedback to hold counselors accountable for providing appropriate
services to students and families. Counselors were asked to create a counseling calendar
of all tasks and to adhere to deadlines and dates. The principals checked and monitored
the data frequently and discussed it with counselors in individual conferences and
counseling department meetings.
Implications for Practice
The study revealed that counseling program quality is significantly predicted by
three variables: involving counselors, noncounseling duties (inverse relationship), and
understanding ASCA standards and domains. Service delivery, with regard to providing
an ASCA-based model (academic, personal/social, career) was not significantly predicted
by any of the variables. Although the participating counselors reported passion for the
profession, they expressed the principals’ lack of understanding of the counselors’ role,
which caused them to feel dissatisfied and not valued.
Results indicated that the two groups—principals and counselors—gave
significantly different ratings across all variables except for quality of the counseling
program. Principals gave significantly higher ratings except for the counselor-principal
relationship, professional development activities, and value of the counselors’ role.
Graduate programs can cross-train administrators regarding the counselors’ role and the
areas of counseling standards as determined by the ASCA. This might assist
administrators to understand the counselors’ role and to collaborate and encourage
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 79
counseling teams to create an ASCA-driven counseling program to hold counselors
accountable for student success.
On the school level, principals can provide professional development training
opportunities on the counseling profession to all staff. At these training sessions,
counselors can highlight the importance of their role in raising student achievement by
explaining their responsibilities to the faculty, staff, students, parents, and the wider
community. This will allow the staff to understand the position of the counselors and give
the counselors an opportunity to explain through data the importance of their role in the
success of every student. Teachers often regard counselors as administrators and hesitate
to build supportive teams, based on the misconception that counselors may evaluate
them. With an explanation of the counselors’ role, teachers may be willing to create
teams with the counselors to build a strong program to raise student achievement.
Recommendations for Future Research
Participants in the interview portion of this study were two principals and three
counselors from four southern California comprehensive public high schools. Future
researchers might consider a larger sample of principals and counselors to obtain
additional information about the counselors’ perceptions of how their relationship with
their principal impedes or encourages accountability. A larger sample might produce a
wider variation of responses due to increased anonymity of participants.
Data for this study were gathered through interviews with two principals and three
counselors at three comprehensive high schools in southern California. As noted in the
section on limitations, an important factor to consider is the size and type of high school
targeted in this study. The data may not represent the perceptions of counselors and
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 80
principals in private or charter high schools. The study was conducted at large high
schools; it would be important to collect data from smaller high schools to determine
whether relationships among principals, counselors and district officials are different. It
might also be beneficial to compare large comprehensive high school to smaller charter
or private high schools to determine whether there is a difference in how the role of the
counselors is perceived and how that perception affects counselor accountability in
creating an ASCA-based school counseling program.
The data showed that assistant principals were direct supervisors for most of the
counseling staff. Future research should obtain feedback and conduct interviews with
assistant principals to provide information regarding the relationship of counselors with
their direct supervisor (assistant principal versus principal) and how that affects counselor
accountability to implement an ASCA-based counseling program. Data gathered from
assistant principals could provide information about their knowledge of the role of the
school counselor gained in weekly meetings and direct daily contact with counselors. It
would be beneficial to study head counselors and compare their perceptions of working
with the principal as they represent the counseling department. This information could
address whether frequent contact between the head counselor and principal is beneficial
to creating a comprehensive counseling program or creates dysfunction in the counseling
team.
Conclusion
The study was conducted to improve understanding of the counselor-principal
relationship and its impact on development and implementation of a comprehensive
counseling program that increases student success. The goal was to explore how the
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 81
collaborative relationship of counselors and principals affects counselors’ effectiveness in
implementing an ASCA-based comprehensive school counseling program that
demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success.
The results of the study showed that, while participant counselors and principals
communicated frequently and had consistent collaboration through weekly or biweekly
meetings that held counselors accountable, this arrangement was not adequate to ensure
an ASCA-based counseling program to increase student success. Results indicated that
counseling program quality is significantly predicted by three variables: involving
counselors, noncounseling duties (inverse relationship), and understanding ASCA
standards and domains. Service delivery, with regard to providing an ASCA-based model
(academic, personal/social, and career) was not significantly predicted by any of the
variables. The principals in the study focused on communication with the counseling staff
and close relationships to ensure accountability by counseling staff to positively influence
student achievement. Development and implementation of an ASCA-based
comprehensive counseling program that addresses the academic, personal/social, and
college/career counseling domains was not encouraged by the principals and counselors
at the high schools in this study. However, the lack of an ASCA-driven counseling
program did not negatively affect the counselor-principal relationships or how counselors
were held accountable to support and increase student achievement.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 82
References
Amatea, E. S., & Clark, M. (2005). Changing school, changing counselors: A qualitative
study of school administrators' conceptions of the school counselor role.
Retrieved from http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/284790
American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA national model: A frame-
work for school counseling programs. Retrieved from http://schoolcounselor.org
Anctil, T. M., Smith, C. K., & Dahir, C. (2012). Professional school counselors’ career
development practices and continuing education needs. Career Development
Quarterly, 60(2), 109-121.
Bickmore, D. L., & Curry, J. R. (2013). The induction of school counselors: Meeting
personal and professional needs. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in
Learning, 21(1), 6-27.
Bodenhorn, N., Wolfe, E. W., & Airen, O. E. (2010). School counselors’ program choice
and self-efficacy: Relationship to achievement gap and equity. Professional
School Counseling, 13, 165-174.
Chan, S. C. H., & Mak, W. (2012). Benevolent leadership and faller performance: The
mediating role of leader-member exchange (LMX). Asia Pacific Management, 29,
285-301.
Clemons, E. V., Milsom, A., & Cashwell, C. S. (2009). Using leader-member exchange
theory to examine principal-school counselor relationships, school counselors’
role, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. Professional School Counseling,
13(2), 75-85.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 83
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Curry, J. R., & Bickmore, D. (2012). School counselor induction and the importance of
mattering. Professional School Counseling, 15, 110-122.
Dahir, C. A. (2004). Supporting a nation of learners: The role of school counseling in
educational reform. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82, 344-353.
Dahir, C. A. (2009). School counseling in the 21st century: Where lies the future?
[Special section]. Journal of Counseling and Development, 87(1), 1-3.
Dahir, C. A., Burnham, J. J., & Stone, C. B. (2009). Listen to the voices: School
counselors and comprehensive school counseling programs. Professional School
Counseling, 12, 182-192.
Dahir, C. A., Burnham, J. J., Stone, C. B., & Cobb, N. (2010). Principals as partners:
Counselors as collaborators. NASSP Bulletin, 94, 286-305.
Dahir, C. A., & Stone, C. B. (2009). School counselor accountability: The path to social
justice and systemic change. Journal of Counseling & Development, 87, 12-20.
Dienesch, R. M., & Linden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership:
A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11, 618-
634.
Dollarhide, C. T. (2003). School counselors as program leaders: Applying leadership
contexts to school counseling. Professional School Counseling, 6, 304-308.
Dollarhide, C. T., Gibson, D. M., & Saginak, K. A. (2008). New counselors’ leadership
efforts in school counseling: Themes from a year-long qualitative study.
Professional School Counseling, 11, 262-271.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 84
Dollarhide, C. T., Smith, A. T., & Lemberger, M. E. (2007). Critical incidents in the
development of supportive principals: Facilitating school counselor-principal
relationships. Professional School Counseling, 10, 360-369.
Foster, L. H., Young, S. J., & Hermann, M. (2005). The work activities of professional
school counselors: Are the national standards being addressed? Professional
School Counseling, 8, 313-321.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange
theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-
844.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Development of leader-member exchange (LMX)
theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain
perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219-247.
Hatch, T., & Chen-Hayes, S. F. (2008). School counselors’ beliefs about ASCA National
Model School Counseling Program components using the SCPCS. Professional
School Counseling, 12, 34-42.
House, R., & Hayes, R. (2002). School counselors: Becoming key players in school
reform. Professional School Counseling, 5, 249-260.
Janson, C., Militello, M., & Kosine, N. (2008). Four views of the professional school
counselor-principal relationship: A Q-methodology study. Professional School
Counseling, 11, 353-361.
Kirchner, G. L., & Setchfield, M. S. (2005). School counselors’ and school principals’
perceptions of the school counselor's role. Education, 126(1), 10-16.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 85
Louis, K. S., Jones, L. M., & Barajas, H. (2001). Districts and schools as a context for
transformed counseling roles. National Association of Secondary School
Principals, 85(625), 62-72.
Mason, E. (2010). Leadership practices of school counselors and counseling program
implementation. NASSP Bulletin, 94, 274-285.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Meany-Walen, K., Carnes-Holt, K., Barrio-Minton, C. A., Purswell, K., & Pronchenko-
Jain, Y. (2013). An exploration of counselors’ professional leadership
development. Journal of Counseling and Development, 91, 206-215.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Militello, M., & Janson, M. (2008). Socially focused, situationally driven practice: A
study of distributed leadership among school principals and counselors. Journal
of School Leadership, 17, 409-442.
Monteiro-Leitner, J., Asner-Self, K. K., Milde, C., Leitner, D. W., & Skelton, D. (2006).
The role of the rural school counselor: Counselor, counselor-in-training, and
principal perceptions. Professional School Counseling, 9, 248-251.
Myrick, R. D. (2003). Accountability: Counselor count. Professional School Counseling,
6, 174-179.
Nelson, J. A., Robles-Pina, R., & Nichter, M. (2008). An analysis of Texas high school
counselors’ roles: Actual and preferred counseling activities. Journal of
Professional Counseling, 36(1), 30-46.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 86
Niebuhr, K., & Niebuhr, R. E. (1999). Principal and counselor collaboration. Education,
119, 674-678.
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Perera-Diltz, D. M., & Mason, K. L. (2010). An exploration of accountability practices of
school counselors: A national study. Journal of Professional Counseling, 38, 52-
70.
Perusse, R., Goodnough, G. E., Donegan, J., & Jones, C. (2004). Perceptions of school
counselors and school principals about the national standards for school
counseling programs and the transforming school counseling initiative.
Professional School Counseling, 7, 152-161.
Ross, W., & Herrington, D. (2006). A comparative study of pre-professional
counselor/principal perceptions of the role of the counselor in public school.
National Forum of Educational Administrations and Supervision Journal-
Electronic, 23(4E), 1-18.
Scarborough, J. L., & Culbreth, J. R. (2008). Examining discrepancies between actual
and preferred practice of school counselors. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 86, 446-459.
Spink, C., & Edwards, C. (2008). Supportive learning communities and the transforma-
tive role of professional school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 12,
108-114.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 87
Wilkerson, K. (2010). School counselor reform and principals’ priorities: A preliminary
content analysis of the National Association for Secondary School Principals
(NASSP) Bulletin (1997-2007) informed by guiding documents of the American
School Counselor Association (ASCA). Education, 131, 419-436.
Young, A., & Kaffenberger, C. (2011). The beliefs and practices of school counselors
who use data to implement comprehensive school counseling programs.
Professional School Counseling, 15, 67-76.
Zalaquett, C. P., & Chatters, S. J. (2012). Middle school principals’ perceptions of middle
school counselors’ roles and functions. American Secondary Education, 40(2),
89-103.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 88
Appendix A
Invitation to Participate

Dear School Counselor/Principal,

I am a doctoral candidate in the Educational Leadership program at Rossier School
of Education at University of Southern California (USC) and I am conducting
research study as part of my dissertation process under Dr. Rudy Castruita. I am
requesting your participation to help me collect data for a research analysis o the
principal and school counselors’ relationship and its impact on counselor
accountability. The focus of this research is to identify how the relationship impacts
or does not impact counselor accountability aligned with the ASCA National Model
of a comprehensive counseling program.

By participating in this study, your responses will provide essential and valuable
information regarding the principal and counselor relationship and its impact on
counselor accountability. Furthermore, it can help to bring clarity to the counseling
profession in helping to create an ASCA based program to help student achievement.
In addition, your responses will bring clarity to the counselors’ current role and the
importance of accountability. The survey should not take more than 10 minutes to
complete.

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) Office of Research at the University of
Southern California has approved the study. Should you have any questions
regarding this survey or study, please contact Program Director.

Please take a few minutes and provide me with your valuable input and help me
with this important study y completing the survey through the link provided below.

The survey link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/principalsandcounselors

Thank you so much for your support.
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 89
Appendix B
Survey

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 90

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 91

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 92

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 93
Appendix C
Consent Form

I am a doctoral candidate in the Educational Leadership program at Rossier School
of Education at University of Southern California (USC) and I am conducting
research study as part of my dissertation process under Dr. Rudy Castruita. I need
your help and expertise to understand school counselor and principals’ relationship
and its impact on counselor accountability based on the ASCA National Model. Your
responses are invaluable to this study and the focus of the research is to identify if
the relationship between the principal and counselors impact how counselors
perform counseling activities aligned with the comprehensive school counselor ASA
National Model and also look at how the relationship does not encourage that.
Demographic questions will also be included in the survey.

You were selected to participate because of your role as a principal or school
counselor. Your participation in this project includes completing a 45 minute
interview. Should you choose to participate, your responses will remain
confidential and the researcher will not use your name in the study. Data and
documents will be stored in a locked office and three years after the completion of
the study the data will be destroyed.

This study is considered a human research project; however, the risk to you for
being a participant is minimal. Your participation in this study is completely
voluntarily and you may withdraw from this study at any time. It is possible that the
study, when completed, will be published and presented in a public forum. When
reporting results, no identifying information such as names, school information will
not be used in the paper or presentation. By participating in an interview, you are
consenting to participate in the study and give consent for the responses to be used
in a publication or presentation.

If you have any questions at this time or at any point during your participation, you
may contact Narineh Makijan, Makijan@usc.edu or (xxx) xxx-xxxx.

I have read the above information and consent form and understand that
participation in this study constitutes my consent.

COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 94
Appendix D
Variables and Their Corresponding Survey Items

Variables Survey Items
Program 15. The counselors coordinate and maintain a comprehensive
school-counseling program based on the American School
Counseling Association (ASCA) counseling standards and domains.
Program 18. Our counseling program is based on the ASCA domains to
ensure student success through the implementation of a program that
addresses the students’ academic, personal/social, career
Program 19. The counseling program uses data to address and identify the
needs of the students.
Program 21. Our counseling program is data driven (graduation rate, A-G
rates, dropout rates, 4-yr college/2-yr college data, etc.) to help keep
counselors accountable to ensure student success.
Service
(Academic/Social)
22. Counselors and administrators meet at least once a week to
review, consult and discuss student situations.
Service (Career) 20. The counselors present to students in classrooms at least once a
year on registrations, college and career information.
Service (College) 24. Counselors meet with students one-on-one at least once a year to
go over college information, registration and/or four year plans.
Collaboration 8. We discuss student/parent/teacher concerns as a team (includes
counselors, assistant principals, principals, etc.)
Collaboration 10. The principal and counselor collaborate and consult regarding
the school-counseling program on a monthly basis.
Collaboration 7. The counseling team meets with the principal frequently
Counselor-
Teacher
Relationship
23. Counselors and teachers have a collaborative relationship and
work toward the same goal: student achievement.
Counselor-
Principal
Relationship
6. I have a good working relationship with my principal/counselor(s)
COUNSELOR-PRINCIPAL RELATIONSHIPS 95
Involvement 12. The counselors participate on different committees within the
school (i.e. school safety committee, teacher-leadership committees,
etc.)
Involvement 17. In creating and implementing school goals and mission
statement, the counselor is involved with the implementation and
process.
Monitoring by
Administrator
14. Time spent on each activity (i.e. individual counseling,
classroom presentations, parent conferences, etc.) for counselors is
monitored by an administrator.
Non-counseling
duty involvement
27. Counselors at our school are involved with discipline,
standardized testing and other non-counseling duties as assigned.
Overwork 25. Counselor are overworked in our school.
Prof Devt 13. The counselors attend professional development activities, such
as UC/CSU conferences and other in-services.
Understanding of
ASCA
26. As a counselor/principal I understand what the ASCA national
standards and domains for a comprehensive school counseling
program are.
Update 9. The counselor(s) provide consultation/update to administrators
and school staff regarding the counseling program and programs
implemented.
Update 11. The counselors inform school staff about the school counselors’
role within the school and what programs and interventions are part
of the counseling program
View of counselor 16. Teachers and staff on campus value, understand and appreciate
the role of the counselors.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purposes of this study were (a) to understand the counselor-principal relationship and its impact on development and implementation of a comprehensive counseling program to increase student success, and (b) to explore how the collaborative relationship of counselors and principals affects counselors’ effectiveness in implementing a comprehensive school counseling program that demonstrates counselors’ accountability for student success. Three research questions guided the study: (a) What strategies do principals utilize to help counselors execute a successful counseling program? (b) How does the principals’ knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the counseling profession affect the way counselors are viewed at the school site? and (c) What key elements of the principal-counselor relationship influence counselor accountability reform for a successful American School Counselor Association (ASCA)-based counseling program? In a mixed-methods approach, qualitative data came from responses to an open-ended survey by 31 high school principals and 33 high school counselors. Quantitative data came from interviews with 2 high school principals and 3 high school counselors. Data showed that, while participant counselors and principals communicated frequently and had consistent collaboration through weekly or biweekly meetings that held counselors accountable, their actions did create an ASCA-based counseling program to increase student success. Results indicated that counseling program quality is significantly predicted by three variables: involving counselors, noncounseling duties (inverse relationship), and understanding of ASCA standards and domains. Service delivery resulting in an ASCA-based model (academic, personal/social, career) was not significantly predicted by any of the variables. The principals focused on communication with counseling staff and close relationships to ensure accountability of counselors to influence student achievement positively. Development and implementation of an ASCA-based comprehensive counseling program that addresses the academic, personal/social and college/career counseling domains were not encouraged by principals and counselors at the high schools in this study. Overall, the study provides hope that principals can play a valuable role in improving accountability among their counseling staff to create an ASCA-based comprehensive school counseling program.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Evidence-based school counseling: challenges encountered by public high school counselors in implementing 21st century counseling skills

PDF

A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement

PDF

Data-driven decision-making practices that secondary principals use to improve student achievement

PDF

The characteristics of high schools that have successfully implemented Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

PDF

Promising practices of school site administrators within established ninth‐grade transition programs at large high schools

PDF

Strategies employed by middle school principals successful in increasing and sustaining the mathematics achievement of African American students

PDF

The secondary school principal's role as instructional leader in teacher professional development

PDF

Efective leadership practices used by elementary school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Effective leadership practices of catholic high school principals that support academic success

PDF

Comparative study of the networked principal vs. the isolated principal

PDF

21st century superintendents: the dynamics related to the decision-making process for the selection of high school principals

PDF

21st century superintendents: the dynamics related to the decision-making process for the selection of high school principals

PDF

Effective leadership practices of principals of low socioeconomic status high schools consisting of predominantly African-American and Latino students showing sustained academic improvement

PDF

California urban superintendents and their selection criteria for secondary school principals

PDF

Let's hear it from the principals: a study of four Title One elementary school principals' leadership practices on student achievement

PDF

An examination of the leadership practices of Catholic elementary school principals

PDF

The leadership skills, knowledge, and training required of high school principals to effectively evaluate classroom teachers

PDF

Should it say or should it go: how successful superintendents build, shift, and transform district culture in an age of increasing accountability

PDF

Use of accountability indicators to evaluate elementary school principal performance

PDF

Strategies employed by successful superintendents and boards of education resulting in increased student achievement

Asset Metadata

Creator Makijan, Narineh (author)

Core Title Secondary school counselor-principal relationships: impact on counselor accountability

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/24/2014

Defense Date 10/21/2014

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag counselor accountability,OAI-PMH Harvest,secondary school counselor,secondary school principal

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy Max (committee chair), García, Pedro Enrique (committee member), Jimenez, Paul (committee member)

Creator Email makijan@usc.edu,nmakijan@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-509530

Unique identifier UC11288025

Identifier etd-MakijanNar-3031.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-509530 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MakijanNar-3031.pdf

Dmrecord 509530

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Makijan, Narineh

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA