University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Compassionate accountability: understanding the capacity of county offices of education to propel the school counseling profession forward

(USC Thesis Other)

Compassionate accountability: understanding the capacity of county offices of education to propel the school counseling profession forward

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Compassionate Accountability: Understanding the Capacity of County Offices of Education to
Propel the School Counseling Profession Forward
by
Edgar Gilbert Montes

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education

December 2023

Copyright 2023 Edgar Gilbert Montes
ii
Dedication
To my Lord and almighty God. Through You, all things are possible! I have been blessed,
beyond words, to have the time, talent, and treasure of family, friends, and faculty to support me
in realizing this study and journey.
To my loving wife and life partner, Sarah. I thank you for your endless encouragement to uplift a
profession that brought us together.
To my most precious treasures and primary models of what it means to be a teacher and learner,
Elijah and Starlynn. I dedicate this literary log as a legacy of what you can achieve as a
passionate and purposeful practitioner. Instilled in you are the values, decision rights, and
information to transcend and transform any profession or life circumstances that are bestowed on
you.
To my furry companion, Coco Chanel, thank you for always being by my side to bring me
immeasurable joy and comfort.
To my parents, my first educators, and examples of love, Ana and Jose. I thank you for the gift
of curiosity. Through your faith and dedication, you have imparted to me what it means to live a
life for a higher calling.
To my siblings, Ana and Jose, thank you for the relentless support and unwavering confidence.
Both of you, through your own mindset and behaviors, have taught me to seek the best in me, my
craft, and my community.
To my friends, my extended family, Erin G., Emily, Joel, Jim, Cindy, Erin S., Chris, Rebecca,
and Arron, who I know is relishing this moment from up above. You have weathered and been
witness to my post-secondary journey, through life, academic, and professional experiences.
Each one of you holds a memorable and magical place in this journey.
iii
Acknowledgments
This research study would not have been possible without the grace, guidance, expertise,
and genuine care of my dissertation chair, Dr. Alan Green. Thank you for the many years of
compassionate accountability you have imparted to me and the encouragement to pursue this
study. To my committee members, Dr. Marsha Riggio and Dr. Guadalupe Montaño, much
appreciation and warm gratitude for the time, confidence, and support you gave me.
A special thank you to my colleagues and source of inspiration for this study, Dr. Al
Mijares and Dr. Christine Olmstead. Your attitudes and actions continue to be instrumental and
influential in my doctoral, career, and life journey. Dr. Mijares, thank you for encouraging me to
start this Trojan journey and providing a beacon of hope and visionary leadership. Dr. Olmstead,
thank you for your unwavering guidance and unconditional support. Your mentorship and
inspirational leadership have left an indelible mark on me, shaping the kind of service-oriented
leader I aspire to be.
Dr. Patricia “Trish” Hatch, thank you for providing the foundation to build my body of
research and for your many years of companionship and inspiration. I could not have completed
my study without your initial guidance and constant support throughout the journey.
Dr. Ben Daley and Dr. Stacey Caillier, my High Tech High colleagues, thank you for
your many years of support, confidence, and love.
Finally, a warm gratitude to my Trojan Buddy, Dr. Jennah Jones, thank you for your
relentless and compassionate model of accountability. This study would not be possible without
your selfless attitudes and personalized behaviors to ensure this study was complete.
We got this. We fight on!
iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... iii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................... viii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 3
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 6
Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 7
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 7
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 11
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 12
Accountability Frameworks in Education ........................................................................ 12
History of School Counseling ........................................................................................... 19
School Counseling and College and Career Readiness .................................................... 24
Legitimizing the School Counseling Profession ............................................................... 31
Educational Ecosystem in California (System of Engagement) ....................................... 37
Multi-Tiered System of Support ....................................................................................... 42
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 49
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 49
Qualitative Research Methods .......................................................................................... 50
v
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 50
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 51
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 51
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 52
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 53
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 54
Settings and Participants ................................................................................................... 56
Results for Research Question 1 ....................................................................................... 59
Discussion for Research Question 1 ................................................................................. 69
Results for Research Question 2 ....................................................................................... 73
Discussion for Research Question 2 ................................................................................. 85
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 88
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 90
Findings ............................................................................................................................ 92
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 102
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 106
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 110
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 111
References ................................................................................................................................... 114
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 122
Appendix B: Research and Interview Questions Table .............................................................. 126

vi
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Themes ……………………………………………………………………55
Table 2: Summary of Setting and Participants…………………………………………………..59
Table 3: Recommendations for Practice………………………………………………………..107
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: California System of Engagement……………………………………………………..39
Figure 2: Multi-Tiered, Multi-Domain System of Supports……………………………………..47

viii
Abbreviations
ASCA American School Counseling Association
CDE California Department of Education
COE County office of education
LCAP Local control and accountability plan
LCFF Local control funding formula
LEA Local educational agency
MTMDSS Multi-tiered, multi-domain system of supports
MTSS Multi-tiered system of support

ix
Abstract
Education in California has undergone a transformative revolution driven by a collective vision
to reimagine teaching and learning. A crucial catalyst in this evolved landscape is the role of
school counselors, whose task of preparing students for college and career readiness holds
immense potential. Despite their role's critical importance, school counselors face challenges due
to limited recognition and support, which hampers their ability to make a meaningful impact.
This qualitative study delves into the attitudes and leadership behaviors of superintendents within
California's county offices of education toward school counselors. The study uses an
accountability framework to explore the values, decision-making processes, and information-
sharing dynamics influencing the relationship between county leaders and school counselors.
Research findings reveal county superintendents exhibit a positive attitude toward school
counselors, recognizing their potential as data-driven professionals, equity advocates, and
champions of student success. Nevertheless, divergent viewpoints persist among stakeholders,
underscoring the need for stronger partnerships with district offices and staff to enhance the role
of school counselors and bolster their professional legitimacy. Additionally, the study highlights
key leadership behaviors demonstrated by county superintendents to support school counselors
in promoting college and career readiness. These behaviors encompass active advocacy,
strengthening organizational structures, establishing support networks, leveraging resources, and
ensuring effective communication. Findings pave the way for improved school counseling
support structures and professional development opportunities.
Keywords: School counseling, county office of education, accountability, college and
career readiness, college counseling, county superintendent attitudes, county superintendent
x
behaviors, interviews, perceptions of school counselors, school counseling legitimacy, system of
engagement, Multi-Tiered System of Support, district office, superintendent

1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Education in post-pandemic California is experiencing a profound transformation, an
educational revolution fueled by the collective vision of educators and stakeholders who dare to
reimagine the future of teaching and learning. This paradigm shift set the stage for a
comprehensive and multifaceted approach to student success, aligning educational priorities with
the needs of the ever-changing world. As California embarked on this transformative journey,
redefining the role of educators, the value of local decision-making, and harnessing the power of
continuous improvement.
In contrast to past reform endeavors, California's educational renewal is distinguished by
implementing diverse strategies, each independently influencing the overall transformation.
Starting in 2007, the state began raising the bar of academic rigor by revising English and math
standards (California Department of Education [CDE], 2022a). Subsequently, in 2010, new state
standards, known as the Common Core State Standards, were adopted that further accelerated the
pace of change (CDE, 2014b). Integrating new technologies, innovative materials, and targeted
professional learning opportunities facilitated the transition to a more dynamic and responsive
educational system that meets the growing demands set forth by the community, state, and
federal agencies.
At the heart of this educational metamorphosis lies a fundamental shift from centralized
state control to localized decision-making, as embodied in the Local Control Funding Formula
(LCFF) and the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) introduced in 2013. These
formulas and action plans provide local educational agencies (LEAs) with more flexible funding
and empower them to collaboratively create long-term improvement plans aligned with their
unique needs and priorities. Within this context, identified state metrics, such as student

2
achievement, serve as vital barometers, holding school communities accountable for fostering
college and career readiness.
Amidst this shifting educational and accountability setting, the Golden State has
embraced a culture of continuous improvement and articulated a continuum of support to ensure
schools and districts are provided with the capacity to address their identified needs (Fullan &
Rincón-Gallardo, 2017). County offices of education (COEs) have emerged as pivotal
intermediary agencies, providing critical oversight to ensure district budgetary and educational
plans are calibrated and offering essential technical assistance when LEAs face challenges
meeting state measures (CDE, 2014a).
While the impact of these efforts is evident in increased graduation rates, lower
suspension rates, and more students completing required courses for entry into the California
State University and University of California systems (CDE, 2022c), considerable challenges
persist in closing achievement and opportunity gaps. Key among these challenges is expanding
post-secondary options and ensuring equitable access and success. College and career readiness
have been a driving force to better prepare students to face a competitive global market and fill
skills gaps in this country. In California, conditions in communities of color hamper, if not
wholly prevent, college and career aspirations. Black/African American, Latinx, and low-income
students have some of the lowest college matriculation and completion rates (The Campaign for
College Opportunity, 2022). Hispanic adults, a population that has grown significantly in the last
few years, continue to lag behind all racial groups in college completion rates. In 2022, national
bachelor’s degree attainment for Hispanic adults aged 25 and older was 20.9%. Although the
percentage of Hispanic adults obtaining bachelor’s degrees has increased by six percentage
points since 2012, from 14.9 to 20.9, it remains far below the level of degree attainment for non-

3
Hispanic White adults at 41.8%, Black adults at 27.6%, and Asian adults at 59.3% (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2022). Compared to White and Asian adults, Latinos in California are less likely to
enroll in a four-year university, attend a selective college, and enroll full-time (The Campaign for
College Opportunity, 2013).
The quest for increased college and career readiness outcomes relies on the pivotal role of
school counselors as essential cornerstones of success. Research shows that access to school
counselors and college counseling positively impacts both the high school community and the
post-secondary outcomes of students (Hoxby & Turner, 2013; McDonough, 2005). Indeed, this
holds particularly true for students from low-income and underrepresented backgrounds, who
often encounter difficulties accessing essential resources and guidance to make well-informed
decisions regarding their post-secondary options (Venezia & Kirst, 2005). Equipped with the
potential to design and implement responsive support systems, school counselors play a crucial
role in shaping students’ academic growth (Carey & Dimmitt, 2012; Davis et al., 2013; Parzych
et al., 2019) and social and emotional development (Berger, 2013; Steen et al., 2018), as well as
preparing them for a successful journey into higher education and the professional world (Bryan
et al., 2011; Hurwitz & Howell, 2014; Marsico & Getch, 2009; Pham & Keenan, 2011).
Background of the Problem
Despite their immense potential, school counselors face significant challenges navigating
the evolving educational landscape. Variations in the quality and availability of counseling
services across schools and districts hinder equitable support (Perna et al., 2008). School
counselors also struggle to gain the recognition and support they rightfully deserve. The lack of
legitimacy and understanding of the school counseling profession has been an enduring
challenge and limiting force that has plagued the profession since its inception (Gysbers, 2001;

4
T. A. Hatch, 2008). Community members and educators, especially school site administrators,
need a clearer understanding of school counselors’ capability and potential to positively impact
student outcomes and address emerging needs (Holland & Farmer-Hinton, 2009; Stone-Johnson,
2015). The impact of low social legitimacy and limited community accountability has yielded
administrative directives to school counselors that are inconsistent with professional standards
for the school counseling community. These mixed perceptions and misaligned behaviors
underscore the need for a compassionate and effective accountability model grounded in trust,
communication, and collaboration between educational leaders and the dedicated school
counselors who shape students’ lives (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
Statement of the Problem
Within this evolving educational ecosystem, school counselors and school counselor
leaders are crucial in addressing the state and local indicators outlined by the LCFF and LCAP.
As mentioned above, however, school counselors have historically been pervasively
misunderstood and undervalued. Despite research showcasing the positive impact school
counselors can have on students' academic, personal, social, college, and career development,
their vital role is often overlooked. With the growing responsibilities of COEs to provide support
and build internal capacity for technical assistance related to state and local indicators, including
college and career readiness, the need to support school counselors and counseling leaders has
become increasingly critical. Therefore, this qualitative research aimed to explore the attitudes
and behaviors of superintendents within California’s COEs regarding their support for the school
counseling profession and the responsibility they have taken to foster internal accountability to
enhance support for the school counseling profession (Fullan & Rincón-Gallardo, 2017). The
study sought to identify ways to propel school counselors forward and position them as

5
influential leaders in fostering college and career readiness among students. By comprehending
the perspectives of these county superintendents, we can gain valuable insights to bolster the
support and role of school counselors in California’s educational system’s continuous
improvement process.
Purpose of the Study
This study aimed to fill the gap in research by examining the mindsets and efforts of
COEs as both directors and providers in supporting school counselors and building internal
capacity to impact the wider school counseling profession. It specifically focused on the attitudes
and leadership behaviors of superintendents at the COE level, enabling school counselors and
school counselor leaders to be key agents of college and career readiness. Understanding the
county superintendents’ attitudes and actions undertaken to enhance the legitimacy of the school
counseling profession will provide opportunities to cultivate, sustain, and spread similar
approaches in other COEs.
The following two research questions guided this study:
1. What are the attitudes of superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and
school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all students
effectively?
2. What are the leadership behaviors of superintendents in COEs that enable school
counselors and school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all
students effectively?
For this qualitative research study, Hentschke and Wohlstetter’s (2004) accountability
framework offers a valuable perspective to comprehend the relationship between COEs and the
school counseling profession. Their proposed framework defines accountability as a contractual

6
relationship between the “director” and the “provider,” where the director relies on the provider
to meet their expectations and goals. To better understand the roles and objectives of the
involved parties, the authors identify three crucial dimensions:
1. Values: This refers to the beliefs and priorities of both the director and the provider.
2. Decision Rights: This involves examining the director’s authority, especially in cases
where outcomes may not align with expectations.
3. Information: This dimension encompasses monitoring the provider’s performance and
understanding the consequences if expectations are unmet. It also involves gathering
information about existing gaps and available resources to support the provider’s work.
By analyzing these dimensions, the framework seeks to gain profound insights into the
dynamics of accountability relationships and their implications for both parties involved in the
context of COEs and the school counseling profession.
Significance of the Study
This study holds considerable significance as it examines the pivotal role of COEs within
California's statewide system of support. In this emerging framework, COEs are positioned to
sharpen their dual roles as directors and providers, creating an opportunity to impact incoming
and existing leaders by providing targeted support to school counselors and their leaders to build
their college and career content knowledge. Understanding the attitudes and leadership behaviors
of county leaders to support school counselors will highlight specific examples to enhance the
capacity of school counselors and influence system-level changes to sustain and spread practices.
School counselors' increased capacity and empowerment can potentially increase post-secondary
outcomes for students, especially those furthest from opportunity. Additionally, insights gleaned
from this study can serve as a valuable resource for other educational leaders at county, regional,

7
state, and national levels. These insights can guide them in building their internal capacity to
increase their support and further legitimize the school counseling profession.
Limitations
This research study was subject to certain limitations. First, the perspective on the
attitudes and perceptions of county leaders was restricted, primarily due to their positional
authority. As a result, the ability to validate and confirm the effectiveness of their views and
actions is limited.
Second, since this study focused exclusively on county superintendents of schools, the
broader perspectives of other leaders in county or district offices were not explored. Future
research efforts could involve a diverse range of leaders to understand better effective leadership
strategies in supporting counselors.
Finally, it is essential to consider the context of the study. Conducted during a once-in-a-
century pandemic, the research required virtual interviews via online platforms such as Zoom.
This shift to virtual interviews introduced challenges related to internet broadband connectivity
issues and local distractions, which could have influenced the quality and depth of the responses
obtained from county superintendents of schools.
Definition of Terms
California County Superintendents Educational Services Association (CCSESA): A non–
profit organization representing the 58 COEs in California. CCSESA provides leadership,
advocacy, and support to COEs and serves as a bridge between the state and local levels to
promote coordination and communication among county superintendents and share best practices
and resources. In 2022, CCSESA rebranded the organization to the California County
Superintendents.

8
California Department of Education (CDE): The CDE, a state-level educational agency,
oversees and administers public education in California, developing and implementing policies,
standards, and regulations related to curriculum, instruction, assessment, and accountability. The
department provides resources, guidance, and professional development opportunities for
educators, administrators, and support staff.
California’s Multi-Tiered System of Support (CA MTSS): CA MTSS focuses on aligning
initiatives and resources within an educational organization to address the needs of all students.
It is an integrated, comprehensive framework for LEA that aligns academic, behavioral, and
social-emotional learning in a fully integrated system of support for the benefit of all students.
MTSS offers the potential to create systemic change through the intentional integration of
services and supports to identify and meet the needs of all students quickly.
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP):
CACREP is an independent organization that grants accreditation to graduate-level counseling
programs. CACREP accreditation signifies that a program meets specific quality standards and
prepares students for professional counseling practice. Graduating from a CACREP-accredited
program is often preferred or required for licensure as a professional counselor.
County office of education (COE): In California, a COE is a regional educational agency
providing support, oversight, and resources to school districts within a specific county. COEs
serve as an intermediary between local school districts and the CDE, working to ensure the
effective delivery of educational services and programs. Among COE’s primary roles and
responsibilities are student services, fiscal oversight, special education, and alternative education.
Each COE operates under the guidance of an elected Superintendent of Schools who leads the

9
organization and works collaboratively with local districts, educators, parents, and the
community to promote educational excellence within the county.
College and career readiness: College and career readiness is the state of preparedness
for post-secondary education or career training without needing remedial coursework. It relies on
four key components: cognitive strategies (critical thinking and problem-solving), content
knowledge (core subjects and career-related expertise), learning skills (goal-setting and effective
study techniques), and transition knowledge (information for successful post-secondary
transition). Students' achievement and performance determine readiness as they progress beyond
high school (Conley, 2012).
College/career indicator (CCI): The CCI is a component of California’s accountability
system for K–12 schools. It measures and evaluates how schools prepare students for college and
careers. CCI considers various indicators and measures reflecting a school’s effectiveness in
supporting students’ post-secondary readiness.
College counseling: College counseling assists students with their post-secondary
education and career goals, particularly concerning college or university admissions. College
counselors typically provide counseling and support services to students throughout the college
planning and application process.
Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA): The FAFSA is a form provided by
the U.S. Department of Education that students in the United States can complete to apply for
financial aid for higher education. The FAFSA collects information about a student’s or their
family’s financial situation to determine eligibility for federal grants, work-study programs, and
student loans.

10
Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP): The LCAP is a tool for LEAs to set
goals, plan actions, and leverage resources to meet those goals to improve student outcomes.
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF): The LCFF is hallmark legislation
fundamentally changing how all LEAs in the state receive funding, how results are measured,
and the services and supports they receive to allow all students to succeed to their greatest
potential.
Local educational agency (LEA): An LEA is a public board of education or other public
authority legally constituted within a state to provide educational services. In California, LEAs
are typically local entities such as school districts, COEs, direct-funded charter schools, and
special education local plan areas. For this study, LEAs are primarily used to reference school
districts.
Pupil personnel services credential (PPS): A PPS is a specialized credential issued by the
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing to individuals who have completed the
requirements and training to work in various student support services roles within the education
system. The credential signifies that an individual has acquired the necessary knowledge, skills,
and competencies to address social-emotional, academic, and behavioral needs effectively.
Technical assistance providers: A technical assistance provider is an organization or
individual which offers expertise, support, and resources to help improve educational programs,
systems, and practices. In California, technical assistance providers work with schools, school
districts, educational agencies, or other stakeholders to offer guidance, training, and consultation
in various areas. In California’s system of support, COEs play a critical role as one of several
identified providers to support schools and districts significantly when they might fall into an

11
improvement status. For this dissertation, a technical assistance provider is primarily a county
superintendent of schools.
Organization of the Study
What follows in Chapter Two is a four-part detailed chapter that includes a further review
of accountability models in education, including Hentschke and Wohlstetter's (2004) model
applied to the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The chapter
then provides a deep dive into the history of school counseling and the impact on college and
career readiness outcomes, reviews studies further examining the legitimacy of the school
counseling profession, and highlights frameworks and research informing the current educational
ecosystem in California. Chapter Three provides an explanation of the research methodology
used to conduct this study, including an overview of the sample and population, the
instrumentation used to conduct the interviews, and the process to analyze the data. A description
of the five participants, along with the results of their answers to the research questions, is
provided in Chapter Four. The last chapter discusses the findings of the results and outlines three
themes to inform implications for practice as well as recommendations for future studies.

12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The educational landscape continues to evolve with new directives from accountability
efforts at the national and state levels. School counselors, still in the process of defining their
legitimate role among educational leaders and the larger community, promise stakeholders to
exert their training, skills, and position as critical educators in helping design, implement, and
sustain a more responsive system of support that prepares all students to be college and career
ready. In California, much of the accountability has shifted from state to local control, where
COEs and district leaders are held primarily responsible for both student outcomes and the
ability to improve practices (CDE, 2014a). Frameworks, such as California’s MTSS and the
Multi-Tiered, Multi-Domain System of Supports (MTMDSS; T. A. Hatch, 2017), provide a
guide for school counselors to braid current and new practices and introduce research-based
strategies to increase the quality and quantity of post-secondary opportunities for their students.
Research indicates that a more compassionate and effective model of accountability rests on the
interdependency between director and provider to build stronger relationships grounded in trust,
communication, and ability, all of which are foundational to increasing the capacity of school
counselors (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). This study sought to further understand the
attitudes and actions that county superintendents, as directors, have taken to position and propel
the school counseling profession and legitimize school counselors as educational leaders.
Accountability Frameworks in Education
Accountability, long a cornerstone of American education, primarily at the local and state
level, entered the national stage in 1965 with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965). This educational overhaul by
the federal government established significant parameters and objectives attached to various

13
funding streams for states and LEAs. There have been numerous debates and revisions regarding
the federal government’s academic expectations to enhance local educational outcomes and
bridge achievement gaps. Although continued revisions to federal and state plans are likely under
new administrations, what remains constant is the director and provider relationship between
parties involved in the accountability process.
The relationship between a director and a provider experiences a breakdown of
accountability when the director miscalculates the provider’s capacity to complete their task. In a
review of No Child Left Behind, the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) offer five methods to diagnose problems in the
contractual relationships of the federal accountability system. The Five Accountability
Relationship Problems (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004) are as follows:
1. Adverse selection problem: Occurs when directors are not fully informed about the
abilities and values of the providers and select providers that are not the best choice.
2. Divergent objectives problem: Occurs when providers tackle their objectives that are not
consistent with the director.
3. Information asymmetrical problem: Occurs when information is not evenly distributed;
information is withheld or is inaccurately assumed.
4. Weak incentives problem: Occurs when the director does not have the decision rights
(insufficient quantity) to cause the provider to share their values or to behave as if they
did.
5. Limited decision rights problem: Occurs when providers are held accountable for
practices and outcomes over which they do not have full authority and responsibility.

14
Hentschke and Wohlstetter’s (2004) accountability relationship model provides a
framework to understand better the current educational accountability landscape that is
influencing and impacting the legitimacy of the school counseling profession. Further, research
indicates that Hentschke and Wohlstetter's (2004) accountability model, which relies on a
contractual relationship between directors and providers, remains consistent and applicable in
current educational literature despite the complex and fluid dynamics of school systems
(Duncheon & Relles, 2018; Loeb & McEwan, 2006; Marsh et al., 2017). Marsh et al. (2017)
apply this reciprocal model to analyze a new accountability model of California’s CORE
(California Office to Reform Education) waiver districts that use multiple measurement metrics
and capacity-building to foster collaboration and continuous improvement. Although the
dynamics and dimensions of the relationship are still viewed through the alignment of values,
decision rights, and information, Marsh et al. (2017) argue that residual efforts of fostering a
more flexible and capacity-building accountability model bring about different challenges, such
as educating the public on new measures of success and creating authentic learning spaces for
educators. In their study, Marsh et al. (2017) also echo the accountability labels that Loeb and
McEwan (2006) use in their review of education policies using an economics framework of
“agent” and “provider” to characterize the provider and director, respectively. Despite the label
change, Marsh et al. (2017), as well as Loeb and McEwan (2006), still consider the agent as one
who provides a service and the provider as the entity that sets the objectives for the agent and
often exerts authority to reward or punish agents. Marsh et al. (2017) also argue that various
accountability systems, such as bureaucratic and professional, still apply to more recent
accountability models like CORE.

15
Through an analysis examining the role of leadership in comprehensive school reform
efforts, Goldberg and Morrison (2003) outline various accountability levels in schools, including
the following groups:
1. Bureaucratic accountability: This accountability is characterized by a hierarchical
order of rules, roles, and regulations exercised within a larger organization and fueled by
compliance to achieve a system that is both efficient and effective (Goldberg & Morrison,
2003). In education, this frequently manifests as setting benchmarks and cut scores for
student outcomes, often artificially set by policymakers or district officials. As a result,
policymakers in school communities are held accountable for the results of their students
and, in many cases, ignore the value of social capital.
2. Professional accountability: This accountability model governs professionals'
professional behaviors and actions and is guided by the internal capacity and knowledge
to carry out formal and informal peer review processes (Goldberg & Morrison, 2003).
3. Community accountability: This model is a voluntary type of accountability practiced
by social organizations in the context of a larger community they serve (Goldberg &
Morrison, 2003). This type of accountability can co-exist with other forms of
accountability and depends on the information flow between educational leaders and the
general public. Although requiring an obligation for educators to be responsive to the
public, the locus of control rests with educational leaders being able to set the agenda and
drive the conversation with their community members.
Goldberg and Morrison (2003) argue that no single form of accountability is the “right one” for
schools and districts. Instead, the various forms of accountability must complement each other to
ensure schools create safe, welcoming, and rigorous climates for learning.

16
In support of cultivating courageous conversations, Singleton (2015) advises educational
leaders to address accountability dilemmas and generate innovative ideas. Goldberg and
Morrison (2003) suggest three broad questions for educators to consider:
1. Do existing accountability mechanisms and strategies for change lead to adequate
preparation of young people for life after school?
2. Do existing accountability mechanisms and strategies for change encourage faculty and
staff to grow in their professional knowledge, take individuals in the life of a professional
community, and publicly apply professional knowledge to decisions about preparing
young people after school?
3. Do existing accountability mechanisms and strategies create opportunities to strengthen
ties between the school and other organizations within the community, resulting in net
gains in social capital?
Open and honest dialogue addressing these and other questions about tensions existing
between the expectations of directors and services of providers is essential to any healthy and
thriving learning community dedicated to continuously improving. To create solid and informed
professional communities, educational leaders, including school counselors, need a nurturing
environment that fosters raising provocative questions and disseminating pertinent information.
This environment can build their capacity to envision, design, and deliver the most appropriate
support system for students and staff. Goldberg and Morrison (2003) ultimately propose that
school leaders strive for a common purpose by leveraging current resources, standards, data, and
other tools to make well-informed decisions. They emphasize the importance of adhering to state
and federal policies while also being agile and competent enough to respond to local needs and
opportunities.

17
Like many other states, California has experienced a seismic shift in the funding and
accountability of LEAs. This funding and accountability reform brought new standards, data
metrics, and initiatives to increase the number of college- and career-ready students. Darling-
Hammond et al. (2014) proposed a new accountability model focused on creating meaningful
learning environments, building the professional capacity of educators, and equipping schools
with adequate and appropriate resources to engage all learners. Darling-Hammond et al. (2014)
describe their new accountability model as a “reciprocal approach,” relying on educational
leaders at all levels holding themselves accountable for their expected outcomes necessary to
support an effective system. Darling-Hammond et al. (2014) argue that this type of “professional
accountability” (Goldberg & Morrison, 2003, p. 65) rests on the ability to support educators in
developing their knowledge and skills to deliver high-quality education. At the center of this
proposed shift in accountability is a process that continually seeks to evaluate and improve LEAs
by engaging all stakeholders in a problem-solving approach to take corrective action.
A deeper examination of Darling-Hammond et al.’s (2014) professional capacity domain
reveals a need to develop an accountability system with mechanisms in place to review the
quality of the educational setting, share expert knowledge, and create a stronger educator support
system. Although Darling-Hammond et al. (2014) provide several examples to support their
multi-pronged approach to building a professional accountability system, their focus primarily
centers on the accountability of teachers and administrators analyzing the quality of instruction
and learning. This opportunity gap provides the school counseling profession a structure to
support building their capacity and legitimacy as educational leaders in the school ecosystem.
With increased attention on whole system reform in education across the United States,
Fullan (2011) argues that many educational leaders and policymakers have been undertaking

18
system change efforts using the “wrong drivers” (p. 5). Although sincere in their attempts,
educators and policymakers have exerted their efforts on reform policies and practices that have
little or no ability to change the culture of an educational environment and therefore have a
minimal chance of achieving the desired outcome. Fullan (2011) contends that while wrong
driver approaches such as prioritizing accountability, focusing solely on individual teacher and
leadership qualities, overemphasizing technology, and implementing disjointed strategies do
hold a certain relevance within the educational ecosystem, their endeavors are primarily centered
around modifying surface-level elements such as structures and procedures. These approaches
tend to disregard the essential elements required for genuine and holistic system transformation.
Fullan (2011) proposes a paradigm shift where change drivers are not only lead drivers but are
also, more importantly, judged by their ability to increase intrinsic motivation, authentically
engage a community in a continuous improvement cycle of instruction, and learning, foster
teamwork, and impact all stakeholders. These “right drivers” target the values, norms, skills,
practices, and relationships of an educational setting and support the cultural transformation
necessary to initiate and sustain systems change.
Educational leaders have largely focused on four wrong drivers; among them,
accountability has been a prominent area of attention and extensive debate. Many educational
accountability systems embrace a rewards and punishments approach, relying on measures like
test results, standards, and teacher evaluations to hold individuals and schools accountable.
Fullan (2011) argues that this approach is based on a false premise, assuming educators will be
self-motivated to change adverse outcomes and seek professional learning on their own to
achieve better results. While some educators prioritize professional accountability and others
may be motivated by financial support, Fullan (2011) argues that ultimately, “community

19
accountability” will take precedence (Goldberg & Morrison, 2003, p. 66). This concept involves
parents and community members holding educators accountable for educational outcomes,
ensuring a satisfactory return on their taxpayer investments. Instead, Fullan (2011) positions
capacity building as a response to accountability by having educators focus on developing new
skills, building a community of continuous improvement, and generating a deeper motivation,
ultimately changing the “underlying attitude toward respecting and building the profession” (p.
8).
History of School Counseling
The school counseling profession faces a significant challenge in securing a legitimate
place in America’s current educational ecosystem, primarily due to the identity crisis it has
endured over the years. Despite the profession’s turbulent journey, there is hope and promise as
current structures, educational climates, and renewed resources may guide the work of school
counselors and steer the profession in the right direction.
Early History
Unlike other sectors in education, school counseling is a relatively new profession that
has gone through periods of evolution over the last 100 years. The significant shifts influencing
the counseling profession arose in response to the time’s social, economic, and educational
demands. Coy (1999) argues that the early beginnings of a school counseling program can be
traced back to the classrooms of a Detroit public school. In 1889, Jesse B. Davis, a high school
principal, introduced guidance as part of the English curriculum (Coy, 1999). When Davis
moved to Grand Rapids, Michigan, he continued his program, which now included vocational
and moral guidance to help students identify their career prospects and develop their character
(Coy, 1999). Other educators during the time also emerged as pioneers in the vocational

20
guidance movement, including Anna Y. Reed, who instituted a guidance program in the city of
Seattle; Eli Eave, who organized guidance outreach for students in the New York area; and Frank
Parsons, who helped develop the Boston Vocational Bureau (Gysbers, 2001).
Industrial Revolution
The first major force to shape the school counseling profession was the social and moral
imperative response to the Industrial Revolution’s exploitative and poor living conditions
(Gysbers, 2001). In an era of social unrest and protest, the Progressive Movement inspired
educators and citizens to support improving schools, working conditions, and employment
opportunities, especially for the youth (Gysbers, 2001). Vocational guidance was envisioned as a
vehicle to prepare young adults as they entered the workplace and industry to fundamentally
change the social and economic conditions of the time (Gysbers, 2001).
Two main philosophies emerged on developing, preparing, and placing students entering
the workforce. Supporters of vocational guidance, such as David Snedden and Charles Prosser,
advocated for an efficient economy centered on preparing students for meaningful entry and
placement into the world of work (Prosser & Allen, 1925; Snedden, 1920). Realizing higher
education as an unrealistic post-secondary path for many students, advocates for vocational
guidance emphasized developing technical skills and expert knowledge by providing students
with authentic opportunities to foster their talents and interests. Although rooted in the same
spirit of transforming society and education, vocational education took a more holistic and
democratic approach. Supporters such as John Dewey and Frank Leavitt highlighted a need to
enlighten students on making educational and employment decisions and, more importantly,
navigating and actively participating in society (Gysbers, 2001). Whiston (2002) characterized
this dichotomy in the profession’s infancy as being “torn between two lovers” (p. 149). Some

21
might argue that the school counseling profession is still enduring challenges, especially with a
heightened focus on college and career readiness.
The Early Counselor
The traditional counselor in the early 20
th
century was often an underpaid and
overworked classroom teacher (Gysbers, 2001). Similar to the challenges school counselors face
today, the duties and responsibilities of early vocational guidance counselors varied from one
school to the next with no established structure (Gysbers, 2001). The inconsistency regarding
counselors’ duties and training posed challenges for the profession. In many schools across the
country, site administrators, often with little or no experience in vocational guidance, were the
ones who determined counseling duties (Gysbers, 2001). The lack of standards, organization, and
additional non-counseling responsibilities worried many in the guidance community that the void
would eventually lead to the profession’s downfall.
The Early 1900s
In response to a perplexed vocational guidance profession in need of centralization,
structure, and a defined scope of work, leadership began to emerge. Around 1918, John Brewer,
an advocate for vocational education, became a prominent voice striving to bring clarity and
professionalism to the vocational guidance community. He and other leaders like George Myres
applauded the guidance efforts but expressed an urgent need to define and unify the guidance
practice (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001). The guidance community’s lack of uniformity and
leadership left individual guidance counselors at the mercy of principals, who often found it
challenging to assign meaningful counseling duties. At the forefront for Myers was a desire to
move vocational guidance away from a position orientation to a service model that could clearly
articulate and integrate the work of counselors (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001). Gysbers (2001)

22
characterized the efforts of Brewer and Myers as significant shifts in defining the role of
guidance counselors. In tandem with other movements impacting education, such as the mental
hygiene and measurement movements, studies of child development, and the introduction of
cumulative records, what emerged was a structured and clinically focused guidance profession
centered on addressing the personal and educational needs of the students (Gysbers, 2001).
Throughout the 1930s, school counselors’ predominant focus shifted to center on students’ social
and personal well-being, mainly supporting pupils through personal adjustments (Gysbers,
2001).
Revival of Vocational Guidance
The 1940s and 1950s marked a revival period for vocational guidance and a pendulum
shift for counselors. As the United States transitioned from some of the bloodiest years of war
into a period of peace and recovery, congress took legislative action to boost the economy and
help veterans enter the workforce. The Vocational Education Act of 1946, which amended the
previous Vocational Act of 1936, allocated significant funds to enhance the capacity and
supervision of guidance counselors (Gysbers, 2001). The launch of the Soviet Union satellite
Sputnik in 1957 sent fears and grave concerns throughout the political and scientific community
that the United States was not doing enough to build its technical and innovative capacity (U.S.
Department of State, 2018). The National Defense Education Act of 1958 was not only an
aggressive response to increasing the scientific capacity at all levels of education for counselors,
but it also placed a responsibility and obligation to identify and guide the nation’s most talented
youth to pursue careers and educational paths to address the United States’ scientific shortfall of
(Herr, 2001). Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, school counselors emerged as a group of
professionals who could own a unique work that spoke to their training and skills. Full-time

23
counselors began to replace teacher-counselors in schools, leading to the formation of
comprehensive counseling programs to address the multifaceted duties of school counseling
professionals.
College Counseling
During the 1990s, college counseling broke through as a focal point for school
counselors. With the introduction of national standards for school counseling (Campbell &
Dahir, 1997) and research redefining the role of the counselor (Cole, 1991), college counseling
was acknowledged by the profession and the larger educational community as an essential
service in schools. Counseling programs can include a vast array of college admission and
financial aid services, such as coordinating with institutions of higher education, providing
multilevel interventions on financial literacy, and using data and technology to identify student
opportunities (Militello et al., 2009).
21st Century School Counseling
Today, school counselors face the daunting task of addressing a wide range of
personalized and unique student needs, encompassing complex academic achievement, career
planning, and personal/social development. An increased focus on preparation for college,
career, and life requires school counselors to be more strategic in using data, implementing
programs and services, and collaborating with other community stakeholders. In 2019, the
American School Counselor Association (ASCA) published the School Counselor Professional
Standards and Competencies (ASCA, 2019), which outlined the mindsets and behaviors of
school counseling professionals, as well as those in a position to prepare and support school
counselors. These standards and competencies articulate the competencies necessary to ensure
school counselors develop, maintain, and improve their programs addressing academic

24
achievement, career planning, and social and emotional development. These standards and
competencies also serve as a guide for school administrators and school counseling education
programs to support the development, implementation, and evaluation of a comprehensive
school counseling program. Complementing this effort, the introduction of the ASCA Mindsets
and Behaviors for Student Success: K–12 College- and Career-Readiness Standards for Every
Student (ASCA, 2021) clarified the types of knowledge, skills, and attitudes students should
exhibit as a result of school counselors working toward achieving equity in preparing their
students to be college and career ready. In a climate of being more proactive, providing high-
quality universal support for all students, and targeting interventions for other students,
frameworks such as the MTMDSS (T. A. Hatch, 2017) illustrate the opportunities for school
counselors to implement and refine a comprehensive school counseling program to better define
when, how, and where to address the diverse needs of students and school communities.
Current and past national events, movements, policies, and frameworks have placed an
increased directive on school counselors and school counselor leaders as providers to ensure
equitable outcomes for students and a heightened legitimacy for the school counseling
profession. Whether from the professional community or an outside educational agency, these
directives have transformed the work of school counselors and shifted the focus toward
preparing each student to be college and career ready.
School Counseling and College and Career Readiness
In educational communities throughout the nation, educators focus on increasing efforts
to develop career and college pathways, adding supplementary staff to provide targeted services,
and cultivating partnerships to increase post-secondary opportunities for students. With the
introduction of the Common Core State Standards, educational agencies nationwide have been

25
elevating and amplifying the college and career readiness agenda to ensure students have the
skills and knowledge to succeed beyond high school. In these efforts, school counselors have
tried to align their work and identity to support the college and career readiness agenda.
Negative Perceptions of School Counselors Related to College and Career Readiness
As school counselors seek to establish what T. A. Hatch (2008) described as
“institutional legitimacy,” social acceptance and awareness of the value school counselors bring
to a school community by colleagues and educational leaders is essential element in fulfilling
that legitimacy. Although the perception of school counselors has and continues to evolve, the
reality is that counseling professionals are still not considered lead agents in the college and
career readiness agenda. This further complicates the ability to define the role and purpose of a
counselor at school sites.
In a national survey of 600 young adults aged 22 to 30, Johnson et al. (2010) discovered
that 60% of students who continued to further their education gave their high school counselors
poor grades for their college guidance. This study raises some alarming student perspectives
about the services provided by school counselors. More than half of the respondents rated their
school counselors as having fair or poor essential school counseling services such as deciding on
the right school, paying for college, exploring different careers, and assistance with college
applications (Johnson et al., 2010).
Through teacher and counselor surveys and interviews, Stone-Johnson (2015) concluded
that a significant discrepancy exists between the perceptions and reality of what counselors do to
prepare students for college and careers. Stone-Johnson (2015) contends that despite engaging in
daily activities and providing services to support students in all aspects of their lives, teachers do
not perceive counselors as the primary agents responsible for college and career readiness work.

26
Teachers perceive counselors as minimally involved in their student’s lives primarily because
they have a limited understanding of counselors’ full scope and role. On the other hand,
counselors themselves expressed an overly involved position in their students’ lives, but
acknowledged playing a secondary role in college and career readiness activities.
Gaining legitimacy within the educational landscape also relies on school counselors’
ability to address the perceptions of community members and agencies. Holland and Farmer-
Hinton (2009) highlight the need for school counselors to leverage their community resources to
establish a comprehensive counseling program and culture focused on exploring and pursuing
post-secondary educational opportunities. Similar to some teachers’ perceptions about school
counselors (Stone-Johnson, 2015), Holland and Farmer-Hinton (2009) argue that the
misconceived notions are grounded in community stakeholders’ lack of knowledge about the role
of a school counselor. This misperception of the school counselor role and their ability to
positively impact college and career readiness student outcomes is both a challenge and an
opportunity for preservice and current school counselors. Stone-Johnson (2015) and others
(Bitner et al., 2009; Hartline & Cobia, 2012; P. A. Hatch, 2002) argued the need for school
counselors to increase the quantity and quality of professional learning, along with a concerted
effort to establish standard methods and procedures to demonstrate the effect and impact of their
work at the school, district, and state level.
Positive Impact of School Counselors and College and Career Readiness
Despite the mixed perceptions of school counselors and their continued quest to gain
legitimacy as a profession, research indicates promising college and career readiness practices
and outcomes attributed to the impact of counselors in schools.

27
Through a series of interviews with high school staff members and community college
administrators, Carter (2011) found that school counselors play a significant role in advocating
for students. Her case studies revealed a critical need for counselors to establish strong
relationships with their students and develop a deep knowledge of their challenges and
opportunities. In the process of school counselors cultivating trusting relationships, students gain
a sense of belonging. They developed a personal interest in meeting the high expectations the
counselors and other adults set.
In a survey of nearly 5,000 12th-grade students, Bryan et al. (2011) concluded that a
small nurturing environment with well-staffed school counselors can play a significant role in
establishing a college-going culture. The student-counselor and parent-counselor relationships
can have a profound impact on building trust, instilling college aspirations, and providing
pertinent college information. The study highlighted the difference between public and parochial
school counselors and how students’ perceptions can influence approachability, guidance, and
support.
One of the consequences of school counselors’ lack of professional legitimacy is the high
counselor-to-student ratios across the country. This is especially true in California, where the
ratio is one school counselor to every 509 students (U.S. Department of Education, 2022). The
recommended ratio by ASCA (2022) is one school counselor for every 250 students. The ability
of school counselors to establish nurturing and meaningful relationships with students and
support their college and career aspirations relies on having skilled adults to meet and follow up
with students. Hurwitz and Howell (2014) argue that increasing school counseling personnel and
the services they provide positively affects post-secondary student outcomes. In a review of high
school counselor staffing levels, Hurwitz and Howell (2014) found that for each additional

28
counselor a high school adds, 4-year college enrollment is predicted to increase by 10%. This
significant increase can make a considerable impact, especially in schools in low-income
neighborhoods where college-going rates are often low.
Studies also demonstrate the positive effect school counseling services have on the
process of students exploring and applying to college. For many students, especially students
coming from families experiencing poverty, college is often seen as unattainable or unrealistic.
The low aspirational levels result in students limiting the number and type of college applications
they pursue or shying away from the idea of applying to college. Among high-academically
achieving and low-income students, Hoxby & Turner (2013) found only 20% of students applied
to one college that was academically a right fit for them. With focused attention on college
counseling supports, counselors can have a direct influence on the number of applications a
student submits and the preparation necessary to meet college entrance eligibility requirements.
Smith’s (2011) findings demonstrate a positive relationship between a minimal increase in
college admission applications and the likelihood of enrollment in a post-secondary institution.
The study found students who increased their college applications from one to two and two to
three applications increased the probability of enrollment in their selected college or university
by 40% and 10%, respectively (Smith, 2011). In the absence of adequate college counseling
services, Johnson et al. (2010) discovered students often delay college or make poor college
enrollment choices. This demonstrates a tremendous impact the role of a school counselor has on
the trajectory of a student’s post-secondary experience and success.
Examining the college application milestone process more deeply, Bryan et al. (2017)
conducted research which sheds light on the specific counselor activities that significantly
influence students’ post-secondary success. Contrary to earlier research (Bryan et al., 2011) that

29
emphasized high college and career expectations as crucial for student success, their more recent
findings highlight the paramount importance of communicating and connecting with students
about their college and career plans. This is particularly evident in the 12th grade when college
and career decisions become imminent (Bryan et al., 2017). The research indicates that
counseling meetings with 12th grade students directly impact their college enrollment. Bryan et
al. (2017) examined several variables, including college readiness actions, to better understand
their influence on students’ college matriculation. Results show that the college readiness actions
taken by students, such as taking the SAT and enrolling in advanced courses, serve as predictive
factors for students’ success in pursuing higher education.
In a similar way, through a series of 13 interviews and questionnaires of first-generation,
urban students transitioning to college, Reid and Moore (2008) identified school counselors play
a significant role in providing valuable college counseling. Participants shared that they were
able to obtain timely information regarding scholarships, financial aid, and navigating the college
application process from their school counselors. The study underscores the vital role school
counselors play in providing accurate and comprehensive information to students in the college
application and transition process.
Consistent with Reid and Moore (2008), a review of key literature studies by McKillip,
Rawls, and Barry (2012) concluded that counselors are well-positioned to increase the number of
students obtaining a post-secondary degree. They highlight the need to develop systems and
relationships that will build the internal as well as the external capacity of outreach to students
and families early in their high school careers. McKillip et al. (2012) also elevate the idea of
establishing a clear and defined role for school counselors and the need for future studies to look
at the type of training and policies that could potentially impact the profession.

30
Models of School Counseling and College and Career Readiness
At the organizational level, the variance in college and career readiness services
complicates the ability to establish legitimacy in the school counseling profession (Hatch, 2008).
Two studies examining college counseling programs across multiple states demonstrate a vast
difference in the personnel, information, and infrastructure used to deliver college and financial
aid counseling (Perna et al., 2008; Venezia & Kirst, 2005). Schools vary drastically in the quality
and quantity of college counseling services offered to students, as Perna et al. (2008) highlighted,
where only 10 of the 15 high schools studied across five states had some type of college and
career coordinator on-site.
While school counseling programs and their college and career readiness services may
differ across communities, research highlights promising pockets of excellence. Exemplary
models of college counseling programs serve as valuable examples for schools and districts to
adopt new strategies and services to support students and families. A review of 18 high schools
receiving recognition for their college preparation and placement (Militello et al., 2009),
identified ten domains that pertain to counseling activities and show a solid relationship with
improved student enrollment in college. Common themes that emerged centered on the
counselor’s ability to implement effective program management practices, which included
school leadership, college-focused interventions with low-income students, and the use of data
(Militello et al., 2009).
In their study, Hagedorn, Lester, Moon, and Tibbetts (2006) attributed much of the
success of native Hawaiians transitioning to 4-year post-secondary institutions at the
Kamehameha School in Hawaii to implementing a holistic college counseling program.
Kamehameha counselors were able to incorporate the technical knowledge of researching and

31
applying to college while also infusing the ability for students to learn about their cultural history
and experience support from their families.
Reinforcing the need for counselors to implement culturally competent services,
Watkinson and Hersi (2014) explored the role that school counselors play in supporting the
career development of Somali immigrant students. The researchers stressed the significance of
school counselors adopting culturally responsive practices by establishing deep relationships
with their students and promoting strong school-family partnerships. Counselors can gain
insights into the cultural needs of their students and respond appropriately by implementing
interventions like small group counseling sessions.
These examples of excellence place school counselors as leaders in their schools, change
agents in their communities, and architects of effective systems and policies. The examples also
provide evidence of school counselors owning and positively impacting the college and career
readiness agenda. A consistent theme throughout the research studies is that school counselors
must cultivate a holistic and nurturing approach that addresses the entire student in their college
and career readiness journey. Moreover, this profession demands practitioners to utilize data and
community resources effectively.
Legitimizing the School Counseling Profession
Since the introduction of the ASCA National Model in 2003, schools and districts have
implemented comprehensive school counseling programs to address students' academic,
personal/social, and career needs. As part of a national study involving 3,000 ASCA members,
Hatch and Chen-Hayes (2008) introduced the School Counseling Program Component Scale
(SCPCS) as a survey tool to gain insights into school counseling practitioners' perceptions of the
components outlined in the ASCA National Model. The research findings demonstrated that the

32
scale has strong internal consistency and construct validity, supporting its effectiveness as a tool
for measuring perceptions related to the ASCA National Model (Hatch & Chen-Hayes, 2008).
Additionally, the researchers analyzed baseline data to understand the school counselors' initial
beliefs during the National Model's development. Findings indicated that school counselors
placed greater importance on developing goals and gaining support from their administration and
less importance on holding themselves accountable through using data to guide their program
planning. Among the suggested applications for the survey, Hatch and Chen-Hayes (2008)
recommend using the SCPCS in developing school counseling programs at both the local and
state level.
Perceptions and beliefs play a crucial role in advocating and advancing support for school
counseling. Furthermore, demonstrating evidence and establishing a direct linkage to support
systems and student outcomes strengthens the argument for implementing, cultivating, and
sustaining school counseling programs. In a school site case study, Duarte and Hatch (2014)
explored the utilization of federal grant funds to establish an assessment-based, results-driven,
comprehensive school counseling program. They highlighted the critical components of school
counselor integration within the school system and the importance of establishing trusting
relationships with administrators and the stakeholder community. The grant team focused on
three elementary schools in a southern California district, methodically designing and
implementing a comprehensive school counseling program aligned with the ASCA National
Model (2012a) to deliver positive work outcomes for school and district administrators. The
results of this case study led to a fully-funded elementary program and the expansion of school
counseling programs to their respective middle schools withing the district. Duarte and Hatch
(2014) attributed the success of the grant team to the focused and meaningful meetings and

33
coaching between the school sites and the district grant team. The study highlights that building
professional legitimacy for school counselors starts with local efforts to establish trusting and
collaborative relationships between the district office and school sites.
Bitner et al. (2009) achieved similar success at the statewide level in Utah, conducting a
comprehensive evaluation of schools across the state. After receiving training on the ASCA
National Model, teams of school counseling practitioners from three schools effectively applied
their learning and demonstrated their impact on school and student outcomes. At the elementary
level, counselors successfully implemented an anti-bullying program that reduced bullying
incidents. Student surveys revealed that students felt safer and more capable of recognizing signs
of bullying (Bitner et al., 2009).
In middle schools, Bitner et al. (2009) reported that counselors aligned their counseling
activities with the school’s academic focus and closely monitored student academic progress.
They promptly intervened when students showed early signs of academic difficulties and ensured
the completion of course credits for seventh and eighth graders. At the ninth-grade level,
counselors provided essential information to students regarding graduation requirements (Bitner
et al., 2009).
At the high school level, the four school counselors collaborated with their school and
parent communities to identify the need for a school-wide climate initiative (Bitner et al., 2009).
This multifaceted campaign included various opportunities for students to develop social-
emotional skills through school-wide assemblies, volunteer opportunities, and awareness days.
As a result, student survey results showed a 20% increase in a positive school climate, with
students expressing a desire to make others feel welcomed and take pride in their school (Bitner
et al., 2009).

34
Driven by data and data analysis, each school site continuously monitored impact and
shared findings with its community. Bitner et al. (2009) argued that the training received by
school counselors was crucial to their ability to collect, analyze, and publicize data related to
their impact. This effort significantly influenced legislation in Utah, resulting in several
impactful policy changes. In 2009, the Utah State Board of Education approved measures to
reduce counselor-to-student ratios to 350:1 in all seventh- to 12th-grade schools. It also
mandated 4-year plans completed by students in the eighth grade while limiting non-counseling
duties for school counselors. Instead, counselors focused on activities and interventions that
maximize their skills. This increased leadership and advocacy by counselors, along with their
reporting on the impact of their work at school sites, substantially influenced statewide
recommendations for policies and practices at the school, district, and state levels (Bitner et al.,
2009). The Utah State Board of Education recommended the following changes:
1. Training needs to be early, ongoing, and rigorous.
2. Training needs to provide the value of data collection and how to collect data.
3. Preservice counselors must be exposed to how to evaluate their counseling program.
4. State or district counselor directors can make data collection easier by providing online
forms with step-by-step instructions. District and state leaders need to provide ongoing
feedback at the school level for data projects.
5. Feedback on individual data projects must be early, ongoing, and rigorous. CCGP
statewide advisory committees are working on a rubric-based feedback form.
6. Data must be shared with local stakeholders at the school building and local district level.

35
7. It is essential to get the support of district leadership for data projects. Districts with
personnel that review data projects before they are submitted to the state have much
higher quality.
8. Data projects need to be planned out before interventions take place. Often, counselors
look back over what they have done during the school year and try to come up with a data
project at the end of the year. Requiring counselors to plan a data project at the beginning
of the year may alleviate this problem.
9. Be supportive of positive and negative results. Both provide valuable information.
The results observed in the Utah Department of Education study align with common
recommendations from policymakers and researchers, emphasizing the importance of enhancing
educators’ capacity through continuous professional development (Bitner et al., 2009). Despite
school counselors’ limited access to professional learning opportunities, targeted training aligned
with the ASCA National Model can directly impact student outcomes. Exploring this notion,
Hartline and Cobia (2012) reviewed 100 summary result reports from a four-day school
counselor training on the ASCA National Model. They concluded that the direct strategies and
skills delivered during the training to address achievement gaps positively impacted student
academic metrics, including test scores, grades, attendance, and discipline/behavior.
While initial findings are promising, Hartline and Cobia (2012) also recommend that
school counselors receive additional and sustained professional development to strengthen their
ability to fully implement comprehensive programs grounded in data. This includes identifying
performance gaps, designing targeted interventions, and evaluating and reporting on the
outcomes of their efforts.

36
Strategic planning and faithful implementation are essential for establishing a school
counseling program (Bitner et al., 2009; Duarte & Hatch, 2014). According to T. A. Hatch
(2008), the ASCA National Model and Standards play a vital role in unifying the profession
across states and highlighting the value of school counselors. However, T. A. Hatch (2008) also
emphasized that school counselors and educational leaders hold the key to determining the actual
legitimacy of the profession through their beliefs and attitudes. To achieve professional
legitimacy, T. A. Hatch (2008) proposed that school counselors and leaders critically examine
the profession through three specific theories that serve as the foundation for their practice.
Organizational Theory
According to T. A. Hatch (2008), measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of school
counseling programs is challenging due to the variability in program structures, services, and
support received from district and school leaders. Despite this measurement challenge, T. A.
Hatch (2008) emphasizes that it is still essential for the profession’s survival and growth. The
ASCA National Standards and National Model provide a framework to address the need for
consistency and enhance legitimacy. These professional resources guide the development of
counseling programs by establishing clear goals and objectives, recommending the percentage of
time school counselors should spend on specific counseling activities, and providing instructions
on how to measure the impact of school counseling actions and services on students and schools.
Institutional Theory
T. A. Hatch (2008) examined institutional legitimacy from operational and social
perspectives. The operational lens considers standards, policies, and procedures that define
norms and practices. On the other hand, social legitimacy comes into play when educational
leaders view school counselors as part of the solution to address social pressures in the

37
educational landscape. Regrettably, the school counseling community has experienced a lack of
social legitimacy, evident in their omission, exclusion, or downplaying of national, state, and
local policies and statutes (P. A. Hatch, 2002; McGannon et al., 2005).
T. A. Hatch (2008) urged school counseling practitioners to hold themselves accountable
through data to demonstrate their impact on school and district officials. By showcasing their
impact and aligning success with the district’s vision and goals, school counselors can emerge as
integral policy actors in their school communities and influential leaders who can shape the
destiny and advancement of their positions and the profession.
Political Theory
T. A. Hatch (2008) contended that the limited social capital of school counselors
undermines the political clout and value of school counseling and counseling programs in their
local communities. According to T. A. Hatch (2008), the low social value status can be attributed
to their inability to demonstrate the worth of school counseling programs to educational leaders
and policymakers. To gain political influence, school counselors must focus on acquiring social
capital.
T. A. Hatch (2008) identified four fundamental levels of political clout that are crucial for
the thriving of the school counselor profession: site level, district level, state level, and national
level. Addressing each level will necessitate a strategic and systematic approach to elevate the
impact of school counseling work across all sectors. T. A. Hatch (2008) recommended further
research to assess the extent to which school counselors gain legitimacy in education.
Educational Ecosystem in California (System of Engagement)
To address the diverse needs of students and families in California, an engagement
process that activates all levels of the educational system is necessary to complement each

38
other’s efforts and create one cohesive system of support. As primary sources of technical
support, state, regional, and county offices play a critical role in assisting LEAs in achieving the
goals and outcomes they have put forward in their plans. Although varying widely in scope and
size across California, districts are responsible for ensuring safe, equitable, and thriving teaching
and learning environments across all their schools and grade levels. They are, therefore, most
fitting to be the key intervention point for receiving technical support. The school site, which is
closest to students and families, is the place of transformation, where academic, social-
emotional, and career outcomes can be measured and improved.
Figure 1 captures the outlined cascading system of engagement in California. As part of
California’s MTSS framework, whole system engagement:
Effectively link[s] school, district, county, regional, state, and federal resources in
efficient and innovative ways. By building local capacity aligned with the Local Control
and Accountability Plan (LCAP) goals, the California MTSS framework builds on the
strengths of those in the school community while mapping all resources to the effort.
(Orange County Department of Education, 2023b)
Ultimately, the purpose driving each educational agency and level in the whole system
engagement process is the ability to fulfill a promise of preparing each student to master their
educational plan, develop healthy relationships, and build trusting partnerships with families and
communities.

39
Figure 1
California System of Engagement

Note. From California’s System of Engagement by Orange County Department of Education,
2023. Copyright 2023 by Orange County Department of Education.

California Department of Education
The CDE is a vital source of leadership and support for county offices and districts across
the state. Over the years, the department has implemented various initiatives to enhance the
support provided to school counselors and school counselor leaders. In the late 1990s and early
2000s, the state agency established a full-time counselor leadership position to aid school
counselors, psychologists, and social workers. Regular Director of Guidance meetings were

40
organized to assist leaders overseeing school counselors and offer valuable resources for
counseling services.
However, with the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in
early 2002, California, like other states, underwent staffing and structural changes. The focus
shifted towards achieving academic success and increased accountability measures to enforce
LEAs in making adequate improvement progress. Unfortunately, this change in direction moved
away from fostering leadership development and capacity building, instead concentrating on
summative test scores and striving for sometimes unattainable academic targets. Consequently,
many support and leadership positions at the state and local levels were eliminated, leaving
practitioners with limited resources and assistance.
County Offices of Education
COEs operate as intermediary service agencies, providing direct and regional support to
school districts and serving as the primary implementation arm of the CDE. The CCSESA
currently defines the responsibilities of county offices in the following categories:
● Educating specific student populations
● Monitoring and overseeing the student academic environment
● Monitoring and overseeing district fiscal stability
● Providing academic support and assistance
● Providing direct services to small school districts
● Reviewing school district LCAPs and ensuring alignment of projected spending,
services, and goals
● Providing technical assistance to school districts
● Implementing regional support activities to assist district and school staff

41
The roles of county offices have dramatically changed since the introduction of
Education Code Section 1240 provided in 1976, which at the time outlined the duties,
responsibilities, and general powers of county superintendents. Since then, bills such as
Assembly Bill 1200 and the legal requirements associated with the federal No Child Left Behind
Act have further defined the scope of responsibilities and oversight for county offices. With the
introduction of LCFF in 2013 and Education Code Section 52070 in 2014, county
superintendents have an increased obligation to oversee and approve LCAPs for all their
districts.
The LCFF and LCAP shift the role of COEs away from a compliance-oriented focus and
service delivery model, positioning them now as agencies to build capacity and promote
continuous improvement. In 2016, several counties throughout California were convened to
redefine the role of county offices, with consideration to the upcoming release of state and local
metric outcomes for LEAs. This select group of counties provided four guiding principles to
define their roles moving forward:
1. Shift from compliance to mutual capacity building related to student learning and
achievement
2. Foster systemic collaboration to improve student outcomes
3. Build a culture of co-learning that leads to sustainable change
4. Promote a climate of candor, evidence, and urgency for action
This renewed focus positioned county offices as agencies with not only statutory responsibility
for oversight, review, and approval of local accountability plans but also redefined directives to
provide support and technical assistance to realize the goals and objectives of their districts.

42
Since then, county offices have been working with state, regional, and outside agencies to
support this shift.
Role of School Districts
States are responsible for adopting standards and implementing policies to promote their
interpretation of college and career readiness. However, in California, districts have gained
increased autonomy and responsibility for ensuring they meet the specific needs of students in
their local communities. Fullan (2013) emphasizes this idea, asserting that the need for school
change cannot be addressed one school at a time. Instead, the imperative is to initiate
transformation at the district level, cascading the change process across all schools within the
district and the state.
Multi-Tiered System of Support
In the past few decades, schools, districts, and states have intensified their efforts to
address disparities in student outcomes. Local educational agencies have implemented strategic
initiatives to systematically target interventions and frameworks to enhance students’ academic
and behavioral needs. Recent research and evidence highlighted the positive potential of an
MTSS in addressing systemic gaps in education (Anderson & Borgmeier, 2010; Erickson et al.,
2012; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; McIntosh et al., 2010). Across the country, numerous schools and
districts have adopted an MTSS, recognizing its role in redesigning support and service delivery
to ensure proactive and reactive measures are in place to propel students toward success.
The essence of an MTSS, with its three tiers, lies in its ability to address student needs
through targeted interventions that increase in intensity as needs become more severe. A
proactive approach is employed at the universal level, providing programs and services that
benefit all students and are implemented systemwide. In Tiers 2 and 3, customized and

43
individualized interventions address the heightened needs of specific students, going beyond the
support provided to all students. These focused, supplemental, and intensive supports can be
delivered over short- or long-term periods to address acute and prolonged student needs. By
implementing a well-designed and effectively executed MTSS framework, educational systems
can create a comprehensive structure that delivers the most effective and proactive instruction
and support system at all levels.
Practitioners and policymakers face challenges in school-wide reform, navigating tiered
and non-tiered initiatives and programs. The goal is to design an educational system that
effectively communicates the priorities and practices of schools, districts, and state agencies. To
enhance the continuum of research and practice in MTSS efforts nationwide, McCart et al.
(2014) introduced a comprehensive framework that supports educational agencies with critical
elements necessary to integrate structures at all levels of the educational system. System reform
efforts have focused on integrating and blending diverse tiered approaches with supporting
educational structures and variables (McIntosh & Goodman, 2016; Sailor, 2015). Although still
in its nascent stage, emerging research suggests that adopting a comprehensive and holistic
approach to systems change in education can positively impact student success (Choi et al.,
2018).
MTSS in California
Recent efforts throughout California and other states utilize an MTSS framework to
intentionally and systematically examine the support system available in each LEA and ensure
the needs of the whole student are identified and fulfilled. The CDE vision of “one coherent
system of education” catalyzes the foundation for long-term educational excellence in the state.
Understanding California’s vast and complex PreK-12 educational system, the integration of

44
statewide MTSS has centered on a multifaceted approach to support both scalability and
sustainability. Statewide MTSS in California compliments current Response to Intervention
(RTI) and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) efforts from schools and
districts (ASCA, 2014; Cowan et al., 2013; Ockerman et al., 2015). It also expands the
integration of other evidence-based interventions such as Implementation Science, Universal
Design for Learning, and the whole child approach in efforts to braid all these and other
initiatives into one system to benefit all students.
In California, the Department of Education has defined MTSS as “an integrated,
comprehensive framework that focuses on Common Core State Standards, core instruction,
differentiated learning, student-centered learning, individualized student needs, and the
alignment of systems necessary for all students’ academic, behavioral, and social success (CDE,
2014a).
California MTSS facilitates a clear framework for the creation and alignment of a
coherent system of education at the state level. This framework is designed to benefit all students
by serving as a mechanism for aligning and integrating key state and local initiatives, such as the
LCFF, implementation of the California state standards, results-driven accountability, and the
work of the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE), a statewide technical
assistance provider to ensure LEAs achieve their LCAP goals. The implementation of MTSS in
California holds the promise of effecting essential and systematic change by purposefully
designing and reconfiguring services and support systems to promptly address and cater to the
diverse needs of every student:
The evidence-based domains and features of the California MTSS framework provide
opportunities for LEAs to strengthen school, family, and community partnerships while

45
developing the whole child in the most inclusive, equitable learning environment thus
closing the equity gaps for all students. (Orange County Department of Education, 2023a)
MTSS and the Role of School Counselor
School counselors are vital stakeholders in the educational support system, delivering
tiered services to address students’ academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs. According
to Sink (2016), their preservice training and positions in school settings make them key
individuals responsible for ensuring that students receive universal, supplemental, and intensified
support. However, recent research studies and resources primarily focus on the role of teachers
and support staff, particularly school psychologists, who work with students with disabilities,
and downplay the role of school counselors. In these resources, school counselors are often cited
as support partners for delivering services and assistance to address the identified students’ needs
and skills (Sink, 2016). Although supportive, Sink (2016) emphasizes the importance of school
counselors’ proactive and team-player role in current MTSS programs and services to ensure
appropriate responses, processes, and support for students and collaborating adults.
Through a study examining the roles of school counselors within an RTI framework, Sink
(2016) was able to generate an alignment of MTSS with current standards and practices of
professional school counselors. Sink’s (2016) research highlights the overlap between MTSS
roles and functions, the ASCA School Counselor Competencies (2012b), and the CACREP
school counseling standards (2016). This overlap has the potential to serve as a roadmap to
ensure alignment with school counseling standards and frameworks, leading to current and
robust roles and responsibilities of school counselors. These roles not only demonstrate the
connection between MTSS and the school counseling profession but also present both a directive
and opportunity for providers in a position to support preservice and in-service counselors,

46
including COEs. This presents an opportunity for aligning the school counseling profession with
the MTSS transformational shifts happening in schools across the country. Although Sink (2016)
provides specific recommendations for school counselor preparation programs, his three
overarching themes are (1) conducting a program audit for MTSS curricular and instructional
gaps, (2) weighing program revisions by considering adding a new school counseling-based
MTSS course or augmenting existing courses with their content, and (3) reviewing MTSS
content and related skills to ensure the most up to date syllabi. These broad recommendations
have practice implications and provide an opportunity to increase the alignment with current in-
service providers, such as districts and COEs.
Multi-Tiered, Multi-Domain System of Supports
T. A. Hatch (2017) delved deeper into the role of school counselors within MTSS,
offering a comprehensive perspective by incorporating the ASCA National Standards. Through
her MTMDSS, T. A. Hatch (2017) extended the current MTSS literature, highlighting the
opportunities and responsibilities of school counselors in establishing a comprehensive school
counseling program that caters to academic, college/career, and social/emotional support for all
students. Within this framework, T. A. Hatch (2017) identifies different tiers of support. At Tier
1, proactive and universal services such as curriculum, individual student planning, and school-
wide events are available to all students. Tiers 2 and 3 target short-term interventions for a select
few students based on data from pre-determined screening tools or responses to life-changing
events like the loss of a parent or guardian. Interventions in Tier 2 may involve small group
counseling or referrals to other services, while Tier 3 focuses on providing individualized one-
on-one services to students. Figure 2 illustrates T. A. Hatch’s (2017) integrated tiered framework
for school counselors.

47
Figure 2
Muti-Tiered, Multi-Domain System of Supports

Note. From Multi-Tired, Multi-Domain System of Supports [Blog post], by Hatch, T., 2017.
Hatching Results (https://www.hatchingresults.com/blog/2017/3/multi-tiered-multi-domain-
system-of-supports-by-trish-hatch-phd).

The enhanced focus on both MTSS and the ASCA National Model provides a
multidimensional and multi-layered system of support framework to empower practitioners, as
well as service providers. This can demonstrate how school counseling is well-positioned to
advance and amplify the transformative work schools, districts, COEs and state departments

48
have undertaken in the last few years. This increased alignment also empowers directors with
enhanced clarity and direction to include school counselors in the systems thinking and change
processes happening in educational agencies throughout the country, further enabling the
legitimacy of the school counseling profession.

49
Chapter Three: Methodology
Research indicates a more compassionate and effective model of accountability rests on
the interdependency between director and provider to build stronger relationships grounded in
trust, communication, and decision rights, all of which are foundational to increasing the
capacity of school counselors (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
This research study explored the attitudes and actions of California county school
superintendents, aiming to understand how they enabled school counselors and school counselor
leaders to be effective in supporting college and career readiness for all students. Building upon
the director and provider accountability framework (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004) discussed
in Chapter One, this framework served as a valuable tool to comprehend the role and
expectations of COEs as both directors and providers in strengthening the capacity of school
counselors. The research questions outlined below facilitated the investigation of COEs’ beliefs
and actions, providing insights into the support provided to school counseling leaders in
enhancing college and career opportunities for students.
Research Questions
The following two research questions guided this study:
1. What are the attitudes of superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and
school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all students
effectively?
2. What are the leadership behaviors of superintendents in COEs that enable school
counselors and school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all
students effectively?

50
Qualitative Research Methods
A qualitative research methods approach was the best-suited approach to answer the
research questions because it could facilitate an understanding of the mindset and capacity of a
COE to support school counselors and leaders of school counselors (Merriam, 2009). This
qualitative approach provided a more profound and intimate inquiry experience where the
researcher further developed concepts, hypotheses, and theories (Merriam, 2009). Interviewing
five COEs leaders provided a meaningful sampling of the 58 COEs in California and an ability to
obtain diverse perspectives from various regional communities across the state (Maxwell, 2013).
The ability to understand the beliefs and rationales behind county leaders’ actions to support
school counselors is quite difficult to replicate or observe; therefore, it was most appropriate to
conduct interviews as a primary data collection method (Merriam, 2009).
Sample and Population
The researcher relied on existing relationships with potential sites or respondents to guide
the selection of interview participants (Merriam, 2009). To address time and availability
constraints, the researcher initially used purposeful convenience sampling to interview
respondents with whom they already had connections (Merriam, 2009). However, a limitation of
convenience sampling is the potential for generating “information-poor” data. To overcome this,
the researcher implemented a purposeful snowball sampling strategy (Merriam, 2009). After the
initial interviews, respondents were asked to recommend other county leaders who could be
included in the research study. The initial outreach to county leaders started with contacting the
researchers’ local COEs by email and following up with a phone call.

51
Access/Entry
Gaining access and entry to potential interviewees can be challenging at the start of any
qualitative research study (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). The established relationships the researcher
had with COEs yielded the initial three interviews and provided an opportunity to obtain
additional recommendations to interview other county leaders. The researcher obtained consent
from the respondents through verbal and written consent forms (Patton, 2002).
Instrumentation
The researcher aimed to clearly articulate the study’s purpose, foster a welcoming and
engaging conversation, and, most importantly, ask relevant questions to gather specific details
about the mindsets and actions of county leaders in supporting school counselors and their
leaders. The design process for the interview protocol was thoughtful and intentional,
constructed to elicit the richest possible data. Open-ended and neutral questions were used to
ensure the greatest level of detail and depth in the responses (Patton, 2002).
Data Collection
Understanding the limitations of time and scheduling, the researcher approached the data
collection process using various strategies to capture rich and meaningful data (Patton, 2002). As
mentioned above, the researcher first sought to establish a comfortable and welcoming
environment by asking the interviewee questions on rapport building and gaining a better
understanding of the COE landscape (Merriam, 2009). The second set of interview questions
focused on answering the outlined research questions. The interviews were recorded and
captured with handwritten notes (Patton, 2002).

52
Data Analysis
One of the most challenging and time-consuming processes of a qualitative research
study is the analysis of the collected data (Merriam, 2009). The sections below outline the
process the researcher took to make sense of the collected interview data and ensure the validity
of the data, as well as the ethical considerations taken to conduct this study.
Interview Data Analysis
Merriam (2009) suggests that data analysis should begin early in conducting the research,
even while interviewing respondents. The researcher began the data analysis during the
interviews by making initial comparisons and possible coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Once all
five interviews were concluded, the researcher developed overarching themes and categories.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Credibility and trustworthiness are essential to ensure that the study’s findings resonate
with outside readers that may or may not be familiar with the research topic or educational field
(Merriam, 2009). The researcher is a Latino male who has worked in various educational
settings, including roles as a high school counselor, a college admissions counselor, and a COE
administrator. The researcher brought a wide range of perspectives and experiences that
informed the research and the type of questions included in the protocol.
Ethics
The researcher incorporated the “Ethical Issues Checklist” that Patton (2002) shared to
ensure the study was credible. Among the ten items, Patton (2002) outlines the following:
● ensure the purpose of the study stated at the start of the interviews,
● no promises or reciprocity are shared,
● confidentiality established,

53
● consent given,
● data security ownership disclosed,
● the researcher present during the interview process,
● and mindful of the mental state of the interviewee.
Summary
In this chapter, the researcher detailed the methodology employed in a qualitative
research study focused on understanding the attitudes, beliefs, and actions of COEs in supporting
school counselors and legitimizing them as educational leaders. The chapter presented the
research questions, sample, population, access and entry process, instrumentation, data collection
approach, and data analysis methods. Five COE leaders in California were interviewed using
purposeful convenience sampling and snowball sampling to identify respondents. The researcher
established relationships with the participants and obtained verbal and written consent. The
interview protocol was designed to elicit specific details about the mindset and actions of county
leaders. Data collection involved recording interviews and taking handwritten notes. The data
analysis process commenced during the interviews, with initial comparisons and coding. After
completing all interviews, the researcher identified overarching themes and categories.
Credibility and trustworthiness were ensured through the researcher’s diverse educational
background and perspectives. Ethical considerations were addressed by following an ethical
checklist, including stating the study’s purpose, ensuring confidentiality, and obtaining consent
from participants.

54
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this research study was to gain a deeper understanding of the attitudes,
beliefs, and actions of county superintendents of schools in their efforts to position and advance
the school counseling profession, legitimizing school counselors as leaders in educational
settings. The first three chapters of this dissertation introduced the issue of increasing support for
school counselors in COEs, provided a comprehensive review of the literature detailing the
historical and current roles of school counselors, and explained of the chosen methodological
design for this study. This chapter presents the findings that emerged from the data collected.
Initially, this chapter presents and analyzes the respondents’ demographics and then
present the results for each research question. A qualitative study was conducted with data
collected from interviews with five COE leaders (Merriam, 2009). An alias was created to ensure
the respondents’ identity was kept confidential. All findings presented served to answer the
following research questions:
1. What are the attitudes of superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and
school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all students
effectively?
2. What are the leadership behaviors of superintendents in COEs that enable school
counselors and school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all
students effectively?
Table 1 provides a summary of the themes that emerged for both research questions.

55
Table 1
Summary of Themes
Research Question Theme Sub-themes
What are the attitudes of
superintendents in COEs that
enable school counselors and
school counselor leaders to
support college and career
readiness for all students
effectively?

Clear role of a school
counselor
Data-directed
Conduit of information and
resources
Equity-driven
Mixed views from the
educational ecosystem
Strong belief in the
capacity of school
counselors

Going beyond state
mandates to support
school counselors

District partnerships to
advance opportunities
for school counselors

What are the leadership behaviors
of superintendents in COEs that
enable school counselors and
school counselor leaders to
support college and career
readiness for all students
effectively?

Advocating for school
counseling

Strengthen county
organizational
structures

Build county-wide
support structures

Leverage regional
support

Directives from county
leaders to districts and
school counselors

56
Settings and Participants
Alpha County Office of Education
The Alpha COE is a mostly rural COE supporting 16 school districts and about 37,000
students across a primarily agricultural region. The largest school district in the county is a
kindergarten through grade 12 school district with 11 schools and an enrollment of about 8,500
students (CDE, 2022b). The county is primarily composed of residents that identify as Hispanic
or Latino and the regional median household income is $49,000. In the county, 15% of adults 25
years or older hold a bachelor’s degree (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The county superintendent
of schools is a former school counselor, holds a PPS credential, and has served in various
teaching and leadership roles within the county office for the last 26 years. The Alpha County
superintendent has been in the current role for five years.
Bravo County Office of Education
The Bravo COE is a mixed urban and rural county office supporting 42 school districts
and nearly 500,000 students across a largely populated and economically diverse metropolitan
area. The largest school district in the county is a preschool through grade 12 school district with
over 150 schools and an enrollment of about 120,000 students (CDE, 2022b). The county is
primarily composed of residents that identify as White and Hispanic or Latino but also includes a
more significant percentage of Asian residents compared to other counties in this study. The
regional median household income is $88,000 and 40% of adults 25 years or older hold a
bachelor’s degree (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The county superintendent of schools has served
in education for 28 years, beginning as a classroom teacher and rising to a superintendent of a
school district. The Bravo County superintendent has been in the current role for three years.

57
Charlie County Office of Education
The Charlie COE, spanning urban, suburban, and rural areas, supports 23 school districts
and about 430,000 students across a large geographic and populated region with a mixed sector
of agricultural, manufacturing, and tourism industries. The largest school district in the county is
a preschool through grade 12 school district with 50 schools and an enrollment of nearly 51,000
students (CDE, 2022b). The county is primarily composed of residents that identify as Hispanic
or Latino and White, but also includes a more significant percentage of Black or African
American residents than other counties in this study. The regional median household income is
$76,000; 24% of adults 25 years or older hold a bachelor’s degree (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022).
The county superintendent of schools is a former school counselor, holds a PPS credential, and
has served in education for 42 years, beginning as an office staff assistant to being a
superintendent of a school district. The Charlie County superintendent has been in the current
role for three years.
Delta County Office of Education
The Delta COE is a vastly rural COE supporting 25 school districts and about 26,000
students across a region that includes a variety of natural landscapes, forests, and smaller
communities. The largest school district in the county is a grade six through 12 school district
with an enrollment of 4,000 students (CDE, 2022b). The county is primarily composed of
residents that identify as White, but also includes a small percentage of Hispanic or Latino
residents and a low but higher percentage of American Indian and Alaska Native residents
compared to other counties in this study. The regional median household income is $62,000;
23% of adults 25 years or older hold bachelor’s degrees (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The county
superintendent of schools has served in education for 30 years, beginning as a teacher to an

58
assistant county superintendent. The Delta County superintendent has been in the current role for
three years.
Echo County Office of Education
The Echo COE is a largely mixed urban and suburban COE with vast regions of rural
areas supporting 33 school districts and nearly 400,000 students across a region with a diverse
economy including key sectors in logistics, transportation, healthcare, and manufacturing. The
largest school district in the county is a preschool through grade 12 school district with an
enrollment of over 50,000 students (CDE, 2022b). The county is primarily composed of residents
that identify as Hispanic or Latino, but also includes a significant percentage of White and a
higher percentage of Black or African American residents than other counties in this study. The
regional median household income is $70,000; 22% of adults 25 years or older hold a bachelor’s
degree (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The county superintendent of schools has served in
education for 31 years, beginning as a teacher to a deputy county superintendent. The Echo
County superintendent has been in the current role for five years.
As shown in Table 2, the participating county offices varied in the number of school
districts they support, overall student population, number of adults with a bachelor’s degree, and
demographics of the county superintendent of schools.

59
Table 2
Summary of Setting and Participants

County
office
School
districts
supported
Student
population
% Adults
(25+) with
bachelor’s
degree
Years as
superintendent
Years of
experience
in
education
Former
school
counselor
Alpha
County
16 37,000 15% 5 26 Yes
Bravo
County
42 500,000 40% 3 28 No
Charlie
County
23 430,000 24% 3 42 Yes
Delta
County
25 26,000 23% 3 30 No
Echo
County
33 400,000 22% 5 31 No

Results for Research Question 1
In addition to adhering to standards and practices, a crucial element in achieving actual
legitimacy for school counselors lies in the beliefs and attitudes of both school counselors and
their leaders (Hatch, 2008). As COEs play an increasingly significant role in supporting district
needs and improving outcomes, particularly in college and career readiness, leaders bear a
greater responsibility to support school counselors. Therefore, the first research question aimed
to gain deeper insights into the attitudes of county superintendents toward school counselors and
the school counseling profession. Research Question 1 asked, “What are the attitudes of
superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and school counselor leaders to support
college and career readiness for all students effectively?”

60
An examination of the data collected revealed that each of the five respondents had a
clear vision and positive attitudes regarding the role of a school counselor. County leaders
envisioned the role of school counselors as being data-directed, conduits of information and
resources, and equity-driven. They also shared mixed views of the role of school counselors
expressed by educators and other leaders. Each county superintendent of schools also expressed
a high level of confidence in the school counseling profession and in the capacity of school
counselors to be educational leaders in their settings. Leaders demonstrated a firm belief in the
ability of school counselors to lead essential initiatives in school settings, such as college and
career counseling. Furthermore, they recognized the need to surpass state-mandated directives.
They actively utilized their influence and partnerships with local agencies to foster, expand, and
elevate opportunities for the school counseling profession. The themes for this research question
are organized in the following section around four main themes: clear role of a school counselor,
strong belief in the capacity of school counselors, going beyond state mandates to support school
counselors, and district partnerships to advance opportunities for school counselors. The first
theme, the clear role of a school counselor, includes four subthemes: data-directed, conduit of
information and resources, equity-driven, and mixed views from the educational ecosystem.
Clear Role of a School Counselor
County superintendents expressed a deep understanding of the role of a school counselor.
Two of the five respondents were former school counselors and therefore were more intimately
aware of the capacity and training of school counselors. The other three respondents, although
not having formal training as school counselors, had positive personal or professional
experiences with school counselors. Common themes emerged when county superintendents

61
described the school counselors’ role, including importance in leveraging data, being a conduit
of information and resources, and focus on equity.
Data-Directed
Data-informed and data-driven decision-making are at the root of school counseling
accountability models (Darling-Hammond et al., 2014; Goldberg & Morrison, 2003), funding
formulas (CDE, 2013), professional standards (ASCA, 2019), and practices (Bitner et al., 2009;
Militello et al., 2009). All respondents expressed a high value in the use of data and a strong
belief that school counselors could leverage data to better guide and target interventions:
Data research is critical because if you are looking at the data for schools, you have to be
able to use your resources wisely. You just cannot go out and start doing things you think
are good. You really have to have something that really justifies your approach. If you go
out into a high school and you look at the data that comes from either their Gallup survey,
or their wellness survey, as well as their academic surveys, and you start to see where the
breakdown is, then you can come up with a targeted and leveraged approach so that you
use your resources the best way possible.
Understanding the current landscape of education in California and the heightened focus
on an MTSS, all five of the superintendents articulated a direct and positive impact school
counselors could have and gain from being part of the MTSS efforts in their schools, “I think
MTSS totally is relevant for counselors. Counselors need to be using data to really advance their
practice and fine-tune who they work with one-on-one.” Another respondent also mentioned the
reciprocal and professional legitimacy (Hatch, 2008) that could emerge when teachers and
counselors work together, “teachers see what and how counselors fit into MTSS, counselors see
how teachers fit in.” Ultimately, superintendents expressed that this type of focus and strategic

62
efforts centered on a common framework provides an opportunity to understand the role of a
school counselor:
Being able to actually articulate very clearly where that [school counselor] role is, what,
how it fits in and what are those cross-connects between these different roles of teacher,
administrator, counselor, and so on. For us, the framework for that is MTSS.
Conduit of Information and Resources
All superintendents emphasized the crucial role of school counselors in addressing the
direct needs of students, their families, and the school community. However, Chapter Two
highlighted that misunderstandings of the school counselor role (Holland & Farmer-Hinton,
2009; Johnson et al., 2010; Stone-Johnson, 2015) and counselors’ heavy caseloads (U.S.
Department of Education, 2022) have led to a perception that they might be too busy or unable to
attend to the direct needs of their stakeholders, particularly students. One of the respondents
shared a conversation with a student who described how they perceived their school counselor:
‘Gosh, I really need to talk to someone because I have many issues I’m dealing with right
now. And I’ve got some family issues, and I want to talk to someone who’s confidential,
who can understand and connect with me.’ And we always say, ‘What about your school
counselors?’ And they say, ‘Well, they are just so busy, and they got so many... you got
to make an appointment with them. And a lot of times, they are trying to tell you what
your course is like, and they’re working with scheduling changes first. And you can’t
really talk to them about your personal issues.’
Several county superintendents acknowledged the reality of counseling with large caseloads and
an opportunity for counselors to complement their efforts by connecting students to resources, “I
see our counselors being key in connecting resources because counselors have a caseload of 500,

63
and you cannot counsel 500 kids. It is impossible. But you can connect them to resources.”
Respondents stated that this partnership with the school and outside resources could influence
how they are viewed by others in their school setting, especially faculty, and ultimately lead to
increased professional legitimacy.
Equity-Driven
Along with being data-driven and a conduit of resources, county leaders envisioned
school counselors being equity-focused. One respondent emphasized her vision for school
counselors to engage with students as individuals and to take up their role as “equity warriors.”
Several superintendents stated that school counselors needed to unpack further the needs and
support students warranted, “paying attention to the kids holistically.” One catalyst stated by
respondents to elevate this work for school counselors is California MTSS, which allowed
county leaders to experience how school counselors could dig deeper into root causes and tier
corresponding resources:
Counselors need to fill some gaps so that it could be because when we dig into the
academics, it was not just the academics. There were issues of food and security and
other issues in the community that our kids and families were struggling with.
Mixed Views from Educational Ecosystem
Despite their clear vision for the role of a school counselor from county leaders, several
mentioned the current reality is a lack of a defined role: “A challenge the school counseling
profession has is that this lack of definition of what their role is.” Respondents attributed much
of the skepticism and misconceptions about school counselors to other stakeholders within the
educational ecosystem, affirming Stone-Johnson’s (2015) and T. A. Hatch’s (2008) conclusions
that counselors are not perceived as primary change agents in school settings.

64
Respondents hinged these perceptions of school counselors on the attitudes and
experiences of teachers and administrators, “If you ask teachers, what does a school counselor
do? You will get answers all over the place because it’s entirely based on their experience
working with a school counselor at their site.” One respondent reinforced Perna et al. (2008) and
Venezia and Kirst (2005) that this lack of definition is a residual of mixed counseling programs,
“I can go to probably 10 different schools in the same district and find a different level of
counseling support and methodologies.” Others stated that much of these misconceptions
emanate at the site level, “in many cases, assistant principals and principals do not understand
the counseling work, so there is very little support for it, and counselors are left trying to defend
their jobs and articulate what they do half the time.” In fact, one of the most impactful levers
county leaders mentioned to address the negative view of school counselor roles is the leadership
of a site leader, “not a lot of leadership is provided in our experience at the site level unless
someone has a background in counseling.”
As the educational environment in California is experiencing seismic changes, county
leaders view the role of a school counselor as evolving and woven into redesigned educational
models, “the role of counselors should be, if done properly, should have shifted into a very
different way.” A better understanding of the role of school counselors and their potential for
positive impact could shift their current professional legitimacy:
I attribute this lack of understanding from many leaders to what school counseling is,
what they do, why we need them, and how they fit in. It is just not generally speaking,
and this is a sad statement to make, but it is not generally speaking top of mind when we
talk about what we are doing as an educational system to support students.

65
County leaders, in addition to their proactive attitude, recognize a specific role and responsibility
in effectively informing the larger educational community about the evolving role of a school
counselor:
A takeaway for me, for going through trying to raise visibility for counselors through
CCSESA was recognizing that the exact same problem we had in our county, which was
informing assistant principals, principals, superintendents, board members, about the
importance of counselors’ role[s] and how it is not the counseling role that you think it is,
it is this new redefined role of counselor.
Strong Belief in Capacity of School Counselors
County superintendents expressed a deep conviction in the ability of school counselors to
connect with students and impact their lives through personal examples of working alongside
school counselors:
At the middle school level, I had a vacancy and I recruited one of my former teachers
who were bilingual, and she came in, and she was so good with the kids. They just loved
talking to her, especially our English Learners, because they had someone that could
speak in their primary language in some sensitive areas and someone who could really
understand them. So I have always been very supportive of counselors.
Another respondent stated that:
When I was at the elementary level, I was very fortunate because that was back in the
90s, and many districts did not have elementary counselors. And still, probably not all
districts do. And I was fortunate because we had a full-time counselor, and I felt that she
was such a huge asset to our program because our teachers were dealing with some
students that really struggled in many areas. And our counselor was able to assist them

66
and kind of provide some guidance for them and help them with referrals or resources to
support students who work closely with our RSP teacher and our special ed team. And so
she was a very valuable individual providing support.
County leaders feel school counselors have yet to realize their capacity to transform the
educational environment:
Right now, I think a lot of things are just masks or out of sight, out of mind. It is really
going to be something that the system may be turning to our counselors to address.
Without really having the system ready structurally to know what that means, how to do
that, and how to support that.
County leaders expressed high confidence in their ability to advance the potential of school
counselors, particularly to support the whole child’s social-emotional wellness and development,
as evidenced by the increased focus and resources being dedicated to this aspect (CDE, 2014a;
McCart et al., 2014):
More and more of those dollars are being spent in social-emotional areas. And so
counselors are a big part of that. So, the role of counselors, in my opinion, will only
increase in importance as we continue to move forward.
Going Beyond State Mandates to Support School Counselors
The focus of many county superintendents was first and foremost to uphold the state-
articulated mandates, such as approving district budgets and instructional plans, ensuring all
teachers have authorized teaching credentials, conducting site visits of lowest-performing
schools, ensuring that non-voter approved debt by districts has oversight, and supporting students
in probation, juvenile hall, and those who have been expelled. Beyond these state mandates,
respondents noted a need to expand their reach and support to address the immediate needs of

67
their districts and educators, “90 percent of what we do as an organization is supporting our local
needs.” In addition to their role as providers of professional services, support, and learning
opportunities to LEAs, county superintendents emphasized the need to empower counselors
through multiyear, comprehensive professional development. They discussed various structures
and forms of support that could be designed to build the capacity of school counselors, including
direct collaboration with counselor leaders at the district and site level:
One model would be to really work with lead counselors. But in having the resources
provided to them, a lot of this work is going to be above and beyond the normal
expectations of their day. So, you need stipend opportunities or other kinds of
compensation.
This level of support and expertise might not always come directly from county offices, “if we
do not have that expertise, we should know where the expertise is and broker it so that the
experts can go and support a district.” Ultimately, county leaders viewed their leadership role as
change advocates for school counselors, “changing the focus and understanding of the profession
of school counseling.”
District Partnerships to Advance Opportunities for School Counselors
Several respondents identified their ability to partner with district and regional leaders as
their highest lever to influence educational outcomes and support for school counselors. The
positionality of county leaders allows them to collaborate strategically with other leaders to
quickly move initiatives and priorities forward, “We would choose the folks. It’s always easier to
work with a speed-of-trust kind of thinking, right? It’s always easier to work with people that
share your vision and you have a high level of trust.”

68
One of the identified opportunities several respondents expressed was creating robust
counseling support structures and partnerships with school districts, “in my perfect world, you
would have directors of counseling services or support services that understand it well and are at
a level where they can pull resources and prioritize resources to support the work.” County
leaders also viewed district leaders as essential in shaping the role and duties of school
counselors:
District leaders should define the role of school counselors and provide room for
autonomy. It’s up to a district to really put forth here some non-negotiables about how we
think the counseling profession should operate, and here are some conditions around
autonomy and creativity about how you work with groups of students in your community.
Beyond defining the role of school counselors, county leaders expressed a need to have a
reciprocal relationship with districts to advance and sustain counseling support. Several
respondents shared their increased efforts to build structures and initiatives to propel counseling
services in their county and region but highlighted the lack of similar efforts at their local school
sites:
Often time, you can have a great structure in the county where they can go and get fed all
kinds of rich information, they get really excited about it, then they go back to their
school site and there’s no support for it, or they don’t get the resources they need to do it,
and so they get frustrated.
This county leader further stated:
We can put the best process in place, structure in place, assistance, outreach, and
communication, but at some point, there’s a handoff to the local site, and that’s where,
unfortunately if the ball gets dropped there, that sometimes the work isn’t as effective.

69
theme.
Discussion for Research Question 1
This research question focused on understanding the attitudes of superintendents in COEs
towards school counselors and the school counseling profession. The data collected from five
respondents, who were county superintendents of schools from diverse regions of California,
indicated a positive attitude toward school counselors and a clear vision of their role. As
described below, this clarity of a school counselor’s role contrasts how other stakeholders in the
educational landscape view the responsibilities and impact of school counselors. Three
subcategories emerged as key ways county leaders viewed the role of school counselors. These
include counselors being data-directed, conduits of resources and information, and equity-driven.
County leaders viewed school counselors as data-directed professionals who can leverage
data to guide interventions and allocate resources effectively. They emphasized the importance
of using data to justify approaches and target interventions based on the specific needs of
students and schools. These responses reinforce findings from Goldberg and Morrison (2003),
Darling-Hammond et al. (2014), Militello et al. (2009), and Bitner et al. (2009), who recognize
the value of utilizing data for effective decision-making, especially when counseling students
about college and career options (Militello et al., 2009). Data-driven decisions are also a critical
element of accountability models, funding formulas, professional standards, and practices.
Further, the superintendents recognized the relevance of school counselors in the context of an
MTSS, seeing them as essential contributors to the MTSS efforts and advocates for data-
informed decision-making.
Another significant role attributed to school counselors is that they serve as conduits of
information and resources. County leaders acknowledged school counselors’ challenges, such as

70
large caseloads and limited time for individual counseling. They believed counselors could
complement their efforts by connecting students to appropriate resources, thereby addressing the
direct needs of students, families, and school communities. Research indicates that the timeliness
of critical information, especially for students with college aspirations, is an essential component
of a school counselor’s efficiency and positive impact on student outcomes (Bitner et al., 2009;
Bryan et al., 2011; Hurwitz & Howell, 2014). This partnership with internal stakeholders and
external resources was seen as enhancing the professional legitimacy of school counselors.
Additionally, county superintendents strongly emphasized school counselors’ role in
promoting equity. They envisioned counselors as “equity warriors” who should engage with
students individually and address their holistic needs. A personalized, culturally competent, and
holistic counseling approach are strategies that Hagedorn et al. (2006) and Watkinson and Hersi
(2014) found effective in their research on college and career counseling Native Hawaiian and
Somali immigrant students, receptively. County superintendents also mentioned that
implementing California’s MTSS provides additional opportunities for school counselors to
identify root causes of challenges and provide corresponding resources, going beyond academic
concerns to include community issues such as food insecurity impacting their students and
families.
At the same time, the research also revealed a mixed view of the role of school
counselors within the educational ecosystem. Some county leaders mentioned a lack of a defined
role for school counselors, leading to skepticism and misconceptions among teachers and
administrators. The attitudes and experiences of these stakeholders influenced how they
perceived and understood the role of school counselors. These findings support the research from
Stone-Johnson (2015) and Holland and Farmer-Hinton (2009) that negative perceptions of

71
school counselors stem from a lack of understanding of counselors’ roles and are not seen as
primary agents when it comes to college and career readiness support activities. The
inconsistencies of counseling support and methodologies across schools within the same district,
which Perna et al. (2008) and Venezia and Kirst (2005) reveal in their studies, also contributed to
the varying perceptions. Finally, limited leadership and support for counseling at the site level
were identified as challenges school counselors faced.
This study also revealed that county superintendents hold strong beliefs in the capacity of
school counselors to make a positive impact on students’ lives. They shared personal examples
of working alongside school counselors and witnessing their effectiveness in connecting with
students, particularly English Learners and struggling students. They also highlighted the support
provided by counselors in assisting students, making referrals, and collaborating with other
educational professionals. Concurring research strengthens these findings and underscores that a
well-staffed school counseling environment, characterized by positive student-counselor
relationships, can significantly contribute to establishing a college-going culture and positively
impact post-secondary outcomes, particularly in communities where college enrollment rates
tend to be lower (Bryan et al., 2011, 2017; Hurwitz & Howell, 2014). Hagedorn et al. (2006), in
their successful efforts to increase the transition rates of native Hawaiians to post-secondary
institutions, would argue that the cultural responsiveness of school counselors and the
personalized supports expressed by county leaders are the attitudes and behaviors that enable
school counselors to provide holistic college and career readiness supports.
The county superintendents also acknowledged that the full potential of school
counselors has yet to be realized within the current educational system, supporting the political
theory from T. A. Hatch (2008), who argued the limited social capital of school counselors

72
within their local communities has undermined the political clout and value of school counseling.
County superintendents report the current system may not be fully prepared to understand and
support the role of school counselors. Despite this underprepared and misaligned educational
system, respondents also shared some optimism about the potential to strengthen the legitimacy
of the school counseling profession. County leaders emphasized the evolving nature of education
in California and expressed confidence in the role of school counselors being woven into
redesigned educational models. They believe the expanding emphasis on supporting the whole
student, including their social and emotional needs, will elevate the importance and influence of
school counselors.
County superintendents recognized the importance of upholding state mandates but also
prioritize going beyond these mandates to support school counselors and meet the immediate
needs of their districts. They shared how they have approached this mindset, focusing on
providing professional services, support, and learning opportunities to educators, including
school counselors. County leaders noted the importance of comprehensive, multiyear
professional learning opportunities for counselors and highlighted the need to work with
counselor leaders at the district and site levels. This attitude of sustaining efforts to build
professional capacity among school counselors was also echoed by Bitner et al. (2009) and
Hartline and Cobia (2012), who recommended that training should be early, ongoing, and
rigorous. Respondents acknowledged that this approach of empowering school counselor leaders
at the local level might require additional resources such as stipends or other forms of
compensation. County leaders also recognized that expertise in counseling may not always be
readily available within the COEs. Therefore, they suggested seeking external support when
needed, as highlighted in the research conducted by Duarte and Hatch (2014), which

73
demonstrated the positive impact of training provided by outside partners. Finally, county
superintendents view themselves as change advocates for school counselors and strongly believe
in changing the counseling profession’s perception and understanding.
The final theme from this study examining the attitudes of superintendents in county
offices revolved around the importance of collaborating with district offices and staff to support
school counselors. Fullan (2013) underscores the critical role of school districts in effecting
transformational and systemic change, and county superintendents acknowledge their ability to
leverage their position to collaborate with district leaders who share their vision and trust.
Respondents believe that district leaders play a crucial role in shaping the role and
responsibilities of school counselors. They emphasize the need for district leaders to define the
counseling profession’s scope, provide autonomy, and establish non-negotiables for counseling
services. County superintendents see systemic changes and support as opportunities to enhance
the capacity and leadership of school counselors. They view district leaders as essential in
supporting these counseling initiatives. However, respondents also noted that this reciprocal
relationship could face challenges when local school sites lack the necessary support
infrastructure and resources to sustain and spread counseling initiatives, even when county
leaders have initiated them. The findings highlight the importance of creating strong counseling
support structures and partnerships with school districts to advance the role of counselors and
their institutional legitimacy (Hatch, 2008).
Results for Research Question 2
Actions and behaviors are central to directors’ and providers’ accountability dynamics
and professional frameworks (ASCA, 2019; Goldberg & Morrison, 2003; Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004). With a persistent need to close the college and career readiness gap for

74
students, especially students of color, the actions of educational leaders are more important than
ever. Chapter Two reviewed literature supporting that school counselors can positively impact
college counseling metrics (Bryan et al., 2011, 2017; Carter, 2011; Hurwitz & Howell, 2014).
This research question sought to understand the behaviors of leaders in COEs to propel the
school counseling profession. Research Question 2 asked, “What are the leadership behaviors of
superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and school counselor leaders to support
college and career readiness for all students effectively?”
An analysis of the collected data revealed that COE leaders exhibited strategic and
systematic behaviors to influence school counselors’ capacity and leadership. One prevalent
theme that emerged was their skillful advocacy for school counselors at various levels of the
educational ecosystem. County leaders also provided specific examples of how they strengthened
their organizational structures by promoting and empowering leaders, some of whom were
current or former school counselors, to support their peers throughout the region. Additionally, a
significant theme revolved around the actions taken by leadership to establish county-wide
support structures. This effort was further enhanced by a fourth theme, where county leaders
actively sought and fostered partnerships with regional agencies to sustain and disseminate the
cultivated support for school counselors across the county. By leveraging their relationships with
local administrators and directly engaging with school counselors, a final theme highlighted
county superintendents of schools providing directives to educators, guiding them to pursue
specific goals, fostering stronger partnerships between principals and school counselors, and
ensuring counselors remained committed and engaged in self-care. The themes for this research
question are organized in the following section around five themes: advocating for school

75
counseling, strengthen county organizational structures, build county-wide support structures,
leverage regional support, directives from county leaders to districts and school counselors.
Advocate for School Counseling
The positional power of a California COE superintendent provides a unique bully pulpit
to bring forward issues and priorities they see as critical in their regions, including being a strong
advocate for school counseling. Respondents in this study recognized the importance of school
counselors and their shifting role, especially their critical position in nurturing student well-
being, fostering academic success, and advancing post-secondary opportunities. As respondents
described their daily schedules, several mentioned the vast number and variety of meetings they
frequently attend at the local and state level. Respondents viewed these gatherings and audiences
as an opportunity to surface the role of school counselors with other leaders:
Being a county superintendent, you find yourself in a lot of meetings, even across the
state. So one of the things I’ve tried to do is mentioning counselors when I’m there with
the governor’s staff, just mentioning counselors when you’re at the CCSESA or one of
the other meetings, but you have to keep it at the forefront of your mind to remember to
mention it.
At the local level, some respondents mentioned their efforts to bring more awareness to
their current district superintendents, “I can’t mandate; what I can do is share my experience with
superintendents. I meet with them every Friday and I’m going to work with those early adopters
that are concerned about this.” This type of advocacy indicates that county leaders recognize the
social legitimacy of school counselors and can influence others in positions of power to think
about the potential of the school counseling profession (T. A. Hatch, 2008).

76
As respondents shared their current leadership opportunities to advocate for school
counselors, they also reflected on their earlier roles as district superintendents and the behaviors
they pursued to increase the number of school counselors:
As a local superintendent, when the LCAP came out, we facilitated discussions with our
community and we made sure that counselors were a high priority to add to the budget
during the LCAP season and added more counselors at the secondary level, but made
sure that every elementary school had a counselor.
Acknowledging the potential of school counselors to positively influence their college and career
goals, respondents described leadership behaviors they took as district superintendents to elevate
the need for more counselors with critical stakeholders in their community:
‘Okay, what needs to be addressed in order to achieve the goals?’ We’re trying to get
counselors to emerge. Then we said, ‘Okay, what do we actually have in our district?’
Then we saw that the ratio was really, really off. Then once we put it up on the board
when we started doing that carousel and you vote for what things are a priority, the
counselors were at the top of the list and our associations were part of the process. So
they saw it emerge, and they were supportive of adding more counselors as well.
Realizing the mixed perceptions of school counselors that Stone-Johnson (2015) and
Holland and Farmer-Hinton (2009) described, as detailed in Chapter Two, some respondents
highlighted their efforts to engage in longer-term educational campaigns to inform their districts
and local leaders about the evolving role of a school counselor:
We will bring in our lead counselor at the county office and her colleagues that have
worked in this space to really start that education campaign with them to help them to
understand that counseling isn’t counseling that they may think they know.

77
Others described their direct actions with district administrators to illuminate how school
counselors could be weaved into the fabric of their support system: “I spent most of our time,
quite frankly, with administrators around the space of how counselors fit into their overall
strategy of school support.” These behaviors align with Sink’s (2016) and T. A. Hatch’s (2017)
recommendations to braid school counseling support services into crosswalks and frameworks
between an MTSS and school counseling standards.
In rural communities with limited and shared resources, school counselors may not be
present in every school. One of the respondents highlighted a direct and poignant advocacy
approach to counter the common reason district leaders often use to justify not hiring school
counselors:
One of the things that I struggle with is when we look at small schools and rural schools.
There’s just not enough to hire a counselor. If we’re looking at what would make a
difference, it’s saying every school needs a counselor, period.
Strengthen County Organizational Structures
Superintendents, as leaders of COEs, offer vision, leadership, and accountability to
multiple departments, staff, and partnerships. With COEs that span the diverse state of
California, the size and scope of these offices can vary across regions. Despite the range in the
makeup of county offices, there are constant structures and responsibilities across all 58 COEs.
One of the most frequent responses county leaders shared in their early tenure as county leaders
was their ability to build on current county structures to elevate school counselors into positions
of influence. Respondents described the direct hiring of school counselors into county
coordinator roles to oversee critical initiatives to support school counselors and former school
counselor into senior leadership positions like deputy superintendents to have a more extensive

78
influence on overall county-wide initiatives. In other cases, respondents leveraged their financial
resources and directed current staff to hire additional counselor coordinators. These full and part-
time counselor coordinators, some of whom are also employed by their districts, provide direct
support to other school counselors, expanding the current services and support from county
office departments, “So what we have done is we built a system where there are counselors who
help counselors in the regions. The director overseeing college and career readiness has
identified some key people who know these districts.”
In addition to hiring new leaders or empowering current staff with school counseling
backgrounds to make additional hires, respondents highlighted their ability to rely on and build
trust in school counselor leaders within their COE. One respondent, who had a school counseling
background, passionately emphasized the importance of school counselor support, citing the
impactful work of one of her department leaders:
We have a shining star, who works in our College and Career Readiness Office. She is
the executive director and actually comes from a counseling background. So whenever
she would provide information about how she wanted to support counselors, I was right
there with her.
Another county superintendent recounted the incredible value of working alongside someone
who also shared the experience of having a school counseling background:
When I took the county superintendent’s role, I brought on my deputy…we’re both
former counselors. And we said probably in the first two years of us working together in
these new roles, numerous times, we would say the most important credential we hold to
do this job is our counseling credential. It’s our PPS.

79
Including leaders with school counseling backgrounds in county offices increases trust and value
to their districts and school counseling community by leveraging their firsthand knowledge and
understanding of the profession. The collaboration between these county office leaders and
counselor leaders supports the organizational, institutional, and political aspects that T. A. Hatch
(2008) asserted are crucial in establishing greater professional legitimacy for the school
counseling field.
Build County-Wide Support Structures
Similar to how county superintendents used their human resource capacity to bolster
county support structures, many of them also mentioned their immediate efforts to build up
county-wide professional learning opportunities for school counselors:
When I came on board and we went into LCFF, we started to really have more flexibility
in terms of how we’re going to use our resources. So some of the first resources that
came to bear that I established here in the county office were resources to support
teachers and counselors across our county.
Another mentioned their efforts to enhance their “counseling roundtables,” where many college
access professionals such as the California Student Opportunity and Access Program and higher
education partners gathered. The respondent described “going deeper” into the focus of their
convenings and conversations:
Now every one of those gatherings is focused on a topic, focused on some professional
development or conversations, guest speakers, those kinds of things, to really try to move
that group along. So I think that’s one thing that we’re doing that I think has been very
effective and even continues through the Covid times, remotely.

80
A common theme that emerged from several respondents when it came to building the
professional capacity of school counselors was a long-term commitment to training and
initiatives. One respondent stated they are “no longer doing any of these one-and-done kinds of
activities” but are instead looking to build multiyear partnerships with trainers and outside
providers. Several of these longer-term capacity-building initiatives for counselors started with
high school counselors:
Another one that we are in Year 5 of is the counseling initiative. This brings together
counselors from every district who have counselors, and we started with just high school.
… One of the things we were able to do is bring Dr. Trish Hatch up for two years, five
days each year, and all counselors in the county. We started with high school, and then
within Day 2 of Year 1, we expanded that to include elementary counselors and middle
school counselors where they existed.
Consistent with the findings from Bitner et al. (2009) and Hartline and Cobia (2012), these types
of long-term commitment behaviors from leaders realize the recommendations from their
findings for sustained professional capacity building of school counselors.
Valuing the importance of these multiyear efforts to build the professional capacity of
school counselors, county superintendents demonstrated their commitment by being present
during training sessions. They modeled and expected the same level of commitment from their
district county superintendents:
All the superintendents were there because I was there. They knew I sent out the
reminders for the meetings. I was front and center on this, and so the superintendents
were there. There was an example where one of the administrators wasn’t there. So as

81
we’re sitting in the training, I send a text to the superintendent saying, ‘I don’t see the
superintendent’ or, ‘I don’t see the principal from this high school.’ He says, ‘I’m on it.’
County superintendents also shared efforts to build collaborative cultures of learning and
celebration among school counselors in their district, realizing the “right driver” response to
accountability and creating the type of continuous improvement community that Fullan (2011)
and Darling-Hammond et al. (2014) support in their research findings. One respondent
highlighted their efforts to expand annual school counseling gatherings to meet the demands of
counselors, especially around areas such as having more students complete the FAFSA, “it used
to be just an annual counselors conference, but now we have had to change it to quarterly
because of the needs and the demands of the counselors. We do things to celebrate their
successes.” Through these county-wide gatherings, shared learning occurs:
There’s learning from each other. “How on earth did you get an 18% increase from last
year? What did you do?” Then, everybody’s all ears because maybe they only increased
by eight percent as opposed to 18%. They improved, but they want to continue to
improve. So, it’s that right balance, I think, of support coming from the county in terms
of what our lead counselors can provide. She helps them a ton with data. I’ll give you an
example. When FAFSA results come out every week, she’s providing that information.
Do they know how to do it? Absolutely. Do they have time to do it? No. So, that’s what
she does, is she sends them. So, then it’s this reminder every week. ‘Oh, shoot. this
district is beating us.’ So, then they’re all in trying to work with their kids to continue to
see more and more kids complete the FAFSA.

82
Leverage Regional Support
Recognizing the critical need for county-wide counseling support and professional
learning opportunities, county leaders also acknowledged that they could have a greater reach
and impact when they leveraged outside and regional resources. As stated, several shared their
partnerships and multiyear agreements with outside school counseling professional learning
providers. Others emphasized intentional work to cultivate relationships with institutes of higher
education, “we have built partnerships with our local universities, for example, Cal State, where
we’ve built workshops and co-presented.” County superintendents also acknowledged the need
to partner with outside agencies to relieve school counselors of some of the caseloads that
warrant counseling and therapy services beyond their scope:
So, as we know, I think that, just like you have the tiered system when you’re helping
students, there is a group of students that need beyond a school counselor. So, we have
partnered and contracted with private companies and community groups who provide in-
depth mental health along with our mental health partners. So sometimes, we do allow
them to go on campuses or allow parents to reach out to them on the weekends.
Embracing the power of collective impact, county superintendents have harnessed the
strength of collaborative efforts within their regions. Respondents described working hand-in-
hand with local stakeholders to leverage collective impact strategies that drive positive change
and create transformative educational opportunities for students. One respondent shared how his
active participation in a collective impact group has resulted in fruitful and solution-focused
dialogue with his higher education partners:
I’m a board member there, and the beauty of it is that you have your county
superintendents from two counties, then you’ve got your college presidents. Now we’re

83
at a place where it’s taken a couple of years, but we have jelled. We get into each other’s
business in a very critically friendly way to be able to say, okay, we’re preparing students
this way. What are you doing that way? Or if they have a challenge, they listen to us
brainstorm or vice versa. Because sometimes you’re so close to a challenge that you
don’t even see the solution. So that involvement is part of it.
As part of these open lines of communication and trust, county superintendents can position
school counselors as solutions to local problems of practice:
I would look to see where there are strong collective impact initiatives being made and
have the counseling lead at the table or very much connected to what’s taking place in the
conversation so that the outreach with counselors can go forward. That’s what I love so
much about our collaboration in the county because the whole network is there.
When fostering this open communication and trust, county superintendents established school
counselors as valuable contributors to addressing local challenges. They actively involved
counselors in pertinent discussions and initiatives, emphasizing the importance of gaining “social
legitimacy” for school counselors, who are recognized as integral to resolving educational
problems of practice (T. A. Hatch, 2008).
Directives From County Leaders to Districts and Counselors
Taking a proactive leadership role, county superintendents have established direct lines of
communication with school district leaders and school counselors. This creates a channel to
provide clear directives that empower these key stakeholders to deliver effective and targeted
support services to students throughout their respective districts. One superintendent provided
insights about focusing districts on key college and career indicators, even before the state
articulated them as priorities:

84
We had as our aim, and still have as our aim. Well, again, it was pre all the other
indicators that make up the CCI, but we were focused on A to G and CTE completion.
Those were the two. Our goal was to equal or surpass the statewide levels. Those became
early points of reference for our superintendents to be able to say, “Yes, we will. That
makes sense. Let’s focus on addressing those two areas.”
Another respondent highlighted a call to action that would strengthen the relationship between
school counselor and principal:
We also have encouraged the counselors to meet at least monthly with the site principal
or assistant principal, whoever works most closely with them, so that they’re in a regular
conversation and stay updated in terms of how things are going.
Others expressed a need for school counselors to share their work and success more broadly with
elected school stakeholders:
Our lead counselors at the county office really encouraged them to do a presentation to
their school board once a year to highlight the data and what that has meant in terms of a
change in the program for students. So, they’ve all done that.
These findings underscore the literature from Duarte and Hatch (2014) and Bitner et al. (2009),
who recommended fostering strong relationships and utilizing data as crucial factors in building
trusting and collaborative relationships between administrators and school counselors.
As county superintendents communicate directives to district leaders and directly to
school counselors about their work, they also emphasize the importance of personal
commitments and self-care. Speaking directly to the heart of school counselors, one respondent
shared a personal request, “I am asking for the commitment of your heart.” In a similarly
profound and personal way, county leaders call on school counselors to care for themselves, “I

85
asked them to make sure that they take care of themselves. Know yourself well enough when
you know that you’ve given out more than you’re receiving, find that place where you can
receive.” These reminders are essential for school counselors who often give so much of
themselves as they navigate demanding educational landscapes and support students’ emotional,
academic, and post-secondary goals and growth.
Discussion for Research Question 2
This study revealed several key themes related to the leadership behaviors of
superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors and school counselor leaders to support
college and career readiness for all students effectively. These included county superintendents
advocating for school counselors, enhancing organizational structures, building county-wide
support networks, leveraging regional resources, and providing clear directives.
The most salient theme that emerged was COE leaders actively advocating for school
counseling by recognizing their essential role and impact on student well-being and academic
success. They leverage their positions and, as mentioned above, their personal experiences to
raise awareness of school counseling at various levels, including local and state meetings. This
proactive and hierarchical leadership approach underscores the importance of local and state-
level political clout that T. A. Hatch (2008) argued is necessary to further legitimize the school
counseling profession. County leaders also engage in long-term educational campaigns to
educate stakeholders about the evolving role of school counselors and integrate them into the
overall support system. The literature review in Chapter Two highlighted this integration through
a crosswalk Sink (2016) provides between MTSS roles, ASCA competencies, and the CACREP
school counseling standards, as well as the MTMDSS framework T. A. Hatch (2017) illustrates
to define further the connection between MTSS and the ASCA national standards. Respondents

86
in this study also provided examples of advocating for equity by promoting the presence of
counselors in all schools and challenging common reasons for not hiring counselors.
Along with county office leaders championing the school counseling profession with
external partners and agencies, they also acted within their COEs. They demonstrated their
commitment to supporting school counselors by strengthening county organizational structures.
They hire school counselors for key leadership positions, such as county coordinators and deputy
superintendents, to oversee initiatives and have a larger influence on county-wide efforts. Some
respondents also provide direction and financial resources to hire additional counselor leaders
who would offer direct support to other school counselors. These leaders with school counseling
backgrounds enhanced the trust and value within the county office as they brought firsthand
knowledge and understanding of the profession. The collaboration between COE leaders and
counselor leaders contributes to the organizational, institutional, and political theory that T. A.
Hatch (2008) argued is necessary to increase the legitimacy of the school counseling profession.
These findings highlight the importance of building strong organizational structures and
fostering leadership within county offices to support school counselors effectively.
County superintendents prioritize establishing county-wide support structures and
professional learning opportunities for school counselors. They allocate resources and create
initiatives to support counselors and teachers across the county, leveraging flexibility in resource
allocation through the LCFF. Additionally, county superintendents enhance existing counseling
roundtables and professional development opportunities, focusing on specific topics, guest
speakers, and conversations to facilitate the growth of school counselors. A key finding and
recommendation in the research from Bitner et al. (2009) and Hartline and Cobia (2012) are the
commitment to long-term capacity-building initiatives for school counselors. County leaders

87
emphasize moving away from one-time activities to instead focus on multiyear partnerships with
trainers and external providers. County superintendents demonstrate their commitment to these
efforts by actively participating in training sessions and expecting the same level of engagement
from district superintendents.
County superintendents of schools also foster collaborative cultures of learning and
celebration among school counselors in their districts. They expand annual counseling gatherings
to meet the demands of counselors and create opportunities for shared learning and celebration of
successes. Several respondents shared improvement efforts around FAFSA completion rates
becoming a common focus, with counselors learning from each other’s strategies and celebrating
achievements. This paradigm shift in creating thriving learning and sharing communities where
counselors experience the impact of their work is the type of professional capacity Darling-
Hammond et al. (2014) recommend in their research and the “right driver” for accountability
(Fullan, 2011).
County leaders recognize the value of leveraging external and regional resources to
enhance county-wide counseling support and professional learning opportunities. They form
partnerships and multiyear agreements with external school counseling professional learning
providers and foster relationships with institutes of higher education. County superintendents
also acknowledge the need to collaborate with outside agencies to address counseling and
therapy services beyond the scope of school counselors. They actively engage in collective
impact initiatives, collaborating with local stakeholders, including college presidents, to drive
positive change and create transformative educational opportunities. Through open
communication and trust, county superintendents position school counselors as solutions to local
challenges and ensure their active involvement in relevant conversations and initiatives,

88
supporting the need to gain “social legitimacy” where school counselors are seen as part of the
solution to educational problems of practice (T. A. Hatch, 2008).
Finally, this research study found that respondents take a proactive leadership approach
to establish direct communication channels with district leaders and school counselors. These
clear directives empower stakeholders in delivering targeted support services to students and
enable school counselors to support college and career readiness of all students. This includes
focusing on key college and career indicators, especially metrics such as financial aid completion
rates and college-preparatory course-taking sequences that increase student eligibility into post-
secondary institutions, encouraging regular meetings between counselors and principals, and
promoting the sharing of counselors’ work with school boards. In line with this, establishing
trusting relationships between administrators and counselors and sharing data-based results are
among the key recommendations from Duarte and Hatch (2014) and Bitner et al. (2009). County
leaders also emphasize the importance of personal commitment and self-care, urging counselors
to care for themselves while supporting students’ diverse needs.
Summary
This chapter presented the findings for the research questions outlined in Chapter Three,
addressing the attitudes and behaviors of superintendents in COEs that enable school counselors
and leaders to be effective in supporting college and career readiness for all students.
The results for the first research question indicate that county leaders demonstrated a
positive attitude toward school counselors and identified three critical roles: data-directed
professionals, conduits of resources and information, and equity-driven advocates. They
acknowledged the challenges and misconceptions surrounding school counselors’ roles but
believed in their potential to positively impact students’ lives. County leaders emphasized the

89
need for professional development opportunities, collaboration with district offices, and systemic
changes to support and elevate the role of school counselors.
The results for the second research question demonstrate that county office leaders play a
vital role in supporting school counselors and strengthening the profession. Their behaviors
include advocating for counselors, enhancing organizational structures, building support
networks, leveraging regional resources, and providing clear directives. These actions aim to
promote college and career readiness for all students and support the capacity and legitimacy of
school counselors.
The next chapter contains further discussion of these findings, implications for leaders
and school counselors in the educational landscape, and recommendations for future studies.

90
Chapter Five: Discussion
California, like many other states, has experienced an ongoing educational transformation
with multiple levers at play, including revised academic standards, introduction of new
technologies and pedagogical approaches, and a shift towards local control funding and decision-
making. While positive progress indicators exist, such as increased graduation rates and
improved student achievement, significant challenges remain, particularly in closing
achievement and opportunity gaps. The focus on expanding post-secondary options and
enhancing college and career readiness has been crucial in addressing these challenges,
especially for students from underrepresented backgrounds. However, disparities in college
matriculation and completion rates persist, particularly for Black/African American and Latinx
students and students experiencing poverty (The Campaign for College Opportunity, 2022; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2022).
Research indicates that school counselors are emerging as promising stakeholders with
the potential to play a vital role in designing and implementing a responsive support system for
college and career readiness. Research reviewed in this study highlights that access to counselors
and college counseling can positively impact student outcomes, particularly for those from
disadvantaged backgrounds. Nevertheless, research also indicates that the quality and quantity of
college counseling services can vary significantly across schools and districts. Enhancing and
improving the capacity of school counselors will rely on a more compassionate and effective
model of accountability emphasizing trust, communication, and interdependency between
directors and providers (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
This qualitative research was designed to explore county office leaders' attitudes toward
and leadership behaviors in supporting school counselors in California (Merriam, 2009). Five

91
county office leaders were selected for interviews using purposeful convenience sampling and
additional participants were identified through purposeful snowball sampling (Merriam, 2009).
The sample included county superintendents with varying years of experience, two of whom
were former school counselors holding a PPS credential. Verbal and written consent forms were
obtained from the participants to ensure ethical considerations (Patton, 2002). The researcher's
extensive background in diverse educational roles informed the study's design and interview
questions. The interview protocol utilized open-ended and neutral questions to gather
information about the attitudes and actions of county leaders (Patton, 2002). Data collection
involved recorded interviews supplemented with handwritten notes. Data analysis was conducted
iteratively and began during the interview phase with initial comparisons and coding (Corbin &
Strauss, 2008). After completing all interviews, the researcher developed overarching themes and
categories to analyze the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
The findings in this study indicate that county superintendents have positive attitudes
toward school counselors and recognize their potential impact on student development.
However, they also acknowledge that existing misconceptions and challenges hinder the full
realization of school counselors' capacity within the current educational system. The results
discussed in this chapter emphasize the importance of collaboration with district offices, creating
strong support structures, and addressing misconceptions to enhance school counselors' role and
professional legitimacy.
This chapter will summarize the implications of the findings and offer several practice
recommendations. These recommendations focus on strengthening support for school counselors
through preservice training, fostering reciprocal understanding between school counselors and
administrators, creating dedicated learning spaces for counselors, implementing advocacy

92
campaigns, and promoting school counselors into leadership roles within districts. Finally,
several recommendations are presented for future studies to understand further how directors
impact the role of school counselors as providers in promoting college and career readiness for
all students.
Findings
The qualitative research findings indicate that county superintendents have positive
attitudes toward school counselors and recognize their role as data-directed professionals,
information and resources conduits, and equity promoters. Essential components that enable
school counselors to enhance their college and career readiness supports of students.
Nevertheless, mixed views on the role of school counselors exist among other stakeholders.
County superintendents believe in the capacity of school counselors to make a positive impact
but acknowledge that their full potential is not yet realized within the current educational system.
They emphasize the importance of partnering with district offices and staff, creating strong
support structures, and addressing misconceptions to enhance the role of school counselors and
strengthen their professional legitimacy.
This study also explored leadership behaviors of superintendents in COEs that support
school counselors in promoting college and career readiness. The findings revealed several key
themes. County superintendents actively advocate for school counseling and raise awareness of
its importance. They strengthen organizational structures by hiring and collaborating with
counselor leaders. County leaders also prioritize county-wide support structures and professional
learning opportunities for counselors. They foster collaborative cultures of learning and celebrate
counselors’ successes. They leverage external resources and form partnerships to enhance
counseling support. Finally, superintendents establish direct communication channels with

93
district leaders and school counselors to provide clear directives to empower stakeholders. These
findings emphasize the importance of advocacy, organizational strength, support networks,
leverage of resources, and effective communication in supporting school counselors in
promoting college and career readiness.
Findings for Research Question 1
Research Question 1: What are the attitudes of superintendents in COEs that enable
school counselors and school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for all
students effectively?
This research question intended to explore superintendents’ attitudes towards school
counselors and the school counseling profession. The data collected from five respondents
revealed that county superintendents held clear visions and positive attitudes regarding the role
of school counselors. They saw school counselors as data-directed professionals who can
effectively use data to guide interventions. Data-driven decision-making was seen as critical in
justifying approaches and using resources effectively, which corresponds with the accountability
models envisioned by Goldberg and Morrison (2003) and Darling-Hammond et al. (2014), as
well as school counseling professional standards (ASCA, 2019). The view of school counselors
by county superintendents as individuals with the capacity to leverage data, advances the attitude
that research has shown increases post-secondary outcomes (McKillip et al., 2012; Militello et
al., 2009). Additionally, respondents viewed school counselors as conduits of information and
resources, connecting students to necessary supports and complementing the efforts of teachers.
This attitude expressed by county superintendents empower school counselors to support college
and career readiness for students through dissemination of timely information and key

94
touchpoints, essential components Bryan et al. (2017) as well as Reid and Moore (2008) would
argue are vital for student success.
These findings highlight the pivotal role of school counselors in supporting students’
needs (Holland & Farmer-Hinton, 2009; Johnson et al., 2010; Stone-Johnson, 2015) and
generating an undercurrent of trust among directors, at the county office or in other educational
settings, through the competency of counselors as providers (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
County leaders also emphasized the importance of school counselors being equity-driven and
attending to the holistic needs of students. This attitude was reinforced in the literature review,
aligns with current educational frameworks, and is a typical value held by county leaders as
directors and school counseling standards as guides for providers (ASCA, 2019; Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004; Perna et al., 2008; Venezia & Kirst, 2005).
Notwithstanding their positive attitudes, county leaders also acknowledged mixed
perceptions of school counselors within the educational ecosystem and a lack of a well-defined
role. This lack of clarity affects counselors’ ability to promote college and career readiness. In
the absence of a well-defined role, school counselors are limited in their ability to measure
improvements and impact, hampering their ability to share successes or undervalue their roles.
This misinformation or misconceptions could deter stakeholders, such as students, caregivers, or
teachers, from seeking the counsel of school counselors to obtain timely and pertinent college
and career support. These missed opportunities perpetuate the findings from Stone-Johnson
(2015) and Holland and Farmer-Hinton (2009) who pinpoint the negative views of school
counselors to the perception of teachers and community members. A lack of trust,
misinformation, and inability to measure impact are also pervasive and perpetual themes that
have limited the legitimacy of the profession since its inception (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001; T.

95
A. Hatch, 2008; Holland & Farmer-Hinton, 2009) and central components Hentschke and
Wohlstetter (2004) argue are necessary to build the contractual relationships between directors
and counselors as providers.
The research findings indicate that county superintendents strongly believe in school
counselors’ capacity and effectiveness in connecting with students and positively impacting their
lives. These beliefs were supported by respondents’ personal examples of working alongside
school counselors and witnessing their valuable contributions. The respondents recognized
school counselors’ unique skills and abilities, such as bilingualism and the ability to provide
guidance and support to students in various areas, including college and career counseling.
Personalized, culturally sensitive, and timely supports, especially with critical elements of the
college admission application and career exploration process, enable school counselors to
increase their post-secondary outcomes and success stories (Hagedorn et al., 2006; Militello et
al., 2009; Reid & Moore, 2008; Watkinson & Hersi, 2014). These strong convictions by county
leaders not only demonstrate a shared value in the capacity to positively impact the lives of
students, but they also present an opportunity to address the adverse selection problem that
Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) describe as one of five potential problems in their
accountability relationship framework. This breakdown of the accountability relationship occurs
when directors are not fully informed about the capacity of the provider to fulfill the outlined
roles and responsibilities and therefore select individuals who are not the best fit. The trust
expressed by respondents has the capacity to channel an assurance to other district and school
leaders, impacting their ability to select school counselors for leadership or placed in roles to
address the holistic needs of a school community. County leaders also express confidence in
school counselors in the ever-transforming educational environment, especially in addressing

96
social-emotional wellness and development. They recognize the allocation of resources toward
supporting the whole child and emphasize that counselors play a significant role in this support.
Work by McCart et al. (2014) and the new support system California adopted in 2014 can
provide frameworks for how this evolved role of a school counselor is situated to be a key
stakeholder in meeting the needs of the whole child. Sink (2016) and T. A. Hatch (2017) further
articulate and weave these new responsibilities with existing school counseling standards.
The present results also indicate that superintendents at the county level prioritize going
beyond state mandates to support school counselors and attend to the immediate needs of their
school districts. Superintendents emphasized the need for comprehensive, multiyear professional
learning opportunities for school counselors, consistent with research findings (e.g., Bitner et al.,
2009; Fullan, 2001; Hartland & Cobia, 2012). County leaders also held the belief that there
should be a reciprocal relationship between county support structures and site- and district-level
school counselor leaders. They advocated for working with counselor leaders and providing
compensation to address the additional counseling duties and responsibilities coming from the
county directives. These attitudes reflect a commitment to building the capacity of school
counselors and changing the perception and understanding of the counseling profession through
sustained efforts. Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) would argue these common values between
county leaders as directors and school counselors as providers increase the ability to fulfill
desired expectations and outcomes, especially increasing college and career success rates of
students. Furthermore, the attitude of commitment from county leaders to build leadership
capacity among counselors in leadership roles, combined with monetary compensation or other
incentives, creates the opportunity for more convergent objectives to be met in the accountability
relationship (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).

97
This study also found that county superintendents of schools recognized the critical role
of partnering with their local school districts and leaders to support counselors. They viewed
collaboration with district staff as a key lever to influence educational outcomes and prioritize
counseling support. The superintendents emphasized the need for robust counseling support
structures and partnerships with school districts, highlighting the responsibility of district leaders
in shaping the role and duties of school counselors, a critical element to enable college and
career supports to all students (Bryan et al., 2017; McKillip et al., 2012; Reid & Moore, 2008).
This study's findings support county leaders in their efforts to enhance district offices by
encouraging them to take further steps and improve their preparation.
Results also revealed that county leaders envision potential challenges in sustaining the
efforts they have fostered to build reciprocal partnerships and structures of support at the county
level. In California’s MTSS framework, the school district is seen as the point of intervention in
the educational system of engagement; the district is essential in strategically braiding current
initiatives and resources, including counseling services, ultimately cultivating transformational
change that is sustainable and scalable (CDE, 2014a; Fullan, 2013; McCart et al., 2014).
Respondents shared that counselors often receive valuable information and support at the county
level but face challenges when they return to their school sites, where there may be a lack of
district-level resources and support, especially from site leaders that lack the understanding of
the role and skills of a school counselor. Applying Hentschke and Wohlstetter’s (2004)
accountability framework, when county and district offices are seen as directors, calibrating on
common capacity building and directives for school counselors, respondents expressed concerns
over the ability of school sites as providers to compliment, replicate, or sustain similar efforts.
This lack of support at the local level can lead to frustration among leaders and school

98
counseling practitioners, stemming from varying values, decision rights, or information
variables. Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) argue that these are the root causes in their five
accountability relationship problems. Most importantly, this disconnect hinders the ability to
fully realize the potential, positive impact, and legitimacy of school counselors that county
superintendents expressed in this study.
Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question 2: What are the leadership behaviors of superintendents in COEs that
enable school counselors and school counselor leaders to support college and career readiness for
all students effectively?
This research question aims to gain a deeper understanding of the leadership behaviors
exhibited by superintendents of schools in COEs that enable support for college and career
readiness by school counselors and school counselor leaders for all students. The findings
indicate that county leaders actively engaged in advocacy efforts at the local, regional, and state
level. For example, respondents proactively raised awareness about the critical role of school
counselors with other educational leaders and policymakers. These behaviors reflected the
literature’s emphasis on the crucial role of advocacy in enhancing the social legitimacy and
professional recognition of school counseling (T. A. Hatch, 2008). These efforts also advance the
type of site, district, and state-level political clout T. A. Hatch (2008) argued is necessary to
realize a thriving school counseling profession.
This study’s findings indicate that county superintendents’ views and behaviors are
inconsistent with others in the educational arena, especially among site leaders and faculty
members. Analyzing this finding through Hentschke and Wohlstetter’s (2004) accountability
framework, these values held by superintendents of county offices are more consistent with the

99
literature and school counseling models that govern and guide the work of counselors in schools.
The trust in counselors exhibited by county leaders also provides a counterargument to those
with negative or mixed views of school counselors. The high levels of confidence from
superintendents avoid the possibility of experiencing an adverse selection problem Hentschke
and Wohlstetter (2004) describe in their accountability framework. This is when directors are not
fully informed on the abilities of providers and select individuals that are not the best fit. This
study finds this is most prominent at the site administrative level, where a principal as the
director would select a non-credentialed or non-school counselor to execute duties and
responsibilities within the domain and scope of a school counselor.
Another action in support of school counselors that emerged from this study was
strengthening the COE organizational structures. County superintendents hired school counselors
for critical roles within their county offices, demonstrating a high level of trust and value placed
on their expertise, leadership skills, and ability to influence and support other counselors in their
region. Additionally, they empowered existing staff members with counseling backgrounds to
hire additional counselors, enhancing the support available to schools and districts. These types
of operational efforts from county leaders are one of two components T. A. Hatch (2008) argued
are necessary to achieve legitimacy at the institutional level. Applying Hentschke and
Wohlstetter’s (2004) accountability framework, county superintendents exercised their authority,
or decision right, to act by strategically placing counselors in positions of influence and elevating
their impact within their COE and the region. The leadership behaviors to increase the number of
school counseling professionals creates the conditions to enable increased college readiness- and
going-outcomes. Hurwitz and Howell (2013) would argue additional school counseling staffing
levels and supports, provide greater opportunities to influence the number of college applications

100
and successful transitions to college (Hagedorn et al., 2006; Hoxby & Turner, 2013). These
findings are contrary to past research described in Chapter Two that highlighted the lack of
school counselors as demonstrated by large counseling caseloads in schools and school
counselors not seen as leaders. Instead, these leadership behaviors are congruent with the
recommendations of T. A. Hatch (2017) and Sink (2016), who emphasize the need to integrate
school counseling support services into existing frameworks and structures, such as MTSS.
Building county-wide support structures was another behavior exhibited by county
superintendents in this study. Respondents enhanced the professional capacity of school
counselors by investing in professional learning opportunities, such as counseling roundtables,
long-term capacity-building initiatives, and continuous improvement communities. County
superintendents, as directors, valued these efforts and actively participated in training sessions,
modeling the expected commitment to professional growth. These supportive and accountable
environments cultivated by county leaders and their staff support the professional accountability
that Goldberg and Morrison (2003) argue emanates from building the skilled actions of
professionals such as counselors and serves to build the knowledge of individuals to implement a
culture of peer review and accountability. They also reinforce the need for robust and persistent
capacity building of school counselors, which the current study and previous research indicates
has not always been common practice (Bitner et al., 2009; Duarte & Hatch, 2014; Fullan, 2013;
Hartline & Cobia, 2012).
County superintendents of schools also leveraged regional support to strengthen school
counseling support and services. They partner with external organizations, higher education
institutes, and regional mental health service providers. As technical assistance providers
leverage their synergy with regional partners, they simultaneously position counselors as key

101
agents in their local context and further legitimize the profession (T. A. Hatch, 2008). This
collaborative approach also complements the literature identified in Chapter Two that
emphasized the power of collective impact and collaborative efforts to address educational
challenges (Darling-Hammond et al., 2014; Fullan, 2011). Leveraging regional resources and
expertise, county superintendents expand the support available to school counselors, thus
enhancing their ability to meet student’s diverse needs and foster college and career readiness
skills.
This study also found that county superintendents provide clear directives to district
leaders and directly to school counselors. Along with a call to counselors, as providers, to
practice self-care and exhibit personal commitment in their professional work, county leaders
also emphasized setting expectations for performance and outcomes on key indicators such as
college and career readiness metrics. Respondents, acknowledging the challenging educational
landscape school counselors face (e.g., the lack of support, misunderstanding of their role),
prioritized the need for counselors to share their work, progress, and outcomes with local
administrations and school boards. As previously mentioned, consistent across all counties was a
deliberate and strategic effort to create time and space to establish routines for counselors to
share, learn, and connect with colleagues and others in the educational community. These
directives from county superintendents promote data-driven decision-making and the use of
evidence-based practices, consistent with literature highlighting the importance of data
utilization and collaborative relationships between administrators and school counselors (Bitner
et al., 2009; Duarte & Hatch, 2014). These behaviors and actions accentuate the powerful role
superintendents in county offices hold as directors and the value, trust, and communication to
address existing tensions of accountability in their regions (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).

102
Implications for Practice
This section further investigates the implications of the study's key findings and their
significance within California’s current educational landscape. Specifically, it examines how
county superintendents wield influential power in recognizing and supporting the value of school
counselors and the importance of articulating and clarifying their roles. Additionally, this section
describes how COEs can enhance school counselors' professional capacity through strategic
partnerships. Understanding these implications can yield keen insights into the significant role
COEs can play in improving outcomes, advancing college and career readiness metrics, and
cultivating compassionate accountability models within the school counseling profession.
Influential Power to Recognize the Value and Support of School Counselors
This study highlights the importance of county superintendents recognizing and valuing
the role of school counselors. The recognition and support from county superintendents
emphasize a positive shift in attitudes towards school counselors, especially in California, where
the ratio of school counselors to students is over double the recommended ratio by the ASCA
(2022). The recognition and support from county leaders as directors add to the credibility of
school counselors as providers. This also enhances the trust and confidence they can continue
cultivating among their local communities, increasing the healthy relationships within
professional and community accountability models (Goldberg & Morrison, 2003). These strong
beliefs from county leaders in the capacity of school counselors, coupled with their proactive
advocacy efforts, illuminate the value and importance of school counselors in supporting
students’ academic, social-emotional, college, and career development. These findings indicate
that education leaders in California, especially those in COEs, increasingly understand and value
the role of school counselors as essential members of the educational ecosystem.

103
This study also indicates that the positionality of county leaders and the directives they
provide to other directors in the accountability model, such as district superintendents and
administrators, play a crucial role in setting expectations and modeling support behaviors for
school counselors. These positive perceptions and actions from county leaders provide an
opportunity to address the proverbial misconceptions and lack of trust in school counselors,
which this study and past research indicates has existed among stakeholders since the inception
of the school counseling profession (Gysbers & Henderson, 2001; T. A. Hatch, 2008; Holland &
Farmer-Hinton, 2009; Stone-Johnson, 2015). Although this study examined the attitudes and
behaviors of leaders in COEs, researching the perceptions and attitudes of counseling leaders in
district offices and school counselors could provide a contrasting viewpoint to better understand
the reality of the current school counseling landscape.
Articulating and Clarifying the Role of School Counselors
County leaders in this study expressed a clear understanding of the capacity and training
of school counselors, emphasizing their role as data-directed professionals, conduits of
information and resources, and equity-driven practitioners. The clarity of defined roles by these
directors at the county level is consistent with current school counseling models, including those
from the ASCA (2019) and emerging ones like the MTMDSS (T.A. Hatch, 2017). Yet, they are
contrary to research findings indicating that educational stakeholders, especially school site
leaders, lack a well-defined description for the role of a school counselor.
The results from this study indicate that collaborative efforts between county and district
leaders are crucial in shaping the role and duties of school counselors to ensure their
effectiveness and coherence in the continuum of support for school counselors. Establishing
clear and universally understood roles can ensure that school counselors are equipped with the

104
necessary knowledge, responsibilities, and expectations. As noted in the distinct county offices
included in this study, this is especially relevant in California’s diverse education system, which
is encompassed by a wide range of districts and schools. Increased visibility and clarity has the
potential to further align the prospective power of school counselors into evolving educational
frameworks. This could also elevate the reciprocal and compassionate accountability model that
Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004) and others (e.g., T. A. Hatch, 2008) argue is necessary to
propel forward the legitimacy of the school counseling profession and increase college and
career success outcomes.
As the source of technical assistance in California’s MTSS educational system of
engagement, county offices and districts play a vital role for districts to fully realize their
position as the key intervention points to support their schools, students, and families. A future
study, possibly a meta-analysis, could further examine the current roles and responsibilities
articulated by county and district offices in written policies to confirm the alignment with this
study and existing frameworks and standards pertaining to the school counseling profession.
Building Professional Capacity of School Counselors and Leveraging Partnerships to
Increase Learning Opportunities
In their response to the “wrong drivers” in transforming education outcomes for students
and school communities, Fullan (2011) and Darling-Hammond (2014) argue that policymakers
and educational leaders need to focus on intrinsic drivers that will develop a community of
continuous improvement with practitioners and leaders. This can further increase their capacity
to hold themselves and their profession accountable (Goldberg & Morrison, 2003). This study
found that superintendents in COEs contribute to this vision, especially in the complex and
diverse California educational landscape. County superintendents recognized the need to support

105
school counselors beyond their required state mandates. They advocated for and implemented
comprehensive, multiyear professional learning opportunities and emphasized the importance of
district and regional partnerships. These sustained professional learning opportunities that
leverage the time and talent of the county and outside agencies provide a model for districts to
replicate or complement their local resources.
Proactive and universal support from county offices also attend to the needs of all their
districts, especially in rural and more distant communities that may lack support structures from
their local agencies, as indicated in this study. Respondents also amplified the increasing role of
leadership for school counselors at the district level and the potential to further shape the
attitudes and behaviors of school site administrators and staff members, where findings
demonstrate is the source of most friction in the accountability dynamics. County
superintendents leveraged their resources and county structures to uplift leaders with counseling
backgrounds, providing another example of how districts could replicate these models. As this
trend continues to flourish, future researchers could examine the number of leaders with school
counseling backgrounds, especially those in district offices, overseeing and supporting school
counselors in schools.
Finally, this study found that county superintendents of schools are privy and positioned
to network and collaborate with other regional leaders. Respondents shared how these
collaborative efforts, many of them through collective impact models, created authentic partners
with institutes of higher education, outside agencies, and the business community. These
synergistic relationships allowed them to maximize their impact, create a platform to advocate
for school counselors, and seek additional resources and avenues to enhance and sustain support
in the region. Efforts in both California and at the national level have long had a strong emphasis

106
on fostering partnerships among various nonprofit and for-profit agencies, institutes, and
companies. Continuing to promote these collaborative efforts provides a platform to align goals,
share resources, and provide comprehensive support to school counselors, ultimately enhancing
the variables necessary to foster compassionate accountability models and positively impact
students’ well-being and post-secondary achievement.
Recommendations for Practice
The findings of this qualitative study and the research included in Chapter Two provide
the foundation for the following five recommendations in this section (see Table 3). Each
recommendation for practice is founded on fostering collaboration, understanding, and support at
various levels within the education system, with the goal of strengthening the impact of school
counselors and elevating their role in the educational environment.

107
Table 3
Recommendations for Practice
Recommendation Example
Preservice support for school
counseling candidates
Build the capacity of prospective school counselors in
their preservice graduate programs and invite system
leaders to expose them to support structures and
directives, providing an opportunity for greater
cohesion and collaboration.

Reciprocal understanding of roles
and goals
Increase the understanding and capacity of teachers,
administrators, and school counselors while obtaining
their degrees or credentials to build stronger working
relationships as educators.

Cultivate sharing and learning
spaces for school counselors
System leaders at all levels foster sharing and learning
spaces that are joyful, celebratory, collaborative, and
informative.

Snowball advocacy and awareness
campaigns
Continue to provide platforms for purposeful
messages from leaders to share their success stories
and promising areas of practice.

Elevate school counselors into
leadership roles
School districts place an intermediary leader with a
school counseling background to support school
counselors at the site level.

Preservice Support for School Counseling Candidates
In the evaluation of statewide school counselor training in Utah and subsequent
recommendations to the State Board of Education, Bitner et al. (2009) and Sink (2016)
recommend building the capacity of prospective school counselors in their preservice graduate
programs. As the field of educational and school counseling undergoes continuous changes,
including the integration of newly adopted frameworks and initiatives like MTMDSS (T. A.
Hatch, 2017), it is essential for graduate schools of education to offer school counseling
programs to provide their future counseling candidates with exposure to the latest practices and
policies. Inviting system leaders, including county superintendents and other technical assistance

108
providers, could offer early exposure to county and regional leaders' support structures and
directives, providing an opportunity for greater cohesion and collaboration.
Reciprocal Understanding of Roles and Goals
Building on the promise of preservice support and knowledge building, a more
significant reciprocal effort can be made to increase the understanding and capacity of teachers,
administrators, and school counselors while obtaining their degrees or credentials. A heightened
focus in this area can hone the relationship between school site leaders and counselors, creating
space to better understand their respective directives and capacities. Findings from this study
indicate that overcoming misconceptions and negative perceptions from school-level principals,
directors, and heads of school, provides the most impactful lever to strengthen the value,
maximize the capacity, and enhance the local accountability of school counselors. In alignment
with the “Administrative Leadership” domain and the corresponding “Strong Educator Support
System” feature of the California MTSS Framework, these recommendations would also support
more personalized, strength-based evaluations based on performance standards aligned with state
accrediting agencies and standards emanating from national associations.
Cultivate Sharing and Learning Spaces for School Counselors
Fulfilling the clear directives shared by respondents in this study, as well as
recommendations from research and professional school counseling associations, system leaders
at all levels should continue to foster sharing and learning spaces that are joyful, celebratory,
collaborative, and informative. These convenings should build school counselors’ capacity and
harness the collective strength of networking. These initiatives should be funded through
educational or community funds, which can be generated as a residual from regional partnerships
and supported with a long-term vision and commitment.

109
Snowball Advocacy and Awareness Campaigns
The level of social legitimacy from county leaders can galvanize and mobilize others in
power to further advance the institutional and political clout necessary to fully legitimize the
school counseling profession. Several respondents mentioned their convictions and experience as
the impetus and force behind the advocacy and awareness campaigns with other superintendents,
policymakers, and community leaders. This study recommends continuing to provide platforms
for purposeful messages from these and other county leaders to share their success stories and
promising areas of practice. State agencies, like the newly rebranded CCSESA, institutes of
higher education, and regional agencies, are prime venues to strengthen the value and share the
impact of school counselors. These agencies can also collaborate on best practices and examine
future research and recommendations.
Elevate School Counselors into Leadership Roles
The intentional and sustained efforts described by county leaders in this study to promote
and advocate for the school counseling profession can serve as a model for actively creating and
promoting leaders with school counseling and PPS backgrounds. The two respondents who rose
to their current county leadership positions through a counseling background demonstrated a
deeper understanding and clarity of how to position the school counseling profession in
California’s educational environment. Considering the implementation of the System of
Engagement as part of the state-wide MTSS framework in California, district offices play a
pivotal role in supporting all schools. To enhance this support, it is recommended that every
school district should have an intermediary leader with a school counseling background. In
districts and regions where such leadership positions do not exist, decision-makers could lead
efforts to build a greater understanding of the counselor role. For example, individuals or teams

110
with limited understanding of school counseling could shadow a counselor for a day or
participate in school counseling professional learning sessions. Leaders could assign one team
member to conduct an in-depth study or opt for a broader exploration involving the entire team.
Future Research
Building on the findings and discussions from this qualitative study, several key areas
emerge that warrant further investigation to enhance the effectiveness of school counselors and
counselor leaders in supporting college and career readiness for all students. The following
section outlines four recommendations for future research, each focusing on distinct aspects of
the school counseling profession and its leadership. In addressing these areas, future studies can
expand on the present findings and generate additional insights and recommendations to advance
the legitimacy and impact of school counseling in educational settings.
First, there is a need to explore the perceptions and attitudes of counseling leaders in
district offices, especially as system leaders heed the call to increase the number of school
counseling leaders at the district level with PPS backgrounds. This study presents an opportunity
to understand the contrasting perspectives of emerging counseling leaders.
Second, a future study should delve deeper into the documented policies of county and
district offices to examine school counselors' current delineation of roles and responsibilities. It
is crucial to understand how district offices fulfill their role as primary intervention points for
schools and ensure consistency with relevant educational frameworks and standards in the school
counseling profession.
The third recommendation calls for future studies to analyze the infrastructure and
empowerment modeled by county leaders in positioning more leaders with school counseling
backgrounds in their systems. Researchers could investigate the prevalence of leaders, especially

111
in district offices, who have navigated the leadership journey with a school counseling
background and are now supporting both new and seasoned school counselors.
Finally, surveying other strategically and politically influential stakeholders, such as
district board members, is essential. Understanding their attitudes and perceptions as they set
high-level priorities and approve budgets, policies, and personnel can offer insights into how
community accountability is realized. This research could generate concrete recommendations to
address concerns and amplify the articulated strengths and opportunities to advance the
legitimacy of the school counseling profession.
Conclusions
This research has shown that the attitudes and behaviors of county leaders exert a
powerful influence on school counselors' present and future roles, significantly shaping their
ability to contribute effectively to California's evolving educational landscape. Efforts to propel
the school counseling profession forward will require political and policy players at all levels to
internalize and realize the policies, practices, and support necessary to build the capacity and
leadership of school counselors as crucial agents in the educational system. County leaders,
especially superintendents of schools, possess a vantage point as an intermediary that can be a
call, meeting, or proposal away from influential decision-makers at the local level, such as a
university president or a school district superintendent, or at the state level, such as a governor or
state agency. Through a deeper examination of the attitudes and behaviors of county leaders, this
study has provided a detailed and nuanced understanding of how to nurture this growing and
poised-to-thrive profession. County leaders, especially superintendents of schools, are inundated
with complex and multi-level directives, positioned to address imminent and crucial elements in
their districts, county offices, and regions. The diverse selection of county offices examined in

112
this research provided an opportunity to reflect on common beliefs and practices that have
shaped the supports, structures, and advocacy for a growing population of stakeholders. Notably,
county superintendents who have risen from the ranks of school counseling demonstrate
remarkable dedication and passion in advancing the profession. Similarly, respondents with
secondhand experiences of impactful interactions with school counselors also play a significant
role in advocating for their work.
At the root of the findings of this research study are universal building blocks to confront
and address educational problems of practice, focusing on the relationships, inquisitiveness,
capacity-building nature, and power of choice held by leaders and practitioners. Consistent with
accountability frameworks, like those of Hentschke and Wohlstetter (2004), where values,
decision rights, and information are leveraged to examine accountability relationships, this study
found complimentary foundational components in the approach county leaders take to advance
educational opportunities and outcomes that influence the school counseling community.
The potential impact of school counselors is profound, attending to both the hearts and
minds of learners of all ages. The counseling connection can transcend the transactional actions,
such as completing a college financial aid form, to the transformational actions, like walking
alongside a teen struggling with suicidal ideation. At the heart of these connections is a genuine
and loving disposition of school counselors to influence the thoughts and actions of learners,
leading them to a more positive and productive destination. School counselors deserve the same
support in their leadership and at all levels.
As the findings suggest, district and school site leaders wield significant influence over
school counselors’ day-to-day roles and responsibilities. Understanding these attitudes and
behaviors is crucial for fostering values and building information-based relationships. However,

113
it represents only one step toward achieving the school counseling profession’s broader and more
complete legitimacy. By delving into the thoughts and actions of county superintendents, this
study has illuminated a pathway for replicating successful models and accelerating progress. It
holds the potential to achieve community accountability and establish trusting relationships
founded on reciprocal, continually improving, and compassionate accountability.
The implications of this research extend beyond the individual level; they have far-
reaching effects on the entire educational ecosystem. As we gain insight into the influential
leadership of county superintendents, we uncover the means to propel the school counseling
profession forward and shape a more inclusive, supportive, and impactful educational ecosystem.
With each incremental step, we inch closer to achieving the legitimacy and recognition that
school counselors deserve.

114
References
American School Counselor Association. (2012a). The ASCA national model: A framework for
school counseling programs (3rd ed.).

American School Counselor Association. (2012b). ASCA school counselor competencies.
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/SCCompetencies.pdf

American School Counselor Association. (2014). The school counselor and Multitiered System
of Supports. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/Standards-Positions/Position-
Statements/ASCA-Position-Statements/The-School-Counselor-and-Multitiered-System-
of-Sup

American School Counselor Association. (2019). ASCA School Counselor Professional
Standards & Competencies. Author.
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/a8d59c2c-51de-4ec3-a565-a3235f3b93c3/SC-
Competencies.pdf

American School Counselor Association. (2021). ASCA student standards. Mindsets and
behaviors for student success.

American School Counselor Association. (2022). School counselor roles & ratios.
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/About-School-Counseling/School-Counselor-Roles-
Raios

Anderson, C. M., & Borgmeier, C. (2010). Tier II interventions within the framework of school-
wide positive behavior support: Essential features for design, implementation, and
maintenance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 3, 33–45.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391756

Berger, C. (2013). Bringing out the brilliance: A counseling intervention for underachieving
students. Professional School Counseling, 17(1), 86–96.
https://doi.org/10.5330/PSC.n.2013-17.80

Bitner, K. S., Kay-Stevenson, D., Burnham, B., Whitely, A., Whitaker, A. B., & Sachse, T.
(2009). Utah’s school counseling data projects: A statewide initiative. Professional
School Counseling, 12(6), 488–494. https://doi.org/10.5330/PSC.n.2010-12.488

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Bryan, J., Farmer-Hinton, R., Rawls, A., & Woods, C. S. (2017). Social capital and college-
going culture in high schools: The effects of college expectations and college talk on
students’ postsecondary attendance. Professional School Counseling, 21(1), 1096-2409-
21.1. https://doi.org/10.5330/1096-2409-21.1.95

115
Bryan, J., Moore-Thomas, C., Day-Vines, N., & Holcomb-McCoy, C. (2011). School counselors
as social capital: The effects of high school college counseling on college application
rates. Journal of Counseling and Development, 89(2), 190–199.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2011.tb00077.x

California Department of Education. (2013). Local control funding formula.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/index.asp

California Department of Education. (2014a). California’s system of support.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/t1/csss.asp

California Department of Education. (2014b). Common Core State Standards systems
implementation plan for California.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/documents/ccsssimplementationplan.pdf

California Department of Education. (2022a). Historical documents: Timeline of California
standards-based reform. https://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/re/hd/yr96-10tl.asp

California Department of Education. (2022b). DataQuest: Annual enrollment data.
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/

California Department of Education. (2022c). DataQuest. https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/

The Campaign for College Opportunity. (2013). The state of Latinos in higher education in
California: The economic and social imperative for advancing Latino college
achievement. https://collegecampaign.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2013-State-of-
Higher-Education_Latino-FINAL.pdf

The Campaign for College Opportunity. (2022). Higher education in California: An introduction
to the state’s public colleges & universities. https://collegecampaign.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/02/2022-HED-PRIMER-WEB.pdf

Campbell, C. A., & Dahir, C. A. (1997). Sharing the vision: The national standards for school
counseling programs. American School Counselor Association Press.

Carey, J., & Dimmitt, C. (2012). School counseling and student outcomes: Summary of six
statewide studies. Professional School Counseling, 16(2), 146–153.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0001600204

Carter, H. M. (2011). The power of the site: Support for professionalism in a school–college
collaborative program. Urban Education, 46(3), 371–389.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085910395950

Choi, J. H., McCart, A. B., Hicks, T. A., & Sailor, W. (2019). An analysis of mediating effects of
school leadership on MTSS implementation. The Journal of Special Education, 53(1),
15–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466918804815

116

Cole, C. G. (1991, April 5-13). Counselors and administrators: A comparison of roles. NASSP
Bulletin, 75, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263659107553403

Conley, D. (2012). Educational policy improvement center, A complete definition of college and
career readiness. Educational Policy Improvement Center.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153

Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. (2016). 2016
CACREP standards. http://www.cacrep.org/for-programs/2016-cacrep-standards

Cowan, K. C., Vaillancourt, K., Rossen, E., & Pollitt, K. (2013). A framework for safe and
successful schools [Brief]. National Association of School Psychologists.

Coy, D. R. (1999). The role and training of the school counselor: Background and purpose.
National Association of Secondary School Principals. NASSP Bulletin, 83(603), 2–8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/019263659908360302

Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(86).
https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n86.2014

Davis, P., Davis, M. P., & Mobley, J. A. (2013). The school counselor’s role in addressing the
Advanced Placement equity and excellence gap for African American students.
Professional School Counseling, 17(1), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.5330/PSC.n.2013-17.32

Duarte, D., & Hatch, T. (2014). Successful implementation of a federally funded violence
prevention elementary school counseling program: Results bring sustainability.
Professional School Counseling, 18(1), 71–81. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.5330/prsc.18.1.vtl5g6343m4130v7

Duncheon, J. C. & Relles, S. R. (2018). “We’re caught in between two systems”: Exploring new
accountability challenges of dual credit implementation. CERPS Working Paper 2018-2.
University of Texas at El Paso.
https://www.utep.edu/education/cerps/_Files/docs/papers/CERPS_Working_Paper_2018
_2.pdf

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C, § 70 (1965).
https://www.congress.gov/bill/89th-congress/house-bill/2362/text

Erickson, A. G., Noonan, P. M., & Jenson, R. (2012). The school implementation scale:
Measuring implementation in Response to Intervention models. Learning Disabilities
(Weston, Mass.), 10(2), 33–52.

117

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how
valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99.
https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4

Fullan, M. (2011). Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform [Seminar Series Paper
No. 204]. Centre for Strategic Education.

Fullan, M. (2013). Motion leadership in action. Corwin Press.

Fullan, M., & Rincón-Gallardo, S. (2017). California’s golden opportunity: Taking stock:
Leadership from the middle. Michael Fullan and Team. https://michaelfullan.ca/wp-
content/uploads/2017/09/17_Californias-Golden-Opportunity-Taking-Stock-
FinalAug31.pdf

Goldberg, B., & Morrison, D. M. (2003). Co-Nect: Purpose, accountability, and school
leadership. In J. Murphy & A. Datnow (Eds.), Leadership lessons from comprehensive
school reforms (pp. 57–82). Corwin Press.

Gysbers, N. C. (2001). School guidance and counseling in the 21st century: Remember the past
into the future. Professional School Counseling, 5(2), 96.

Gysbers, N. C., & Henderson, P. (2001). Comprehensive guidance and counseling programs: A
rich history and a bright future. Professional School Counseling, 4(4), 246.

Hagedorn, L. S., Lester, J., Moon, H. S., & Tibbetts, K. (2006). Native Hawaiian community
college students: What happens? Community College Journal of Research and Practice,
30, 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920500248852

Hartline, J., & Cobia, D. C. (2012). School counselors: Closing achievement GAPS and writing
results reports. Professional School Counseling, 16(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X1201600109

Hatch, P. A. (2002). National standards for school counseling programs: A source of legitimacy
or reform? Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(08-A), 2798.

Hatch, T. A. (2017, March 8). Multi-tired, multi-domain system of supports. Hatching Results.
https://www.hatchingresults.com/blog/2017/3/multi-tiered-multi-domain-system-of-
supports-by-trish-hatch-phd

Hatch, T. A. (2008). Professional challenges in school counseling: Organizational, institutional
and political. Journal of School Counseling, 6(22), 31.

Hatch, T. A., & Chen-Hayes, S. F. (2008). School counselor beliefs about ASCA national model
school counseling program components using the SCPCS. Professional School
Counseling, 12(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0801200104

118

Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of
Southern California Urban Education, (Spring/Summer), 17–19.

Herr, E. L. (2001). Career development and its practice: A historical perspective. Career
development Quarterly, 49(3), 196-211. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ627595

Holland, N. E., & Farmer-Hinton, R. L. (2009). Leave no schools behind: The importance of a
college culture in urban public high schools. High School Journal, 92(3), 24–43.
https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.0.0019

Hoxby, C., & Turner, S. (2013). Expanding college opportunities for high-achieving, low-income
students. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

Hurwitz, M. D., & Howell, J. S. (2014). Estimating causal impacts of school counselors using
regression discontinuity designs. Journal of Counseling and Development, 92(3), 316–
327. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00159.x

Johnson, J., Rochkind, J., Ott, A. N., & DuPont, S. (2010). Can I get a little advice here? How
an overstretched high school guidance system is undermining students’ college
aspirations. Public Agenda.
http://www.publicagenda.org/theirwholelivesaheadofthem?qt_active=1

Loeb, S., & McEwan, P. J. (2006). An economic approach to education policy implementation.
In M. I. Honig (Ed.), New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting
complexity (pp. 169-186). State University of New York Press.

Marsh, J. A., Bush-Mecenas, S., & Hough, H. (2017). Learning from early adopters in the new
accountability era: Insights from California’s CORE waiver districts. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 53(3), 327–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X16688064

Marsico, M., & Getch, Y. Q. (2009). Transitioning Hispanic seniors from high school to college.
Professional School Counseling, 12(6), 458–462. https://doi.org/10.5330/PSC.n.2010-
12.458

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.

McCart, A., Sailor, W., Bezdek, J., & Satter, A. (2014). A framework for inclusive educational
delivery systems. Inclusion, 2, 252-264.

McDonough, P. M. (2005). Counseling and college counseling in America’s high schools. In D.
A. Hawkins & J. Lautz (Eds.), State of college admission (pp. 107–121). National
Association for College Admission Counseling.

119
McIntosh, K., Filter, K. J., Bennett, J. L., Ryan, C., & Sugai, G. (2010). Principles of sustainable
prevention: Designing scale-up of School-wide Positive Behavior Support to promote
durable systems. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20448

McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI
and PBIS. Guilford Press.

McKillip, M., Rawls, A., & Barry, C. (2012). Improving college access: A review of research on
the role of high school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 16(1), 49–58.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Jossey-
Bass.

Militello, M., Carey, J., Dimmitt, C., Lee, V., & Schweid, J. (2009). Identifying exemplary
school counseling practices in nationally recognized high schools. Journal of School
Counseling, 7(13), 26.

Ockerman, M. S., Patrikakou, E., & Feiker Hollenbeck, A. (2015). Preparation of school
counselors and response to intervention: A profession at the crossroads. The Journal of
Counselor Preparation and Supervisor, 7, 161–184. https://doi.org/10.7729/73.1106

Orange County Department of Education. (2023a). California MTSS framework.
https://ocde.us/MTSS/Pages/CA-MTSS.aspx

Orange County Department of Education. (2023b). System of engagement.
https://ocde.us/MTSS/Pages/System-of-Engagement.aspx

Parzych, J., Donohue, P., Gaesser, A., & Chiu, M. (2019, February 1). Measuring the impact of
school counselor ratios on student outcomes. American School Counselor Association.
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/5157ef82-d2e8-4b4d-8659-
a957f14b7875/Ratios-Student-Outcomes-Research-Report.pdf

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Perna, L. W., Rowan-Kenyon, H., Thomas, S. L., Bell, A., Anderson, R., & Li, C. (2008). The
role of college counseling in shaping college opportunity: Variations across high schools.
Review of Higher Education, 31(2), 131–159. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2007.0073

Pham, C., & Keenan, T. (2011). Counseling and college matriculation: Does the availability of
counseling affect college going decisions among highly qualified first-generation
collegebound high school graduates? Journal of Applied Economics and Business
Research, 1(1), 12–24.

Prosser, C. A., & Allen, C. R. (1925). Vocational education in a democracy. Century Company.

120
Reid, M.J., & Moore, J.L. (2008). College readiness and academic preparation for postsecondary
education. Urban Education, 43(2), 240-261. https://doi:10.1177/0042085907312346

Sailor, W. (2015). Advances in schoolwide inclusive school reform. Remedial and Special
Education, 36(2), 94–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514555021

Singleton, G. E. (2015). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving
equity in schools. Corwin.

Sink, C. (2016). Incorporating a multi-tiered system of supports into school counselor
preparation. The Professional Counselor, 6(3), 203–219.
https://doi.org/10.15241/cs.6.3.203

Snedden, D. (1920). Vocational education. Macmillan.

Smith, J. (2011). Can applying to more colleges increase enrollment rates? College Board
Advocacy & Policy Center Research Brief.
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/nosca/research-brief-applying-
colleges-increase-enrollment.pdf

Steen, S., Liu, X., Shi, Q., Rose, J., & Merino, G. (2018). Promoting school adjustment for
English-language learners through group work. Professional School Counseling, 21(1),
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X18777096

Stone-Johnson, C. (2015). Counselors as policy actors: Challenges to systemic involvement in
college and career readiness policy in secondary schools. American Secondary
Education, 43(2), 27–43.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Quick facts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/

U.S. Department of Education. (2022). National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core
of Data (CCD), State Nonfiscal Public Elementary/Secondary Education Survey, 2021-22
v.1a. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/

U.S. Department of State. (2018). Sputnik, 1957. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-
1960/sputnik

Venezia, A., & Kirst, M. W. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education systems
and policies undermine the chances for student persistence and success in college.
Educational Policy, 19(2), 283–307.

Watkinson, J. S., & Hersi, A. A. (2014). School counselors supporting African immigrant
students’ career development: A case study. The Career Development Quarterly, 62(1),
44–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2014.00069.x

121
Whiston, S. C. (2002). Response to the past, present, and future of school counseling: Raising
some issues. Professional School Counseling, 5(3), 148.

122
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
I. Introduction (Appreciation, Purpose, Line of Inquiry, Plan, Confidentiality, Reciprocity,
Consent to Participate, Permission to Record):
I want to thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to share your vision and
leadership in paving opportunities to grow the capacity of school counselors. I know your day is
filled with many unpredictable activities, so I appreciate you putting aside other duties to help
answer a series of questions. The total interview should only last about an hour. Does that work
for you?
Before I ask you any questions, I want to give you some background information about
my study, share some additional consideration items, and provide an opportunity for you to ask
any questions before we get started. I am currently a doctoral student finalizing my dissertation
at the University of Southern California. My research topic focuses on better understanding the
attitudes and behaviors of county leaders in supporting the professional capacity of school
counselors. Along with this interview, I will also be interviewing other county office of
education leaders.
If you are interested, I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final paper. Do you
have any questions before we get started? If there are no questions, I would like to cover a few
items about consent. Here is a short form indicating that I have your permission to conduct this
interview and reinforcing the research nature of this interview. Would it be okay with you to
record our interview? I will also be taking some notes on paper to help me keep track of the
questions and your answers. Is that okay? Are there any other questions before we get started?

123
II. Setting the Stage (Developing Rapport and Priming the Mind, Demographic items of
interest (e.g. position, role, etc.))
To get us started, I was wondering if you could share a little bit about your county office
of education setting, such as any special programs, number of districts you support, staffing
and/or unique characteristics. What has been the history in this county office to support school
counselors? (2A) What has been your personal relationship with school counselors? (1A)
III. Heart of the Interview (Interview Questions are directly tied to your Research
Questions) (Minimum of 2 questions from Strauss, et. al. typology: Hypothetical, Devil’s
Advocate, Ideal Position, Interpretive (done in the moment)):
View of School Counselors
1. Considering our current educational ecosystem, where do you see school
counselors? How should they be contributing to the success of students and your
schools? (1B)
2. Do you see opportunities for school counselors to be included in any current or pending
policy/legislation? (1C)
3. Acknowledging some of your crisis/major issues in education right now, how or if do you
think school counselors can contribute to improve the situation? (1D)
Current Support Structure
1. What is the current support structure (i.e., assistant superintendents, directors,
coordinators) to support school counselors throughout your county? (2B)
2. What have been some specific changes you have h in your county to increase the capacity
of school counselors to be college and career leaders? (2C)
School Counselors as Directors

124
1. What role do you think school counselor leaders in county offices of education should
play in supporting school districts? (1E)
2. What specific leadership changes/requests have you made to your school counseling
leaders? (2D)
School Counselors as Providers
1. What role do you think your school counselor leaders should have in supporting other
school counselor leaders or school counselors directly? (1F)
2. What types of responsibilities/duties should be introduced or implemented across the
region/state to increase the ability to support more students to be college and career
ready? (1G)
Building School Counselor Capacity
1. What types of events or professional development do your counselors leaders currently
attend? (2E)
2. What types of events of professional development would you like to see your counselors
attend? (1H)
3. How would you know if you are positively impacting the professional growth of school
counselors? (2F)
4. What role do you think school counselors should play in helping to implement
California’s Multi-Tiered System of Support Framework? (1I)
IV. Closing Question (Anything else to add)
I know we have covered various topics in the past hour, but I am wondering if there is
something I didn’t ask that I should have asked to have a better understanding of your vision or

125
efforts to support the professional capacity of school counselors to be college and career
leaders?
V. Closing (Thank you and follow-up option):
Again, thank you for taking the time to answer my question and sharing your
experiences! I appreciate your candor and information you have shared today. The information
you have provided today will be very helpful in my study. If by any chance I do think of any
follow up questions or find that I need additional information, would it be okay to contact you
via email? Thanks again for your time and participation!
VII. Special Considerations and Probing
Transitions
Thank you for sharing your insights on (name topic), I wanted to see if we could also spend
some time discussing (new topic0? Is there anything you would like to add before we shift
gears?
Probing Statements/Questions
I heard something that caught my attention, could you tell me a bit more about (topic)?
(Repeat key phrase/answer), I am interested to learn more about that, could you elaborate?
What did you learn from the experience?
I want to clarify something you said, could you explain what you meant by (topic)?
How did that make you feel?
Could you take me step-by-step of what happened?
When else has (topic) happened?

126
Appendix B: Research and Interview Questions Table
Research Question Interview Question
What are the attitudes of
superintendents in county offices of
education that enable school counselors
and school counselor leaders to support
college and career readiness for all
students effectively?
1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 1H, 1I

What are the leadership behaviors of
superintendents in county offices of
education that enable school counselors
and school counselor leaders to support
college and career readiness for all
students effectively?

2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2F

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Education in California has undergone a transformative revolution driven by a collective vision to reimagine teaching and learning. A crucial catalyst in this evolved landscape is the role of school counselors, whose task of preparing students for college and career readiness holds immense potential. Despite their role's critical importance, school counselors face challenges due to limited recognition and support, which hampers their ability to make a meaningful impact. This qualitative study delves into the attitudes and leadership behaviors of superintendents within California's county offices of education toward school counselors. The study uses an accountability framework to explore the values, decision-making processes, and information-sharing dynamics influencing the relationship between county leaders and school counselors. Research findings reveal county superintendents exhibit a positive attitude toward school counselors, recognizing their potential as data-driven professionals, equity advocates, and champions of student success. Nevertheless, divergent viewpoints persist among stakeholders, underscoring the need for stronger partnerships with district offices and staff to enhance the role of school counselors and bolster their professional legitimacy. Additionally, the study highlights key leadership behaviors demonstrated by county superintendents to support school counselors in promoting college and career readiness. These behaviors encompass active advocacy, strengthening organizational structures, establishing support networks, leveraging resources, and ensuring effective communication. Findings pave the way for improved school counseling support structures and professional development opportunities.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

New school counselor's perception of preparedness

PDF

The missing voice: graduate students' perceptions of the school counseling profession

PDF

Concurrent enrollment in English support classes for community college students

PDF

Problems and solutions for school counselors supporting Black and Latinx students in the 21st century

PDF

The relationship between culturally responsive self-efficacy and attitudes of trauma-informed practices among K-12 educators

PDF

High school counselors’ support of first-generation students’ postsecondary planning: an evaluative study

PDF

Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools

PDF

African American officer's experiences as leaders navigating the United States Armed Service

PDF

The role of student study team members in the special education referral process for English Learners

PDF

The role of superintendents and district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college‐ and career‐ready

PDF

Disruptive innovation and cultural capital in virtual school counseling

PDF

Middle school counselors’ perceptions of their role supporting LGBTQ+ youths’ belonging

PDF

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

PDF

Strategies used by California high school counselors to help Latino students complete a–g requirements

PDF

Successful strategies and skills utilized by high school principals as perceived by San Diego County superintendents

PDF

Pivotal positions, critical experiences, and preparation programs in the career paths of superintendents

PDF

Counselor perspectives on disparities and access to college for Hispanic and Black high school students

PDF

A qualitative examination of PBIS team members' perceptions of urban high school teachers' role in implementing tier 2 schoolwide positive behavior supports

PDF

Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic On K-12 southern California public school districts and understanding what district and site administrators…

PDF

Implementing an equity-based multi-tiered system of support in a large urban school district: the grows and glows

Asset Metadata

Creator Montes, Edgar Gilbert (author)

Core Title Compassionate accountability: understanding the capacity of county offices of education to propel the school counseling profession forward

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 09/01/2023

Defense Date 08/16/2023

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

Tag accountability,college and career readiness,college counseling,county office of education,county superintendent attitudes,county superintendent behaviors,district office,interviews,multi-tiered system of support,OAI-PMH Harvest,perceptions of school counselors,School Counseling,school counseling legitimacy,superintendent,system of engagement

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Green, Alan (committee chair), Montaño, Guadalupe (committee member), Riggio, Marsha (committee member)

Creator Email edgargmontes@gmail.com,egmontes@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113302915

Unique identifier UC113302915

Identifier etd-MontesEdga-12305.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MontesEdga-12305

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Montes, Edgar Gilbert

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230901-usctheses-batch-1089 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu