Campus Access Only
All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of University of the Pacific. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.
Date of Award
Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)
Jay W. Reeve
First Committee Member
John V. Schippers
Second Committee Member
David K. Brumer
Third Committee Member
It was the purpose of this study to evaluate the effectiveness of counseling by comparing results of a counseling tema approach with those of a standard counseling approach. The criterion of effective counseling was client, counselor, and supervisor satisfaction with the counseling experience. The following background questions were raised. Would the perceptions as experiences in the two counseling practicum approaches be measured as significantly different? What in both approaches would be common perceptions among the student counselor, his client, and the student counselor supervisor of what constitutes a satisfying counseling interaction? What common perceptions of the counseling experience would be least gratifying? What would be the appropriate content of a questionnaire designed to measure student counselor satisfaction during both team and standard practica? Would the student counselors involved in a team approach to counselor education perform differently from those using a standard approach? Would practicum questionnaire results be different among student counselors experiencing both a standard and a team approach? Would there be a difference among student counselors experiencing both methods if they had had a team approach before the standard approach? How would the advanced student counselor, his client, and the counselor supervisor perceive the team and standard experiences as compared to the individuals involved in an intermediate counseling practicum? Would there be a difference between male and female perceptions of the experience in there two approaches in counselor education? Among clients, how would fathers perceive the counseling interactions as compared with mothers?
The above questions would assume that expressed satisfaction might be indicative of successful counseling interaction and possibly of client growth.
The problem of this initial study may be stated as follows: What are the possible values of team counseling for school settings?
Subsidiary questions include: How might the evaluation of counseling effectiveness be enhanced? How many underachievers be further encouraged in counseling? What elements in the counseling interaction should possibly be more emphasized in counselor education? Does the perceived difference of the experience of the counseling interaction among counselor, client, and counselor supervisor have curricular implications?
Mallars, Patricia Baker. (1965). Differences In Team And Standard Approaches To Counselor Education. University of the Pacific, Dissertation. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/2887