---

Indiana Professional Standards Board

External Committee for School Counseling
Selections

December 6, 2000

Members Present: Charlene Alexander, Brad Balch, Peggy Hines, Tom Keller, Susie Matzat, Lin Metzger, Sue Reynolds, Mark Scanlan, Kay Schrader, Shawn Sriver, Rex Stockton, Bryan Wright

Member Absent: Mike Horvath, Nellie Moore

Others: Kelly Dunn

==================================================================

The External Committee for School Counselors of the Indiana Professional Standards Board convened at 9:00 a.m. on December 6, 2000, at the Wayne Township Administration and Service Center at 1220 South High School Road, Indianapolis.

Peggy Hines called the session to order and asked members to review the committee roster and the November selections. In the future, selections will be emailed in advance to committee members. As soon as possible after each committee meeting, selections will be emailed to members. Members will then submit corrections of the selections to Shawn Sriver.

Shawn Sriver informed the committee members that one CRU can be earned for every two hours served on this committee. If committee members wish to receive CRUs at the conclusion of these meetings, Peggy Hines will write a letter stating the total hours of participation. Shawn Sriver will then see that CRUs are awarded.

The meeting agenda was reviewed. Discussion and moving toward the development of strong rationales for each decision will be a large portion of this meeting.

The first area of discussion was in regard to the existence of a school counselor content area.

Rationale may include the uniqueness of the counseling position, which includes a knowledge base of education, including the K-12 curriculum as well as the application of counseling and psychology on education.

While the area of disposition may be similar to that of teachers, the performance and content areas are different. Content areas include career skills, and the performance is preventative in nature with short-term counseling and referrals to outside agencies. The advisor role of the counselor includes the development of a student's academic program and the interpretation of test results that analyzes a total school program. Defining the content area as school counselor will also make it a more recognizable license if one was to move to or from another state.

Another unique component of the school counselor is as an advocate for students as well as working with school staff, parents, community, and administration. The counselor does have a unique relationship with all areas. Serving as a neutral party, the counselor consults with many components and may impact school policy as well as prevention and general early intervention educational plans for individual students. The school counselor is also a part of implementation of long-range plans. Knowledge of systemic change is also an important component. Indiana Code 4.1 includes counselor requirements to oversee certain areas.

A request was made for the CACREP (Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Education Programs) documents. These documents demonstrate what school counselors who graduate from CACREP institutions are trained to do in the schools and may feed into the induction piece. Tom Keller offered to provide a document that combines the Student Service Standards and CACREP standards into one document.

The next item of discussion was the possibility of a K-12 license, with all five areas listed, or if only one or more levels should be listed on the license. There are five school settings on teaching license; all five settings will be listed on the adminstrator's license. The rationale for a K-12 administrator's license was requested. Discussion concerning the ability of a preparation program adequately offering a program for counseling that would address Pre-K-12 experiences was held. The possibility of addressing this through the induction process was also discussed. The theory is currently addressed throughout the lifespan, but the experiences in the schools may not address all levels. The need for flexibility and comprehensiveness to the higher education and to the individuals in the programs is needed.

The committee discussed the need for research and expert testimony, especially in the areas of settings, teaching experience, and examination of initial license. Discussion will be around a framework and specific questions were developed. Specific names of professional and questions were developed.

The following six areas of experts invited to provide testimony

1. K-12 proponent (Explanation of the change from Rules 46-47)--one

2. Settings proponent--one

3. K-12 counselor--two counselors

4. Counselor who has changed level--three counselors to share time period

5. Counselor who had no experience in the area for which he/she was hiredtwo counselors to share time period

6. Administrator--rationale of P-K-12--possibly two administrators to share time period

This format was developed for expert testimony

1. Time Limit: Maximum of 30 minutes for each area of expert testimony, which includes time for questions

2. Once testimony is given, the presenter is free to leave.

3. Presenters will be requested to bring 14 copies of documentation/outline of information.

4. An opinion paper would also be encouraged in regard to having previous teaching experience or no teaching experience.

5. A summary of the committee charges will be provided to experts.

Questions to be addressed by each expert were developed. The committee discussed the need to include urban, rural, ethnicity, experience, male, and female in the expert testimony. The testimony will be scheduled with 15 minutes between testimony for committee discussion. January's meeting will be filled with expert testimony.

The committee's goal is to come to consensus in regard to K-12 or settings on the license by mid-day at the February meeting. Research will be discussed at that meeting.
The second half of that meeting will revolve around teaching/no teaching experience information and setting expert testimony and gathering research.

If Peggy Hines feels the weather will not be acceptable for the January meeting, she will make that decision on Tuesday morning and contact members as to a rescheduled date.

NEXT MEETING: January 10, 2000