Reflection #6

After reading the discussion posts by my classmates as well as myself, I think we were all in agreement on the fact that counselors seem to have so many responsibilities. This seemed clearer to me as I examined the TEA Counseling Guide. There are eight areas of responsibilities, or domains, that TEA outlines for school counselors. These are: program management, guidance, counseling, consultation, coordination, student assessment, professional behavior, and professional standards (p. 30). Program management describes a clear guidance plan including guidance curriculum, responsive services, individual planning, and system support summarized in the Texas Education Code. Counselors must find a balance between these components to meet their students’ and community’s needs. Guidance refers to preparing students for their academic, future, career, and social goals. Counseling is an intervention service available for students who experience development, personal, or other problems that interfere with their social, academic, or personal growth. Consultation refers to the interactions between parents and school personnel because they act as an advocate for students. Coordination describes the referrals of students that may take place to support students in the home, school, community, and district. Student assessment refers to the idea that counselors must be familiar with student assessment procedures, data, and legalities among them. Professional behavior and professional standards describes the professionalism that counselors must possess at their school to create a safe and stable school environment.

The counselor job description seemed quite vague to me especially since it comes straight from TEA. It even states that, “It is important to note that counselors’ specific job descriptions vary depending on their work setting and the counselor-to-student ratio” (p.32). Realistically, there is no one school counselor that has the same day-to-day tasks and responsibilities.

As a school administrator, I think it is important to be knowledgeable of the guidance and counseling programs provided at the school. The first step would be to be involved in the development of the program. Although there are certain criteria outlined in their curriculum. The organization and planning are crucial to an effective program. I think it would be beneficial to have a leadership team to serve as a support team for a counselor. I would love, as an administrator, to have the counseling staff to support the amount of students at my school. Although the effectiveness of a program is directly related to the counselor-student ratio, it is evident that many schools, including my current one, serves way more than the recommended 1:250 ratio suggested by the American School Counselor Association (p. 47). I realize that as administrators we do not have the option of adding a staff member due to budgeting or district policy, but I would try to ensure that students get the services they deserve. In addition, I would try to alleviate some of the “additional” responsibilities that ultimately get left with the counselor. The administrator is deemed the testing coordinator of the school. Although she has this title, I believe the counselor performs many of these duties. I would try to take on these responsibilities so that they can do what they job description truly is – addressing and aiding students’ academic, social, and personal needs. Lastly, I would try to implement many different surveys of the staff, students, and parents of what their concerns are. This would help guide the counseling program and provide input from different sources. This would be a small piece of the evaluation process as well. More than anything, administrators should make themselves available as a support of school programs. Communication is necessary for the success of a school.

Evaluation is an important part of any program in order to ensure its success and continue improvement. The questions that should be answered during the evaluation process seemed vague to me. For example, “How well are counselors performing their roles?” (p.108). This seems quite subjective to me and requires more observation time and input from multiple sources. I really liked how TEA described evaluation as “an on-going process of program renewal” (p.112). As I have previously stated, I am very fortunate to have an amazing counselor who goes above and beyond the job description. I believe because of her passion and dedication to our students, staff, and school, we have an effective counseling program. At the beginning of each year and throughout the year, our counselor surveys the teachers to see where students’ needs are most needed. She then uses these needs to develop her guidance lessons. In addition, she surveys students to see what they are struggling with and areas of concerns they have. If there are situations that arise during the year, she also comes into the classroom to help mediate. For example, my first year we had an issue with bullying among students. She helped lead a classroom meeting in which we, as a class, came to an agreement about classroom norms. In addition, she also presents her curriculum to our Local School Council, which is a board comprised of school personnel and administrators, parents, and community members. This way the community is aware of the guidance program and can voice their concerns if they have any at this time. Lastly, our counselor is good at making time for teacher concerns. If we come to her with a question she does not know, she will always work to find the answer. She knows the ins and outs of assessments, legalities of 504’s and IEP’s, and the family history of almost every student in our school. Overall, I believe we have an effective school counseling program at my elementary school.

Reflection #5

In all of my undergraduate and graduate courses, GT has not been an area of focus. While ELL and SPED strategies, laws, and practices have been emphasized, GT has been omitted. After reading “A Nation Deceived,” I tend to agree with the authors’ viewpoints presented in the article. I am a very research-oriented person. I need to see the facts, statistics, and reasons why something is the way it is. According to the authors, research has shown that intelligent students are becoming bored with the curriculum in the classroom, where challenge should be present (p.8). I teach at a school that is filled with a lot of students who might be considered bright students. Compared to the 5% American average of students who are listed as GT students, I have approximately 38% in my homeroom. Out of 26 students, ten attend the pull-out GT program in our district. I have parents complaining that their child is not being challenged enough during school, rather than receiving complaints that it is too hard. It is a good problem to have, but it also confirms what the authors portray in the article.

The idea of acceleration as it was presented in the article is something that we should already be doing as teacher. As a teacher, I admit that I tend to focus on those students with deficits, ELL students, and SPED students. I am constantly trying to get up to the level of their peers. However, acceleration, which is simply recognizing individual differences and meeting them, should be something teachers equally focus on (p.9). A lot of times these bright students tend to fall through the cracks. Since they are at grade level or above it, teachers do not focus on them (p.47). This is doing a disservice to both the students and teachers. I do feel guilty as a classroom teacher for not giving them the attention they deserve, but I also feel as though I have not been equipped with the skills to meet their needs. According to the authors of the article, they believe the blame does not lie with the teachers because they may not have the training or skills necessary (p.51). The only GT training that is offered in my district occurs during the summer and does not count toward our professional development hours. I would be more than willing to take these courses during the school year especially since the population at my school is so high.

There were two acceleration programs described in the article that stuck out to me: the talent search and TAMS. When I was in middle school, I took the SAT test. Although I did not know it at the time, I realize now that I took part in a talent search. I did not know why, who wanted me to take this, or even what this meant for me at that time. I am honestly not sure if my own mom did at the time. The authors describe the time in which students in the talent search take the SAT being the “only hours of the year in which they are truly challenged” (p.25). As a somewhat perfectionist student, I remember struggling through the test and being completely stressed the whole time because it was so difficult for me. In high school, I heard of the TAMS program (through UNT) because I knew of one person enrolled in it. After reading and learning more about it, I wish I would have known more about it. I am not sure that I would have partook in it, but the idea of completing high school and earning two years college simultaneously is tempting (p.36). There are programs available, yet the lack of knowledge of many does not promote the acceleration model.

There were two main things that stood out to me while I was reading this article. The first is the myth that stated that acceleration is not important because most students don’t need it. (p.8) Although there are only a small percentage of students who technically qualify for a GT program, there are still those bright students in every classroom. I was one of those. I tested for the GT program several times without every being labeled as GT. School always came easy to me, I never had to study until college, and I was enrolled in Pre-AP and AP classes throughout middle school and high school. As it stated in the article, there is a need for us to meet the needs of these students as educators.

Since the NCLB legislation, it seems that our focus has shifted from enriching curriculum to simply meeting requirements. Because GT students have very little legal protection, many students remind underchallenged in classrooms around the United States (p.40). For many years now, the United States has fallen academically to other countries. Politicians are constantly reminding us of this fact, yet not offering any assistance or a plan to fix the problems. The oxymoron of low test scores and providing an equal education for every student is not only confusing, but also hypocritical (p.39). As a country, we are focused on meeting a set of standards instead of maximizing the talents and gifts of those who are well above grade level (p.49). We need to change our focus to pushing students to their maximum capacity, including surpassing the mandated standards.

When I was interviewing the GT teacher for the last discussion question, she loaned me her copy of TEA’s GT plan. My initial response to the plan was that it seemed very vague and left many choices to each school district. While I do believe that each school and district should be given the freedom to do what is best for their students, I also think that GT students lack legal protection in comparison to other populations, such as SPED and ELL students. TEA’s plan has three different categories (in compliance, recommended, and exemplary) to identify each district’s plan with. It seems to me there aren’t any repercussions for districts that might not be fully meeting these requirements or labeled as simply in compliance. Acceleration, as it was described in the article, requires teachers and parents to be more proactive in their child’s education. More than once in the article, it reiterated the idea of “Information is power” (p.25). I think TEA’s plan could be more specific and include specific things that teachers must do in order to meet GT students’ individual needs. Although it is simply a plan, many of these students are not receiving the greatest education they deserve. Every child deserves to grow a year academically. Whether they are above or below grade level, we must push our students past what they believe their potential is.