Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Mentoring Promotion/Tenure-Seeking Faculty: Principles of Good Practice within a Counselor Education Program

Researchers: L. DiAnne Borders, J. Scott Young, Kelly L. Wester, Christine E. Murray, José A. Villalba, Todd F. Lewis, & A. Keith Mobley

The University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Source (Journal name, date of publication):

Counselor Education & Supervision, March 2011, volume 50, pages 171-188.

What was the purpose of this research?

The authors describe a successful program for mentoring junior faculty in one counselor education department.

If applicable, who were the participants, and what were they asked to do?

Five promotion/tenure-seeking faculty members (PTSFs) employed in the department at the time the article was written reviewed lists of mentorship examples and provided written feedback about their mentorship experiences. The five PTSFs also provided feedback about what worked well and what could be improved.

Major findings or points:

The authors developed a model of mentoring PTSFs based upon 10 basic principles developed by Sorcinelli (2000): communicate expectations for performance, give feedback on performance, enhance collegial review processes, create flexible timelines for tenure, encourage mentoring by senior faculty, extend mentoring and feedback to graduate students who aspire to be faculty members, recognize the department chair as a career sponsor, support teaching, support scholarly development, and foster a balance between professional and personal life. The authors identified the most salient mentoring activities that occurred in the Department and used these examples to illustrate the 10 principles. The PTSFs’ reactions to the mentoring experiences and suggestions for improvement were also provided.

Major caveats:

This mentoring program was implemented at a single university; other universities will have different needs and should alter the model accordingly. The authors describe some informal aspects of mentorship that are difficult to quantify and might be difficult to replicate.

What does this research mean for counseling practice, settings, and/or training?

This model is a useful framework for mentoring PTSFs in counselor education departments and can be modified to fit the unique culture of a university. Mentorship activities generate positive consequences for senior faculty and PTSFs. The authors encourage other counseling departments to develop and implement a clear mentoring plan, have frequent conversations about senior faculty involvement with mentoring, be flexible, and emphasize open communication.

Labels:

counselor education, mentor, promotion, tenure

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Latest volume of Sexuality Counseling Guidebook by CED 691 students is available

Students in the Fall 2011 Sexuality Counseling course are pleased to present Volume VI of the Sexuality Counseling Guidebook, which focuses on the topic of "Good Sex." Topics included in the guidebook include attraction, positive sexual communication, spirituality, and sexual self-esteem, among others. This volume, along with the previous five volumes, can be downloaded from Dr. Murray's faculty web-page: http://www.uncg.edu/ced/faculty/murray.html Students in CED 691 this semester were: Jenifer Aronson, Elizabeth Doom, Paulina Flasch, Callie Gordon, Susan Henkel, Kate Jessup, Adam Kim, Jenna McGown, Bill Molen, Tom Peake, and Lindy Snyder

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Tarasoff and Duty to Warn in North Carolina

Title of Study:

Tarasoff and Duty to Protect in North Carolina

Researchers:

A. Keith Mobley & Eugene Naughton, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Source (Journal name, date of publication):

North Carolina Counseling Association (2011)

What was the purpose of this research?

This conceptual article reviews the Tarasoff case and its implications for counselors practicing in the state of North Carolina. Implications for preventing and reacting to possible dangerous clients are discussed.

If applicable, who were the participants, and what were they asked to do?

N/A

Major findings or points:

The Tarasoff Decision provided the basis for the “duty to warn” clause found in the ACA Code of Ethics and many state statutes. However, the state of North Carolina has not always held up the “duty to warn” ethic, as demonstrated by a number of court cases reported in this article. In particular, prior case law has required that mental health providers protect the health of the public when a client is under their control in a mental health facility. However, LPC’s lack the authority to involuntarily commit or release a client on the bases of his/her propensity for violence.

Major caveats:

Where a lack of legal guidance in NC supports a “duty to warn,” ACA clearly states this ethic’s importance. The authors provide several points that might assist clinicians in making proactive and reactive choices. However, the authors to not provide a one-size fits all answer to solving ethical issues. In the end, the practitioner’s ability to protect himself or herself is up to the discretion of the counselor and is subject to North Carolina law that does not have a cut and dry solution in regard to the counselor’s “duty to warn.”

What does this research mean for counseling practice, settings, and/or training?

Counselor educators and counselors alike can benefit from reading the proactive and reactive guidance provided by the authors. The authors explain the importance of informed consent, knowing your client, being able to detect violent clients, creating a plan for when violent clients arise, and for aligning appropriate professionals for consultation and supervision. In addition, steps for reactive services are also included which include reminding and including the client in situations where confidentiality may be broken, develop a safety plan for all parties involved, positioning key supervisors and legal consultants to aid in the decision-making process, and maintaining accurate and up-to-date paperwork to fully protect one’s clients and ability to practice counseling.

Labels:

Tarasoff; Ethics; ACA; North Carolina case law; Duty to Warn