I
SCHOOL COUNSELING
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT:
ASSESSING THE USE
OF DATA TO
INFORM SCHOOL
COUNSELING
SERVICES
The need to train and engage all school
counselors in use of data drives professional
development at the district and state level.
This study examined previous training in
the use of data and the degree to which that
training influenced current school counseling
practices. Data were collected from 512
school counselors across a Midwestern
state. Findings revealed that participation in
professional development can influence the
perceived data and accountability practices
of school counselors. This article shares
implications for school counselors.
46 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING
n the current climate of accountabil-
ity, school counselors are expected to
use data to monitor student progress,
drive program decision making, and
create systemic change (American
School Counselor Association [ASCA],
2012; Council for the Accreditation of
Counseling and Related Educational
Programs [CACREP], 2009; Dimmit,
2009; Kaffenberger &Young, 2013;
No Child Left Behind, 2001; Sink,
2009; U.S. Department of Educa-
tion, 2013a; White House, 2014). In
spite of this universally held expecta-
tion, some school counselors report
that they do not regularly use data,
they were not trained as graduate
students to use data (Astramovich,
Coker, & Hoskins, 2005; Wilkerson,
& Eschbach, 2009), they do not have
confidence in their ability to use data,
and they struggle to meet the expecta-
tion to use data (Holcomb-McCoy,
Gonzales, & Johnson, 2009; Johnson,
Rochkind, & Ott, 2010; Rowell,
2005; Whiston & Quinby, 2009).
Others suggest the lack of effective
professional development opportuni-
ties impairs their ability to use data
appropriately (Young & Kaffenberger,
2011). The authors conducted the
present study to determine how school
counselors in a Midwestern state used
data to impact student achievement
and college and career readiness, and
to determine the impact of previous
professional development training on
those school counselors’ practices.
The imperative to use data to drive
program development, implementa-
tion, and evaluation has never been
Anita Young, Ph.D., is an assistant
professor at Johns Hopkins University.
E-mail aayoung@jhu.edu Carol
Kaffenberger, Ph.D., is an associate
professor emerita at George Mason
University in Fairfax, VA, and a faculty
associate with Johns Hopkins University.
DOI: 10.5330/1096-2409-19.1.46
clearer. The ASCA National Model for
school counseling programs (2012),
recently revised, emphasizes the use of
data to drive program decision mak-
ing. Comprehensive school counsel-
ing programs are developed based
on a review of school and individual
student data to determine the type of
service delivery and interventions (e.g.,
individual, group, classroom, consul-
tation) that best meet the academic,
career, and personal/social needs of the
students. Continuous evaluation of the
effectiveness of interventions contrib-
utes to improvement of the program.
In other words, reviewing, collecting,
analyzing, interpreting, and sharing
data are part of every cycle of program
development and delivery.
Current changes to the evalua-
tion of school counselors reflect their
ability to demonstrate the impact of
school counseling interventions and
programs on student achievement. For
several years, the U.S. Department of
Education has been calling for teacher
evaluation based on student growth
performance factors in initiatives
such as the reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Educa-
tion Act (ESEA), Race to the Top,
and Blueprint for R.E.S.P.E.C.T. (U.S.
Department of Education, 2013b). In
response, more than half of states have
adopted standards-based performance
evaluation criteria to evaluate teach-
ing and non-teaching professionals
(Tooley, 2013). In New Jersey, for
example, the TeachNJ Act was signed
into law in 2012, requiring all teach-
ers to be evaluated based on growth
objectives. In draft are guidelines that
use the same criteria for non-teaching
personnel, such as school counselors
(New Jersey Department of Education,
2014). In Virginia, where standards-
based teacher assessment criteria have
been adopted (Virginia Department of
Education, 2012), a draft of evalu-
ation criteria for school counselors
aligns with the ASCA National Model
and requires that school counselors
also identify student performance
growth goals.
Given the goal that school coun-
selors need to be highly effective in
their use of data, the question is how
to provide the training and support
to reach that goal. The challenge to
state and school district leaders is
delivering professional development
that will enable school counselors to
use data consistently and effectively.
What constitutes effective profes-
sional development? The National
Staff Development Council (2001)
defines professional development
as “the means by which educators
acquire or enhance the knowledge,
skills, attitudes, and beliefs necessary
to create high levels of learning for all
students” (p. 2). Legislative mandates
detail the critical impact and linkage
of high quality, systemic, and student-
focused professional development to
improve instructional teaching and
increased student learning (No Child
Left Behind, 2001; U.S. Department
of Education, 2013a). While some
research supports the impact of
professional development for teach-
THE CHALLENGE TO STATE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT
LEADERS IS DELIVERING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
THAT WILL ENABLE SCHOOL COUNSELORS TO USE DATA
CONSISTENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY.
ers (Borko, 2004; Champion, 2003;
Gusky, 2000, 2002), other research
calls into question the sustainability
of professional development (Ferraro,
2000; Linn, Gill, Sherman, Vaughn,
& Mixon, 2010). Still others claim
that effective professional develop-
ment must be aligned with school
improvement (Sparks, 2002); evalu-
ated by its impact on student learn-
ing (Gusky, 2000); job embedded,
collaborative, and ongoing (Hun-
zicker, 2010); and must begin with a
professional development plan based
on what educators need to know (Kil-
lion, 2008).
The National Implementation
Research Network (NIRN) released
a description of the core implementa-
tion components that offer guidance
for planning and delivering profes-
sional development in a way that
will increase successful use of best
practices (Fixsen, Blae, Naoom, &
Wallace, 2009). With the overarching
goal of successful implementation,
meaning that practitioners are able
to successfully use best practices, five
core implementation components
were described by NIRN: staff selec-
tion (e.g., selecting practitioners who
will be able to carry out the practice);
preservice and in-service training
(e.g., identifying and providing the
knowledge and skills necessary to
carry out the practice); consultation
and coaching (e.g., learning on the
job as well as ongoing encourage-
ment); staff evaluation (e.g., assess
use and outcome of skills); additional
support (e.g., decision support data
and facilitative administration); and
systems interventions (e.g., working
with external systems to garner ad-
ditional support and resources; Fixsen
et al., 2009, pp. 533-535.)
Professional development that
focuses on training school counselors
to use data has been part of state and
district school counselor professional
development for more than 10 years
(House & Hayes, 2002), yet school
counselors continue to be hesitant to
implement the accountability strategies
(Young & Kaffenberger, 2011). What
appears to be missing is a way to link
professional development to school
counselors’ use of data to impact
student achievement. Expecting school
counselors to demonstrate account-
ability skills in various ways may offer
a viable method to evaluate whether
the professional development training
they receive is translated into strate-
gies that impact student engagement
(Gilles, Wilson, & Elias, 2010; Gillies,
1993; Whiston, 1996).
VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 | ASCA 47
 ASSESSING
measured how and if school counsel- varied school counseling and educa-
ors were using data in accountable tional experience. Of the participants,

PROFESSIONAL
ways (Rowell, 2006). The second was 166 (31.4%) were elementary school
to identify professional development counselors, 89 (16.9%) were middle

DEVELOPMENT AT
needs concerning their use of data. school counselors, 153 (29.3%) were
The present study focused on these high school counselors, 30 (5.7%)

THE STATE LEVEL

Just as other advocates have done,
school leaders at the state and district
levels from this Midwestern state
sought to provide school counselors
with professional development that
engaged them in the process of using
data from a variety of sources includ-
ing the American School Counselor
Association (ASCA), state school
counselor associations, The Educa-
recommendations. Building from exist-
ing literature and collaborative discus-
sions, two research questions guide the
study. First, how do school counselors
use data to drive program effectiveness
that increases student achievement and
college and career readiness? Second,
was there a relationship between par-
ticipation in professional development
training and school counselors’ use of
data and accountability strategies dur-
ing the past 12 months?
were K-12 school counselors, 25
(4.7%) were K-8 school counselors,
43 (8.7%) were other, and 22 (3.6%)
were unidentified. The demographic
profile of participants’ school coun-
seling experience was as follows:
47 (8.9%) had less than 2 years of
experience, 73 (13.8%) had 3–5 years
of experience, 126 (23.9%) had 6–10
years, 87 (16.5%) had 11–15 years, 73
(13.8%) had 16–20 years of experi-
ence, 81 (15.3%) had 20 or more
years of experience, and 41 (7.8%)

tion Trust, National Office of School
Counselor Advocacy (NOSCA), school
counselor educators, and school coun-
selor consultants (Martin & Carey,
2012). Although training and profes-
sional development opportunities
were provided, there had not been a
systemic examination of the effective-
ness of these trainings. Collaboration
for the present study occurred over an
18-month period among two Depart-
ment of Education school counseling
METHOD
Participants
At the time of the study, 1,128 school
counselors and supervisors from a
Midwestern state were invited to
voluntarily participate in the IRB-
approved study; they represented the
population for this sample. The 528
participants that responded to the
statewide electronic survey consti-
did not report. Of the 486 (92%) who
reported their gender, 401 (75.9%)
reported as female and 85 (16.1%) as
male. Regarding employment status,
458 (86.9%) responded as full time
employees, 29 (5.5%) responded as
part-time students, and 41 (7.9%) did
not report.
Survey Instrument
The authors developed the 19-item sur-
vey, School Counseling Accountability
Needs Assessment (SCANA), based

WAS THERE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN on their 26 years of collective experi-

ence in school counseling teaching and

PARTICIPATION IN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT training, recommendations from the

state Department of Education school

TRAINING AND SCHOOL COUNSELORS’ USE OF DATA counseling specialist, and selected items
from the Data and Accountability

AND ACCOUNTABILITY STRATEGIES? Beliefs and Practices (DABAPS) survey

personnel in the Midwestern state, six
members of a school counseling trans-
formative leadership team that con-
sisted of school counselors represent-
ing various regions across the state,
and two school counselor consultants.
Discussions centered around ensuring
that all school counselors gained and
sustained the knowledge and skills to
use data and accountability strategies
that translated to improved student
outcomes.
Two recommendations resulted
from the collaboration. The first was
to administer a statewide survey that
tuted the convenience sample. The
authors e-mailed an electronic link
to all school counselors and sent two
subsequent reminders to increase
the response rate. Once participants
responded to the survey, they were not
able to repeat as a participant. The
Department of Education determined
criteria for participation as school
counselors who currently worked as
elementary, middle, high school, and
multi-level school counselors or ad-
ministrators of school counselors. Par-
ticipants represented urban, rural, and
suburban geographical localities with
(Young & Kaffenberger, 2011). The
survey was designed to measure how
school counselors use data to close
achievement and opportunity gaps,
measure student progress, assess pro-
fessional development participation,
and promote college and career readi-
ness. Part one of the survey consisted
of 19 Likert scale items with possible
responses of never, seldom, sometimes,
often, usually, and always. Part two
consisted of six open-ended statements
and part three contained two yes/
no statements. The final section, part
four, asked demographic questions
such as years of school counseling and
non-school counseling educational

48 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING

 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF ITEMS AND FACTOR LOADINGS FOR VARIMAX
ORTHOGONAL FOUR-FACTOR SOLUTION (N = 528)
Factor Loading
Item 1 2 3 4 Communality
I present workshops to teachers about collaborative ways .55 .33 -.59 .22 .81
to increase student achievement
I present workshops to my principal about collaborative ways .56 .27 -.59 .27 .81
to increase student achievement
To improve school counseling services, I analyze district profiles .65 -.11 -.30 -.12 .54
To enhance student achievement, I analyze data to increase college .67 -.29 -.16 -.24 .62
and career readiness for all students
To improve school counseling services (academic, personal/social, and .61 -.34 -.08 -.41 .65
career), I analyze student progress/report cards
To improve school counseling services (academic, personal/social, and
career), I analyze my school’s state data reports .72 -.08 -.18 -.21 .60
I use technology to improve student achievement .64 -.08 -.05 -.02 .42
I use data to close achievement gaps that exist in my school .79 -.09 -.02 -.09 .63
I create surveys as a data collection method to improve school counseling .48 .58 .21 -.02 .62
services/programs
I analyze program feedback to improve school counseling services .63 .33 .28 -.09 .59
I regularly use pre- and post-tests when facilitating classroom guidance .45 .37 .31 .10 .44
lessons and workshops
I facilitate focus groups as a data collection method to improve my .48 .28 .04 -.05 .32
school counseling services/programs
My school counseling department sets strategic goals .58 .08 .39 -.17 .53
I have a systematic way to share outcome data .69 .12 .18 -.19 .56
I use data to identify barriers that impede student performance .78 -.22 .05 -.06 .66
I regularly attend professional development trainings to improve .51 .04 .15 .19 .32
my school counseling skills
I believe it is important to use data to identify issues that .54 -.28 .22 .38 .57
impede academic success
I can recognize social justice inequities .47 -.42 .19 .48 .67
I use evidence based practices to increase student achievement .69 -.15 .11 .34 .62

experience, locale, and gender. Only

the Likert scale items and part three
items were used to answer the research
questions for this study. Given that this
was the first distribution of the instru-
ment, the authors deemed it appropri-
ate to conduct additional psychometric
testing to determine the applicability
of the survey items for the research
questions and the study’s population
(Burnham, Dahir, Stone, & Hooper,
2008). Accordingly, statistical tests
were conducted to further examine the
instrument.
SCHOOL COUNSELORS WITH LESS THAN 2 YEARS
OF EXPERIENCE…REPORTED A SIGNIFICANTLY
HIGHER FREQUENCY OF TECHNOLOGY USAGE TO
IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT.
Reliability analysis. First, the au- The results of the analysis indicated a
thors conducted a reliability analysis Cronbach’s alpha of .90, which was
to determine the internal consistency well above the conventionally accept-
of the items. Nineteen items were able Cronbach’s alpha of .70 for social
included (N = 473) in the analysis. science research (Cohen, 1998). The

VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 | ASCA 49

 scale mean of each item ranged from
63.63 to 60.83. Even with the deletion
of the lowest mean item, the Cron-
bach’s Alpha remained at .89. There-
fore, the researchers concluded that
the internal consistency of this survey
instrument was sufficiently high for
use with this population and analysis
of results. The high Cronbach’s alpha
for the overall survey instrument also
indicated that the survey items worked
well as a set of instrument items.
A K-12 COLLEGE AWARENESS GAP EXISTS AT THE
ELEMENTARY LEVEL AND MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE
WIDENING LACK OF COLLEGE READINESS.
Factor analysis. The authors
conducted an exploratory factor
analysis to determine if the items in
the instrument represented multiple
factors. The dimensionality of the 19
items was analyzed using maximum
likelihood factor analysis. The scree
test and eigenvalues greater than
one suggested the interpretability of
possibly four factors underlying the
survey instrument. The Kaiser-Meyer-
Olkin measure of sampling adequacy
was .91, indicating that a factor
analysis procedure would be useful,
and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was
significant, which also indicated that
the data were appropriate for a factor
analysis procedure.
The rotated solution yielded four
factors (see Table 1). Of concern, fac-
tors three and four from the rotated
procedure exceeded the cutoff for
interfactor correlations of .70. Fifteen
of 19 items loaded on factor one at
an extracted communality level of
.50 or higher. This factor accounted
for 36.84% of the overall variance.
One item loaded on factor two, which
limited the ability to adequately inter-
pret this factor. Factor two accounted
for 7.52% of the variance. As noted
earlier, two items loaded on factor
three with an extracted communality
level of -.59. Factor three accounted
for 7.38% of the variance. However,
only one item loaded on factor four
50 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING
and was slightly below the set cutoff
of .50. Still, factor four accounted for
an additional 5.54% of the variance.
Researchers (Costello & Osborne,
2005; Green & Salkind, 2008) suggest
a minimum of three items for each
unique factor with a preference of five
or more items that load at a minimum
of .50. Using these criteria, this instru-
ment appeared to be best represented
by one underlying factor and three
factors requiring further research and
exploration to determine the feasibility
to retain, expand, or delete. However,
the findings remain consistent for the
high Cronbach’s alpha depicted in the
reliability analysis of survey items. Al-
though four distinct factors were not
indicated on the 19-item instrument
used in this study, internal consistency
was deemed sufficiently high and the
survey items worked well as a set of
instrument items to identify emerging
accountability needs assessment do-
mains for this population and contin-
ued analysis of results (Cohen, 1998).
The four domains were: student
achievement, instrument develop-
ment, collaboration and professional
development, and social justice inequi-
ties. The student achievement 15-item
domain measured constructs such as
how participants used evidence-based
practices to improve student achieve-
ment, whether they aggregated district
profiles and state data reports, and
whether they analyzed data to increase
college and career readiness, set strate-
gic goals, and share outcome data. The
one related item that assessed if par-
ticipants created surveys as a method
to improve school counseling services
constituted instrument development.
The collaboration and professional
development domain included the two
items that assessed if and how often
participants presented collaborative
accountability strategies to colleagues
and attended professional develop-
ment trainings. One item assessed the
ability to recognize inequities and was
assigned to social justice inequities.
Data Analysis
The authors applied two quantitative
data analyses to answer the research
questions. They used an ANOVA to
determine if there were significant
differences in the use of accountability
strategies by school level and a regres-
sion analysis to estimate the relation-
ships among variables.
Prior to running the analysis of
variance, the authors examined and
analyzed the collected data to deter-
mine whether the assumptions of the
ANOVA were met. They used multiple
approaches including histograms, box
plots, Q-plots, and statistical tests of
the assumptions. Shapiro-Wilk’s tests
were used to test the normality of the
survey items in the data set, and to
test skewness and kurtosis. All of the
results of the Shapiro-Wilk’s tests were
significant. Therefore, the data were
not normally distributed. The majority
of the items were positively skewed;
five of 19 were negatively skewed.
The authors also performed Levene’s
test for equality of variance for each
ANOVA. Violations of equality of
variance are noted in the narrative for
each test.
RESULTS
With the first research question, the
authors sought to understand how
school counselors used data to drive
student achievement and program
improvement. Using the Likert items
for the four identified domains, they
conducted an ANOVA to determine
if differences existed by level (i.e.
elementary, middle, and high school
counselors) and years of experiences.
Five of the 19 items, all represented in
the student achievement domain, indi-
cated a significant difference by level.
The five items, “To enhance student
achievement, I analyze data to increase
college and career readiness for all stu-
dents,” “To improve school counseling
 TABLE 2 LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS BETWEEN REPORTED FREQUENCY OF PARTICIPATION
IN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FREQUENCY OF PARTICIPATION IN DATA ACTIVITIES
Data Activities N M SD r R2
Analyzing district profiles 513 3.00 1.25 .24*** .06
Analyzing data to increase college and career readiness for all students 512 3.25 1.44 .30*** .09

Analyzing student progress/report cards 510 4.28 1.42 .23*** .05

Analyzing school’s state data reports 517 3.59 1.53 .25*** .06
Analyzing program feedback to improve school counseling services 516 3.57 1.31 .30*** .09

Using data to close achievement gaps that exist in counselor’s school 513 3.74 1.32 .35*** .13

Using data to identify barriers that impede student performance 515 3.67 1.29 .35*** .12

Note. ***p < .001

services (academic, personal/social,

and career), I analyze student progress/
report cards,” “I regularly use pre and
post-tests when facilitating classroom
guidance lessons and workshops,”
“I use data to identify barriers that
impede student performance,” and
“I use technology to improve student
achievement,” informed the impact
and frequency of differences. The om-
nibus F-test results showed significant
differences by the level where school
counselors worked, F(5, 474) = 14.72,
p < .001 for analyzing data to increase
college and career awareness. Specifi-
cally, elementary school counselors re-
ported a significantly lower frequency
of using data to increase college and
career readiness than middle school
counselors (p = .001), high school
counselors (p < .001), K-12 school
counselors (p = .001). K-12 (p = 001),
and administrators (p < .001).
The omnibus F test (5, 470) = 15.11,
p < .001 for improving academic,
personal/social and career services
by analyzing report card data also
suggested a significant difference.
Respondents from elementary levels
reported a lower frequency of using
student report card data to improve
academic, personal/social, and career
school counseling services, and they
did not report significant differences
in using data from other sources such
as state or district data when com-
pared to other levels (middle or high
SCHOOL COUNSELORS WHO PARTICIPATED IN
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PAST 12
MONTHS WERE MORE LIKELY TO USE DATA TO IDENTIFY
BARRIERS TO STUDENT SUCCESS.
school). Yet, the mean scores from
elementary respondents suggest strong
beliefs about the importance of using
data to close achievement gaps. When
asked about the regular use of pre-
and posttests during the facilitation of
classroom guidance lessons and work-
shops, the omnibus F(5, 475) = 5.77,
p < .001 indicated a significant differ-
ence by level. For example, elemen-
tary school counselors reported a
significantly higher frequency of using
pre- and posttests than high school
counselors. Similarly, the omnibus F
test (5, 476) = 3.63, p < .01 and the
elementary and middle school respon-
dents reported a significantly higher
level of using data to identify barriers
that impede student performance.
One item, “I use technology to
improve student achievement,” indi-
cated significant differences by school
level F(5, 478) = 3.92, p < .01 and by
years of experience, F(5, 480) = 2.76,
p < .05. Respondents from elementary
schools reported a significantly lower
frequency of using technology than
their colleagues at the middle and high
school levels. However, school coun-
selors with less than 2 years of experi-
ence in the school counseling profes-
sion, regardless of the level, reported
a significantly higher frequency of
technology usage to improve student
achievement than respondents with
more years of experience in the school
counseling profession, p < .05.
Responses to the instrument item,
“I create surveys as a data collection
method to improve school counseling
services/programs,” showed a signifi-
cant difference by years of experience,
F(5, 477) = 3.39 p < .01, but not by
school level. Respondents with less
than 2 years in the school counsel-
ing profession reported a significantly
higher frequency of creating surveys
to use as a data collection tool to
improve services than respondents
with 11–15 years in the counseling
profession, p < .01, and 16-20 years
of experience in counseling (M = 2.81,
SD = 1.24, p < .05.
No significant differences appeared
in the collaboration and professional
development domain by level or num-

VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 | ASCA 51

 TABLE 3 FREQUENCY OF ENGAGEMENT IN DATA ACTIVITIES FOR COUNSELORS WHO DID AND
DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING IN PRIOR 12 MONTHS
Did Not
Participated in Participate in
Professional Professional
Development Development
Data Activities M SD M SD df t
Analyze district profiles 3.22 1.31 2.73 1.12 484 4.43***
Analyze data to increase college and career readiness
for all students 3.51 1.44 2.95 1.39 483 4.36***

Analyze student progress/report cards 4.40 1.41 4.13 1.40 481 2.10*
Analyze my school’s state data reports 3.87 1.55 3.32 1.50 488 3.98***
Use data to close achievement gaps that exist in my school 4.00 1.34 3.46 1.26 485 4.62***

Create surveys as a data collection method 3.26 1.30 2.82 1.24 486 3.77***
Analyze program feedback 3.70 1.33 3.38 1.27 487 2.71**
Regularly use pre- and post-tests when facilitating classroom
guidance lessons and workshops 3.19 1.37 2.92 1.34 485 2.16*

Facilitate focus groups as a data collection method 2.30 1.30 2.08 1.09 480.53a 2.00*

Use data to identify barriers that impede student performance 3.88 1.29 3.47 1.20 486 3.64***

Notes. aLevene’s test for equality of variances was violated; therefore, df and t score were reported for equality of vari-
ances not assumed.
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

ber of years of experience and age. The Research question two asked, “Is in professional development training
overall mean for presenting workshops there a relationship between school specific to using data during the past
to teachers was 1.97 (SD = 1.04) and counselors’ use of data and partici- 12 months, 47% (n = 233) stated that
to principals was 1.95 (SD = 1.08). pation in professional development they had not and 52% (n = 257) stated
Although not significant, the findings training related to using data and ac- that they had participated in train-
suggest that presenting workshops to in- countability strategies during the past ing within the past 12 months. Table
crease student achievement is not a be- 12 months?” To address the question, 3 details the results of the frequency
havior performed by school counselors the authors considered analysis of of engagement in data activities for
regardless of the age or level of school the yes/no question and conducted a counselors who did and did not par-
counseling experience. The item, “I can linear regression analysis between the ticipate in professional development
recognize social justice inequities,” also reported frequency of participation in training during the prior 12 months.
did not suggest a significant difference, professional development and frequen- This section describes two of the seven
yet the overall mean 4.60 (SD = 1.03) cy of participation in data activities. differences; these two differences were
and school level mean scores suggested Table 2 describes this linear regression also identified as significant in research
that respondents were able to recognize analysis. On the yes/no question ask- question one.
social justice inequities. ing if school counselors participated A significant relationship existed
between the reported frequency of par-
ticipation in professional development
SCHOOL COUNSELORS WHO HAD RECEIVED PROFESSIONAL training during the past 12 months
and reported frequency of analyzing
DEVELOPMENT WERE NOT CONSISTENTLY USING WHAT data to increase college and career
readiness. The two variables were
THEY HAD LEARNED ONCE BACK AT THEIR SCHOOLS. linearly related and as the reported fre-

52 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING

quency of participation in professional
development increased, the frequency
of analyzing data to increase college
and career readiness for all students
also increased, r = .30, p < .001. Ap-
proximately 9% of the variance of
reported frequency of analyzing data
to increase college and career readiness
for all students was accounted for by
the reported frequency of participation
in professional development.
A significant relationship also ex-
isted between the reported frequency
of participation in professional devel-
opment training within the past 12
months and using data to identify bar-
riers that impede student performance.
The two variables were linearly related
such that as reported frequency of
participation in professional develop-
ment increased, the reported frequency
of using data to identify barriers that
impede student performance also
increased, r = .35, p < .001. Ap-
proximately 12% of the variance of
reported frequency of using data to
identify barriers that impede student
performance was accounted for by the
reported frequency of participation in
professional development.
DISCUSSION
This study occurred as a result of state
school counseling leaders’ collabora-
tive interest in evaluating statewide
efforts to transform school counseling
services. A major goal of the study was
to examine the impact that using data
has on program effectiveness specifi-
cally aimed at closing achievement
gaps and promoting college and career
readiness for K-12 students, and to
assess if there is a relationship between
participation in professional develop-
ment training within a 12-month span
and school counselors’ use of data and
accountability strategies.
This study resulted in several no-
table findings. First, it showed varying
perceptions about the college coun-
seling role of elementary as opposed
to high school counselors. Similar to
previous reports (Southern Regional
Education Board, 2010), the findings
of this study suggested that not only
is there a high school college readiness
gap, a K-12 college awareness gap
also exists at the elementary level and
may contribute to the widening lack
of college readiness. Plausible factors
may have contributed to the self-
reported lack of using data to increase
college readiness by elementary school
counselors, as noted by Young and
Kaffenberger’s (2011) findings suggest-
ing that elementary school counselors
do not view preparing elementary
students for college and readiness as
within their scope and practice. In
contrast, the results appear to propose
that elementary school counselors
collected data during small groups and
classroom guidance lessons, but were
less likely to analyze the data to ascer-
tain effectiveness of their intervention.
Both elementary and middle school
counselors said they used data to
identify barriers that impede student
success, but they may not have used
the data they identified to increase col-
lege and career readiness as compared
to their high school colleagues.
WHEN HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS COLLECT DATA, THE
RESULTS SUGGEST THEY ARE MORE INCLINED TO ANALYZE
THE DATA TO INFORM SCHOOL COUNSELING SERVICES.
When analyzing student achieve-
ment data, the authors identified two
factors that appeared to contribute
to school counselors’ increased use
of data. One is participation in data
professional development training and
the other is years of service. School
counselors, regardless of level, who
participated in professional develop-
ment within the past 12 months were
more likely to use data to identify bar-
riers to student success.
This study suggests that professional
development training is effective in
reinforcing knowledge and increasing
the perceived use of data accountabili-
ty strategies for school counselors. The
results also suggest that school coun-
selors who had received professional
development were not consistently
using what they had learned once back
at their schools and the transference
of collaboration and information was
restricted. This finding is consistent
with the results found by Hartline
and Cobia (2012) in their evaluation
of district ASCA National Model
professional development focusing
on using data, that school counselors
could identify gaps but needed help
to evaluate interventions and write
results reports. Perhaps, without ongo-
ing on-the-job coaching and training,
implementation of accountability
strategies requires the support of
supervisors or administrators (Fixson
et al., 2009). As is suggested by the
NIRN implementation components,
the provision of professional develop-
ment training is not enough to assure
that best practices are carried out once
back at school. Such lack of collabora-
tive engagement and transference can
inhibit the identification of barriers
that prohibit student achievement and
the development of SMART goals to
address issues for all students (ASCA,
2012).
Another distinguishing factor,
consistent with prior studies (Perusse,
Goodnough, & Lee, 2009), suggested
that high school counselors were less
likely to initiate small groups or facili-
tate larger classroom guidance lessons
than their elementary and middle
school colleagues. Lack of time has
been cited as the most common threat
to this variable (Rowell, 2006; Young
& Kaffenberger, 2011). Thus, the lower
use of pre- and posttest measures by
high school counselors may be directly
attributed to the absence of small group
and classroom guidance facilitation
or the need for professional develop-
ment training focused on the integra-
tion at the high school level for school
counselors. This finding may also be di-
rectly related to the proclivity of school
VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 | ASCA 53
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS MOST EFFECTIVE
WHEN THE TRAINING GOALS MATCH THE NEEDS
OF THE PARTICIPANTS AND WHEN IT INVOLVES …
REINFORCEMENT THROUGH ONGOING COACHING.
counselors with less than 2 years of
experience to create surveys at a higher
frequency than their counterparts.
However, when high school counselors
collect data, the results suggest they are
more inclined to analyze the data to
inform school counseling services.
A final notable finding was that
school counselors with less than 2
years of service reported using technol-
ogy to increase student achievement
and create surveys. Although specula-
tive, this finding may contribute to
preservice technology preparation
and training received during graduate
school (Poynton & Baker, 2007; Sa-
bella, 2003). Many school counseling
programs teach students to measure
the effectiveness of school counseling
services through the action research
process (Sagor, 1992; 2011), require
students to demonstrate technology
competencies (CACREP, 2009), or of-
fer online courses that require techno-
logical knowledge and skills.
LIMITATIONS
Three limitations should be considered
when discussing the impact of this
study. First, the convenience sample
of volunteer school counselors from
one state does not represent the total
population of school counselors
across the nation. A second concern-
ing limitation is the threat to external
validity. Although respondents were
asked specifically about prior profes-
sional development related to account-
ability strategies, they were not asked
to include the title or summarize the
professional development. It is un-
known if prior participation in similar
professional development training that
was not sponsored by the Department
of Education influenced participants’
responses or level of participation.
54 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING
Last, item analysis informed the
results of this study; however, the
identified domains cannot be consid-
ered as four distinct factors. Further
item development and factor reliability
are needed. Researchers seeking to
replicate this study through the use of
the SCANA can better capture these
factors.
IMPLICATIONS FOR
SCHOOL COUNSELING
PROFESSIONALS
Professional development offered to
school counselors that teaches effec-
tive use of accountability skills begins
with extensive planning, including
identification of which school coun-
selors are predicted to have the skills
and attitudes consistent with readi-
ness to learn and apply these skills
(Bodenhorn, Wolfe, & Airen, 2010;
Fixsen et al., 2009; Holcomb-McCoy,
et al., 2009). Professional development
is most effective when the training
goals match the needs of the partici-
pants and when it involves review and
practice and reinforcement through
ongoing coaching. A coach can pro-
vide encouragement, information, and
practice. Measuring the effectiveness
of professional development requires
evaluation of the skills learned, for
which school counselors must dem-
onstrate their ability to use data to
impact student achievement.
School counselors may require the
support of a trainer, district school
counseling leaders, or colleagues to
put training strategies into practice.
They will also need to receive encour-
agement, advice, and opportunities
to practice the new skills. For profes-
sional development to have the desired
impact (changing behavior and insti-
tuting new practices), support for the
practitioner will need to be built into
the professional development plan and
school counselors must be seen as key
to the instructional mission.
What seems to be missing in current
professional development plans is a
way to evaluate the impact of training
on student learning. Expecting school
counselors to apply the accountability
skills gained in professional develop-
ment through the implementation
of action research may offer the best
way to evaluate whether the profes-
sional development that they have
received is translated into the use of
new strategies and increasing student
achievement (Gilles, Wilson, & Elias,
2010; Gillies, 1993; Whiston, 1996).
As district and state school counseling
leaders consider needed professional
development, this research suggests
that school counselors will need ongo-
ing support, including regularly sched-
uled meetings that give them time to
work on the steps of collecting and
using data. For example, professional
development may occur regionally
or monthly (via module trainings or
face-to-face engagement) that focuses
on developing and increasing school
counselors’ knowledge and leadership
skills (Young & Miller-Kneale, 2013).
Counselor educators can contribute
to the school counseling professional
development landscape by continu-
ing to train graduate students to use
data and engage in the action research
process. A university and district
collaborative partnership can be a
dimensional value. Districts seeking to
transform school counseling pro-
grams can benefit from the expertise
and training provided by counselor
educators. Counselor educators also
can benefit from the transference of
theoretical constructs to firsthand
pragmatic issues facing practicing
school counselors.
CONCLUSION
Without question, professional
development increases the knowledge
and skills needed for K-12 school
counselors to increase student
achievement and promote college
and career readiness. Training school
counselors to use data to assure that
their interventions are increasing
student achievement, evaluating
current programs, and validating
the impact of the school counseling
program on students continues to be
a critical professional development
challenge for school counseling
leaders. This study examined the
vision of state leaders to measure the
impact of professional development
trainings aimed at increasing the
knowledge and skills needed for school
counselors to engage in accountable
interventions that improve K-12
student performance. n
REFERENCES
American School Counselor Association.
(2012). The ASCA National Model: A
framework for school counseling
programs (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA:
Author.
Astramovich, R. L., Coker, J. K., & Hoskins,
W. J. (2005). Training school counselors
in program evaluation. Professional
School Counseling, 9, 49-54.
Bodenhorn, N., Wolfe, E., & Airen, O.
(2010). School counselor program
choice and self-efficacy: Relationship to
achievement gap and equity.
Professional School Counseling, 13,
165-174. doi:10.5330/PSC.n.2010-13.165
Borko, H. (2004). Professional
development and teacher learning:
Mapping the terrain. Educational
Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
Burnham, J. J., Dahir, C. A., Stone, C. B.,
& Hooper, L. M. (2008). The
development and exploration of the
psychometric properties of the
Assessment of School Counselor Needs
for Professional Development survey.
Professional School Counseling, 15,
51-63.
Cohen, J. (1998). Statistical power
analysis for the behavioral sciences.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Champion, R. (2003). Taking measure: The
real measure of a professional
development program’s effectiveness
lies in what participants learn. Journal
of Staff Development, 24, 1.
Council for Accreditation of Counseling
and Related Educational Programs.
(2009). 2009 Standards. Retrieved from
http://www.cacrep.org/doc/2009%20
Standards%20with%20cover.pdf.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005).
Best practices in exploratory factor
analysis: Four recommendations in
getting the most from your analysis.
Practical Assessment, Research &
Evaluation, 10(7), 1-8.
Dimmit, C. (2009). Why evaluation
matters: Determining effective school
counseling practices. Professional
School Counseling, 12, 395-399.
Ferraro, J. M. (2000). Reflective practice
and professional development.
Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Teaching and Teacher Education,
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service
ED 449120).
Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Naoom, S. F., &
Wallace, F. (2009). Core implementation
components. Research on Social Work
Practice, 19, 531-540.
doi:10.1177/1049731509335549
Gilles, C., Wilson, J., & Elias, M. (2010).
Sustaining teachers’ growth and
renewal through action research,
induction programs, and collaboration.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 37, 91-108.
Gillies, R. M. (1993). Action research in
school counseling. School Counselor,
41, 1-5.
Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2005). Using
SPSS for Windows and Macintosh:
Analyzing and understanding data.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Gusky, T.R. (2000). Evaluating professional
development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press, Inc.
Gusky, T. R. (2002). Does it make a
difference? Evaluating professional
development. Educational Leadership,
59(6), 45-51.
Hartline, J., & Cobia, D. (2012). School
counselors: Closing achievement gaps
and writing results reports. Professional
School Counseling, 16, 71-79.
doi:10.5330/PSC.n.2012-16.71
Holcomb-McCoy, C., Gonzalez, I., &
Johnston, G. (2009). School counselor
dispositions as predictors of data
usage. Professional School Counseling,
12, 343-351.
House, R. M., & Hayes, R. L. (2002).
School counselors: Becoming key
players in school reform. Professional
School Counseling, 5, 249-256.
Hunzicker, J. (2010). Characteristics of
effective professional development.
Unpublished manuscript, Department
of Teacher Education, Bradley
University, Peoria, IL. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED510366.
pdf
Johnson, J., Rochkind, J., & Ott, A. (2010).
Why guidance counseling needs to
change. Educational Leadership, 67,
74-79.
Kaffenberger, C., & Young, A. (2013).
Making data work (3rd ed.). Alexandria,
VA: American School Counselor
Association.
Killion, J. (2008). Assessing impact:
Evaluating staff development. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Linn, G. B., Gill, P., Sherman, R., Vaughn,
G., & Mixon, J. (2010). Evaluating the
long-term impact of professional
development. Professional
Development in Education, 36, 679-682.
doi:10.1080/19415250903109288
Martin, I., & Carey, J. C. (2012). Evaluation
capacity with state-level school
counseling programs: A cross-case
analysis. Professional School
Counseling, 15, 132-143.
doi:10.5330/PSC.n.2012-15.132
National Staff Development Council.
(2001). Standards for staff development
(Rev. ed.). Oxford, OH: National Staff
Development Council.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2001).
Retrieved from http://www.2ed.gov/
policy/elsec/leg/Esea02/107-110.pdf
New Jersey Department of Education.
(June 2014). Evaluating educational
services staff, counselors, and other
specialists. Retrieved from http://www.
state.nj.us/education/AchieveNJ/intro/
SpecialistsandOthersOverview.pdf
Perusse, R., Goodnough, G., & Lee, V.
(2009). Group counseling in the
schools. Psychology in Schools, 46, 225-
231.
Poynton, T. A., & Baker, T. D. (2007). Free
tech tools. ASCA School Counselor, 44,
22-29.
Rowell, L. L. (2005). Collaborative action
research and school counselors.
Professional School Counseling, 9,
28-36.
Rowell, L. L. (2006). Action research and
school counseling: Closing the gap
between research and practice.
Professional School Counseling, 9,
376-384.
Sabella, R. (2003). SchoolCounselor.com
2.0: A friendly and practical guide to the
worldwide web. Minneapolis, MN:
Educational Media Corporation.
Sagor, R. (1992). How to conduct
collaborative action research.
Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Sagor, R. (2011). The action research
guidebook: A four-stage process for
educators and school teams (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 | ASCA 55
 Sink, C. A. (2009). School counselors as
accountability leaders: Another call for
action. Professional School Counseling,
13, 68-74.
Southern Regional Education Board.
(2010). Beyond the rhetoric: Improving
college through coherent state policy. A
Special Report by the National Center
for Public Policy and Higher Education
and the Southern Regional Education
Board. 1-13.
Tooley, M. (2013, May 13). A shifting
landscape for state teacher evaluation
policy [Web log post]. Retrieved from
http://www.edcentral.org/shifting-
landscape-state-teacher-evaluation-
policy/
U.S. Department of Education. (2013a). A
Blueprint for R.E.S.P.E.C.T.: Recognizing
educational success, professional
excellence, and collaborative teaching.
Washington DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/documents/respect/
blueprint-for-respect.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2013b).
Meeting the Nation’s 2020 Goal: State
targets for increasing the number and
percentage of college graduates with
degrees. Retrieved from https://www.
isac.org/dotAsset/8469ef53-433f-4863-
a827-56c131d5f79f.pdf
56 ASCA | PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL COUNSELING
Virginia Department of Education. (2012).
Guidelines for uniform performance
standards and evaluation criteria for
teachers. Richmond, VA: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.
gov/teaching/performance_evaluation/
guidelines_ups_eval_criteria_teachers.
pdf
White House. (2014). Reach higher
initiative. Washington, D.C. Retrieved
from http://www.whitehouse.gov/
reach-higher
Whiston, S. C. (1996). Accountability
through action research: Research
methods for practitioners. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 74,
616-623.
Whiston, S. C., & Quinby, R. F. (2009),
Review of school counseling outcome
research. Psychology in the Schools, 46,
267-272.
Wilkerson, K., & Eschbach, L. (2009).
Transformed school counseling: The
impact of a graduate course on
trainees’ perceived readiness to
develop comprehensive, data-driven
programs. Professional School
Counseling, 12, 30-37.
Young, A., & Kaffenberger, C. (2011). The
beliefs and practices of school
counselors who use data to implement
comprehensive school counseling
programs. Professional School
Counseling, 15, 67-76.
doi:10.5330/PSC.n.2011-15.67
Young, A., & Miller-Kneale, M. (2013).
School counselor leadership: The
essential practice. Alexandria, VA:
American School Counselor
Association.
Earn CEUs for
reading this article. Visit
www.schoolcounselor.org
and click on Professional
Development
to learn how.
Copyright of Professional School Counseling is the property of American School Counselor
Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.