ATHABASCA UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE

Counselling Practicum Placements

The Counsellor Educators’ Perspectives

by

Heather Lynn. Abbott Demish

Campus Alberta Applied Psychology: Counselling Initiative

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTERS OF COUNSELLING

Alberta

May 2005

i

DEDICATION

This is dedicated to my children, Samantha and Brandon, and my parents, Charles and Darlene, who

have supported and encouraged me throughout the completion of this Master’s program. Thank you

for your inspiration and your love.

ii

iii

iv

ABSTRACT

Supervised practice for master’s level counselling students during a practicum is often considered a

critical aspect of counsellor education training, yet, little is known about the processes used to

acquire high quality practicum placements. The research here sought Canadian counsellor educators’

perspectives on the barriers faced in acquiring high quality practicum placements and

recommendations for facilitating high quality practicum placements. An electronic survey was

distributed to 156 members of the Canadian Counselling Association Education Chapter. The data

was analyzed through the use of frequency analysis and a thematic approach. Barriers that were

identified in placing counselling students in high quality practicum settings were: government

policies, agency policies, lack of high quality practicum sites available, and lack of qualified

supervisors. A systemic framework for conceptualizing the practicum/internship system is utilized to

discuss the literature and the results. Future research suggestions are offered.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge and thank my supervisor Dr. Vivian Lalande for her time and effort in

assisting me in seeing this project through, I am grateful for her guidance and her commitment to the

process. I would also like to acknowledge and thank the many Campus Alberta faculty members and

staff who are dedicated to supporting students in their academic journey. And of course, I would like

to extend my thanks to the many wonderful students and friends in the Campus Alberta pilot group,

particularly Katya Roubina and Patricia Hannigan for their support and friendship over the years.

You have enriched my journey and lightened the load. I also wish to extend my gratitude to my

treasured and closest friends, Wendy, Anne, and Rhonda, for their endless support and friendship

and of course, to my family for being so wonderful and patient while I embarked upon this journey.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedication i

Approval ii

Abstract iv

Acknowledgements v

Table of Contents vi

CHAPTER I – INTRODUCTION

General Introduction and a Practicum Definition 1

The Importance of Practicum Training and Rationale 2

Purpose of the Study 5

CHAPTER II – LITERATURE REVIEW

The Practicum as a System; Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS 6

Student Subsystem 10

Student Impairment and Student Incompetence 12

Preventing and Addressing Student Problems in the PIS 12

Initial Screening to Prevent Student Impairment 13

Student Readiness for Practicum 15

Preparing Students for Practicum 17

Student Monitoring and Evaluation During Practicum 18

When Student Impairment/Incompetence Continues 19

Fear of Litigation 21

Summation of Student Issues in the PIS 21

Faculty Subsystem 22

vii

Faculty and Practicum Coordinator Roles 23

University Subsystem 26

Distance Masters of Counselling Education Programs 27

Placement Setting Subsystem 28

Quantity and Availability of Placement Sites 30

Quality of Supervision 30

Training of Supervisors 31

Counselling Profession Subsystem 33

CCA Council on Accreditation of Counsellor Education Programs (CACEP) 34

CPA (2002a) and Regional Licensing Requirements 35

Jobs and Potential Placement Sites 35

Codes of Ethics 36

Socio-Cultural Political Subsystem 37

Privacy Laws 37

Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada (CFHCC) 38

Summary 40

Summary of the Literature Review 42

CHAPTER III – METHODOLOGY

Sample and Participants 46

Data Collection 46

Theoretical Orientation and Procedures for Data Analysis 47

CHAPTER IV – RESULTS

Quantitative Analysis 51

viii

General Counselling Program Information 51

The Nature of the Practicum 52

Summary of the Quantitative Results 54

Qualitative Analysis 54

Government Regulation and Policies 55

Agency Policies 57

Quality and Quantity of Placement Settings 58

Quality and Quantity of Supervision 60

Faculty and/or Practicum Coordinator 63

Accreditation 64

Summary of Qualitative Results 65

CHAPTER V – DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Discussion and Implications 67

Strengths and Limitations 74

Recommendations for Future Research 75

Conclusion 78

REFERENCES 81

APPENDIX A 87

APPENDIX B 91

APPENDIX C 92

APPENDIX D 95

APPENDIX E 102

APPENDIX F 104

ix

x

1

CHAPTER I: Introduction

General introduction and a practicum definition

Currently in Canada there are 20 universities that offer a master’s degree in counselling

psychology and/or educational psychology (CanLearn, 2004; Peterson’s Guides, 2005). Essential to

all of these professional counsellor education programs is the provision of high quality supervised

counselling experiences in a placement setting whereby a student gains the competencies and the

skills necessary to become a proficient counsellor. In fact, Johnson and Stewart (2000) maintain that

most psychologists would state the most important aspect of graduate training is the quality and

quantity of clinical supervision received. The Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) (2002a)

defines the practicum as a field training experience to assist students in acquiring and applying

psychological skills and techniques to a variety of client problems and populations. Practicum

training begins early in graduate training and is usually integrated with didactic instruction via

coursework (CPA, 2002a) and provides a means for students to acquire skills and to begin to identify

with the profession. The CPA (2002a) further elaborates that student practicum experiences are

coordinated by “… a core faculty member or by an adjunct professor associated with the practicum

setting” (43) and that masters level students are supervised by practitioners registered for

independent psychological practice in the corresponding jurisdiction (CPA, 2002a). According to the

CPA (2002a), at this early stage of training, frequent access to supervision is required and faculty

and site supervisors should be in regular contact with one another.

In Canada, the Canadian Counselling Association (CCA) accredits master’s level counselling

programs and outlines accreditation guidelines and procedures for master’s level counselling

programs to adhere to through the Canadian Accreditation of Counselling Education Programs

(CACEP) standards (CCA, 2005a). CACEP sets very specific standards and guidelines for the

2

supervised practice experience during practicum and these particular guidelines are included in

Appendix A. The practicum guidelines cover supervision, client hours, counselling activities,

evaluation, activities and settings. The CCA introduced the accreditation standards in 2003 and to

date, there are no accredited programs, likely because it was so recently introduced (Lalande, 2004).

In regards to the practicum, CACEP states, “Clinical instruction includes supervised practice

completed within a program of study. Practicum requirements are considered to be the most critical

experiences of the program” (CCA, 2005a, Supervised Practice, ¶ 1). Throughout this project,

references will be made to the CACEP accreditation standards as it provides a national framework

and focus for practicum placements in Canada.

For the purpose of this research project, a practicum will refer to supervised field experiences

(by a host and faculty supervisor) whereby master’s of counselling psychology students apply and

develop psychological knowledge and skills in assessment and interventions with a variety of clients

and populations at a particular practicum placement site for a specified amount of time in fulfillment

of their master’s program requirements and in preparation for their professional roles.

The importance of practicum training and rationale

Practicum training in a counselling education program is critical for many reasons: the student,

the clients, counsellor educators and the profession. Roe (2002) stated acquiring academic

competence in knowledge, skills and attitudes are necessary but not sufficient; thus to train

competent practitioners, the knowledge, skills and attitudes must be applied to performance in

training. During a practicum, counselling students can effectively link theory to practice. The

practicum experience for some students may also constitute “an important part of the practical

experience that they will gain prior to applying for a professional position” (Pitts, 1992, Orientation

and Application, ¶ 2) and may be regarded as “an integral part of the students’ vita building process”

3

(Pitts, 1992, Orientation and Application, ¶ 2). The development of a professional identity also

begins during a practicum experience. For example, although referring to the internship, Kaslow and

Rice (as cited in Pitts and Miller, 1990) describe the internship as an important part of training which

impacts a student’s professional identity. Thus the quality and the nature of the practicum/internship

experiences are critical in supporting healthy and integrated emerging professional identities.

In terms of the counsellor educators’ roles in acquiring high quality practicum placements,

Custer (as cited in Jordan, 2002) states, it is the obligation and responsibility of faculty members and

the university to ensure that those who graduate from their programs are competent to the public thus

making the issue of practicum training an important one for educators and students alike. Sexton

(2000) succinctly sums up the importance of high quality counsellor education and training, for all

involved: the students, the public, the profession and the counsellor educators. He states:

Because the work of professional counseling affects the lives of so many, counselors entrusted

with the responsibility of promoting the welfare of clients while protecting them from harm

carry a significant ethical, societal, social and professional responsibility to provide the most

effective treatments.

Counselor education programs are the educational foundation that professional counselors

draw upon to meet these expectations and responsibilities. Thus, the stakes of clinical training

are high for both individual practitioners and the counseling profession. Unprepared or poorly

trained counselors have the potential to harm their clients (Lambert, Bergin, & Collins1977)

(Sexton, Reconstructing Clinical training, ¶. 3 & 4).

Despite the importance of the high quality training during a practicum and its potential

implications for students, counsellor educators, the profession and the public, no research exists

regarding how practica are obtained and monitored for quality in terms of outcomes, supervision, or

4

challenges faced in acquiring and maintaining such high quality practicum placements. Most of the

Canadian research to date on related areas focuses on clinical psychology training regarding quality

of supervision of internships at the doctoral level (Johnson & Stewart, 2000); the relevance of

integrating empirically supported treatments in practice and training (Dobson, Johnston, Mikail, &

Hunsley, 1999); future directions and expansions of the role of clinical psychologists in Canada

(Arnett, 2001); and the importance of diversity training in Canada (Dobson & Meyen-Hertzsprung,

2000).

Other research on practicum/internship issues tends to be American-based, with an emphasis

on clinical psychology and doctoral level training. Much of the research examines issues of supply

and demand of internship sites (Keilin, Thorn, Rodolfa, Constantine, & Kaslow, 2000); methods and

models of counsellor training and supervision (Peake, Nussbaum, & Tindell, 2002; Sexton, 2000);

pre-practicum course based training (Schwitzer, Gonazalez, & Curl, 2001; Woodard & Yii-Nii,

1999); supervision models (Ward & House, 1998); training of supervisors (Borders & Bernard,

1991); new internship and training environments (Humphreys, 2000); and the future role of

counselling and clinical psychologists (Levant, et al, 2001).

From a licensing perspective, this lack of specific research regarding how supervised practice

hours are initially obtained and monitored for quality is of concern given that all the Canadian

regional licensing boards (with the exception of Quebec and the Yukon) require supervised practice

hours in order to charter and register as a psychologist (CPA, 2002a). From an educational and

accreditation standpoint, this lack of research is also a rational concern given the importance of the

practicum in training and its centrality to counsellor education. CACEP (CCA, 2005a) outlines the

standards and procedures required during supervised practice at a practicum placement, but there is

no research or information regarding on how to obtain such high quality practicum placement

5

settings. In summary, pursuing research on practicum training in counselling education at a master’s

degree level is important because of its centrality in producing and training competent practitioners

and most importantly, because there is no Canadian research regarding practicum placements.

Barriers to achieving high quality practicum placements affect students and counsellor education

departments alike and are worthy of exploration given the potential implications.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this research is to assess Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives and

explore what they believe are some of the current barriers or facilitative factors in obtaining essential

training in high quality practicum placements. This research represents the first Canadian source of

information regarding practicum placements and as such, it could have implications for training. It

will explore the relevant issues and future trends in counselling psychology today related to

practicum training.

In the research here, I have endeavoured to explore some of the factors of how counsellor

educators obtain and maintain practicum sites, what types of sites and counselling experiences they

seek, and what expectations and concerns they have regarding the placement of students in practica.

The questions relevant to this research are: What are some of the issues and barriers in obtaining

high quality practicum placements in Canadian contexts? What are some of the facilitative factors?

How do counsellor educators assist students in obtaining high quality practicum placements? What

recommendations and perspectives do they offer regarding the gaps, issues and trends for the future

in obtaining and maintaining high quality professional training for students in their programs? This

research will shed light on these issues and identify future areas of research regarding the

counselling psychology master’s level practicum placements in Canada.

6

CHAPTER II: Counselling Practicum Literature Review

The Practicum as a System, Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS

The Canadian definition of a counselling practicum was defined above and American

definitions are similar. For example, the American Council for Accreditation of Counselling and

Related Education Programs (CACREP) state (as cited in Pitts, 1992), a counselling practicum

consists of a supervised experience from both the host and counsellor educator, to enhance

counselling skills whereby students can perform some of the activities a regularly employed

counsellor would in that particular setting. Pitts and Miller (1990) discuss the practicum and the

internship together as they view the experiences and issues as similar to both. They holistically

conceptualize the practicum/internship as a system and label it the practicum/internship system

(PIS). The PIS incorporates the many potential factors impacting the placement of students in high

quality practicum sites. According to Pitts and Miller, the PIS consist of the following components

or subsystems: students, faculty (counsellor educators and departments), university, placement

settings, and the larger professional context. Each of these subsystems interacts with one another and

impacts the practicum process (quality and quantity of placements) and experience of training. For

example, student abilities affect success at practicum sites and quality of supervision at the site

impacts the overall training of the student.

Pitts and Miller (1990) also conceptualize the coordination and organization of practicum

placements from Caple’s (1987a, 1987b) self-organizing principle (as cited in Pitts & Miller).

Briefly, Caple’s self-organization paradigm “emphasizes the necessity for openness to growth and

change” (Pitts & Miller, A practicum and internship program, ¶ 1). They cite Caple in stating:

“’Each system must evolve or it becomes extinct. Without creative fluctuations that result from a

free exchange of energy with its environment, the organization moves toward equilibrium and

7

ultimately toward dysfunction (Caple, 1987b, p. 101)’” (Pitts & Miller, A practicum and internship

program, ¶ 1). As Pitts and Miller state, the purpose is to foster an optimum degree of order in a

dynamic environment to fend off both chaos (excessive responses and changes) and rigidity (not

enough responses and changes).

When problems arise in any of the subsystems, the organization must respond to such issues

and barriers in terms of first and/or second order changes. A first order change is a response to

fluctuations and problems in the system but do not alter the systems structure (Pitts & Miller, 1990).

Pitts and Miller cite the example of a first-order change as a situation when a student has a

placement and the placement site has closed due to funding cuts. A first order change would be for

the student to find a new site – no change in the counselor education system and/or practicum

program is required.

Second order change demands a change in the PIS structure (policies and/or procedures) in

order to meet the current demands and results in counsellor educators doing something different. An

example of this could be developing more formal procedures for screening sites and supervisors in

response to problems, which may have arisen at a placement site resulting in an ineffective

placement. Another example of this is the implementation of more formal procedures to assess a

student’s ability to perform at a particular site in response to situations where a student may not have

been successful at a particular site. As Pitts and Miller suggest, failure to respond to problems and

implement the appropriate second order changes which arise in the PIS can result in a dysfunctional

system and lead to dissatisfaction amongst the various stakeholders in any or all of the subsystems.

Dissatisfaction with the practicum/internship program can lead eventually to dissatisfaction with the

counsellor education program as a whole, thus creating barriers to the successful future placement of

students at these sites.

8

Pitts (1992) recommends it is best to have one faculty member coordinating and managing the

practicum placement processes. Responsibilities of this designated practicum coordinator include

establishing practicum procedures and creating an environment conducive for interactions between

students, faculty and placement sites. This coordinator (a) assists students in applying and obtaining

practicum sites, (b) provides clinical supervision individually or as a group, (c) communicates with

the site supervisor, (d) evaluates the students, and (e) ultimately, is the person responsible for

enhancing facilitative factors and responding to problems or barriers (first and second order

changes).

There seems to be some useful applications of the PIS. It is a holistic and systems perspective

of the coordination and management of practicum placements and it effectively identifies a number

of subsystems that comprise practicum experiences and elaborates the processes by which the

subsystems interact and changes are made. From this framework, a practicum coordinator can

approach his or her role within the PIS from a much broader perspective, beyond the academic

department. This may prove valuable in effectively managing the PIS. The conceptualization and

organization of practicum placements from Caple’s self-organizing principle (as cited in Pitts &

Miller, 1990), whereby practicum coordinators respond to fluctuations in any or all of the

subsystems is also of relevance when discussing barriers and responses to barriers in placing

students in high quality practicum placements.

The limitations of this conceptual framework are that is has not been empirically tested or

validated. It is just that, a conceptual framework. It also neglects another overarching subsystem,

which embraces the PIS, that is the socio-cultural political subsystem. Political, economic and

cultural forces can influence the counselling profession and subsequently the education and training

of master’s level counselling students, creating barriers or facilitative factors. National and regional

9

health care policies, privacy laws, economics and cultural forces can all impact counsellor education

and ultimately the practicum system. For example, the funding of mental health services and health

care in general (federally, provincially, municipally) impact the quantity and level of services thus

the availability of sites to place students in practica. Privacy laws at the federal, provincial and

regional levels may impact and limit the use of videotapes as a means to evaluate student’s work

with clients. The cultural diversity of our nation demands all counsellors be prepared and trained to

work with a variety of clients in a wide spectrum of settings. It is important to add this broader,

overarching subsystem (socio-cultural political system) to the Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS as a

means to integrate the relevant literature in this area and to consider its potential impact on

counsellor education and training and its relevance to obtaining and maintaining high quality

practicum sites.

In summation, the PIS is empirically limited, but has value in providing a framework that

captures the complexities of factors, activities, participants and influences involved in the practicum

component of counsellor education. It also has value as a means to conceptualize and organize the

literature and research. The following sections describe in detail how Pitts and Miller (1990)

conceptualize the student, counsellor educator, university, placement site and professional

subsystems. Related literature on practicum/internship placements and issues will be integrated into

each subsystem. An added section of the socio-cultural political subsystem (the overarching system

within which the PIS operates in) will briefly highlight some of the issues and forces that influence

the counselling practicum experience.

10

Student Subsystem

The student subsystem includes the students, their individual performance at a placement site,

and all their interactions and relationships with site staff and clients. Pitts and Miller (1990) state the

effectiveness of the PIS is greatly affected by the practicum coordinator’s ability to respond

appropriately to student needs and demands. They state students need clear expectations and

guidelines about counselling program and practicum placements and clear ideas about the settings

and clients with whom they will be working. This allows them to be able to integrate into a

placement setting without major problems. Other students’ needs not directly mentioned by Pitts and

Miller which might be included are (a) adequate pre-requisite training prior to placement at a site,

(b) a clear idea of how they will be evaluated during practicum, (c) some preparation in handling

potential problems at a site and, (d) knowledge of how to best seek faculty support should they

experience difficulties or issues. Once at a placement site, students must navigate their own needs

within the placement setting structure and the sites’ needs and demands. Developing cooperative

relationships with clients and staff, keeping appointments, and managing paperwork sufficiently are

some of the roles and functions Pitts and Miller state students need to master in order to experience a

smooth progression into a placement site. Students may also demand or need extra faculty support

once at a placement site in terms of mastering some of these activities and skills. Ensuring such

student needs are met enhances the likelihood that students will integrate into their placement sites

and progress accordingly without major issues.

Some students do not experience this “smooth progression” and practicum coordinators may

receive feedback regarding various problems students face from the site clinical supervisor, the

student themselves, or other people at the practicum/internship site according to Pitts and Miller

(1990). These problems range on a continuum from “mostly student generated” to mostly “system

11

generated” or some combination of the two. Pitts and Miller (1990) describe the latter as early

warning signs that there are inadequacies in the PIS that lead to stakeholders’ dissatisfaction, create

PIS dysfunction and may require second order change. Inadequacies include the need for more

formal communication between the site and academic department, unclear expectations from site

supervisor, and unhealthy group dynamics. As Pitts and Miller suggest, student generated problems

typically result from the student being at “odds” with a system is that is functioning well and usually

are the result of inappropriate and/or incompetent student behaviour. Pitts and Miller state student

generated difficulties include: missing important appointments or deadlines with clients or

supervisors, inappropriate conduct and dress, inability to develop satisfactory relationships with

others at the placement site and/or failure to keep up with required paperwork. They suggest these

problems demand two levels of responses from practicum coordinators. Firstly, the practicum

coordinator must address the student’s issue in terms of remediation (first order change) and/or

termination (second order change) if students fail to incorporate the practicum coordinators feedback

and plans. Secondly, the practicum coordinator must engage in ‘”damage control” with the

placement site in order to maintain a good working relationship with the site and to ensure future

placements of students at this site.

Pitts and Miller (1990) state when issues in the student subsystem result from a combination of

causes (both student or system generated) the practicum/internship coordinator needs to gather

information from the student, the site, the clinical supervisor and other appropriate sources and

decide on a course of action to remedy the situation. For example, if there are misunderstandings,

solutions “…may be as simple as a phone call to correct a misperception or as elaborate as a face-to-

face meeting of all of the persons involved and discussion of possible second-order change in the

practicum and internship system” (Pitts & Miller, Students, ¶ 7). There is no direct literature on

12

“systems” type problems in the student subsystem, but there is ample, albeit mostly American,

literature on student problems and issues and means for counsellor educators to address them and

these will be summarized below.

Student impairment and student incompetence. Jordan (2002) elaborated upon the definition of

student impairment whereby a student’s “judgment and behavior with his or her client(s) are below

acceptable standards and/or harmful” (35) and/or they exhibit inappropriate behaviour with peers

and faculty. Faculty might identify student impairment if, (a) students functioned better in previous

semesters, (b) if there is the possibility of psychological and/or emotional disorders not previously

evident, (c) if there is potentially substance abuse, (d) and/or if the student has indicated there are

overwhelming events in their life (Jordan). Enochs and Etzbach (2004) add that other identifiable

symptoms of student counsellor impairment may include: cynicism, anger, depression, temporary

emotional imbalance due to personal loss or trauma, stress, paranoia, over involvement with clients

and denial of feelings. For Jordan, students are not intentionally unethical, but rather their judgment

is impaired. Both Jordan and Enochs and Etzbach agree that preventing and addressing student

impairment is critical for ethical reasons.

Preventing and addressing student problems in the PIS. There are some ways counsellor

educators can attempt to address such potential student issues within the counselling program itself

by: (a) screening and carefully selecting students into the program and/or a particular site (Enochs &

Etzbach, 2004; Nagpal & Ritchie, 2002; Pitts, 1992); (b) by assessing and preparing students to enter

practicum sites (Frame & Stevens-Smith, 1995; Jordan, 2002, Pitts); (c) by monitoring and

evaluating student conduct and progress at the site (Jordan, Pitts, Pitts & Miller); and (d) by

addressing continued student problems/impairment at a site with the student (Enochs & Etzbach, &

Jordan). Addressing issues with the student alone (student makes changes) would be considered first

13

order changes; new policies and methods would be considered second order changes. These are

discussed below.

Initial screening to prevent student impairment. To reduce the potential of admitting

potentially impaired students who could possibly be unfit to practice during a practicum/internship

placement and/or subsequently with the public, most counselling education programs have a

selection and screening process to screen out those who may cause potential harm to clients (Nagpal

& Ritchie, 2002). Screening should also include: “…vital information such as personal

characteristics; students’ willingness to participate in counseling themselves if needed; openness to

self-exploration; and desire to enter the field” (Enochs & Etzbach, 2004, 399). Bradey and Post

(1991) advocate for a personal interview to screen out those with desired personal qualities, yet

Market and Monke (1990) found that interview evaluations do not always correlate with therapeutic

or counselling effectiveness.

Nagpal and Ritchie (2002) were interested in what personal qualities and characteristics

counsellor educators looked for in applicants, how they measured these qualities in applicants, and

how this all translated into the decision making of accepting or rejecting applicants. They

interviewed nine full time faculty members in four counselling education departments in Ohio

(master’s level) on the evaluation criteria and decision-making processes utilized in student selection

interviews (admission to the masters of counselling program) and subsequently analyzed the

interviews using a grounded theory approach. Two metathemes were found in participant responses:

decision criteria (qualities or characteristics counsellor educators looked for when interviewing

applicants) and decision making (personal processes used to decide if they accept or reject an

applicant). Under the decision criteria, they found there were basically ten characteristics which

faculty looked for in the initial screening of potential counselling students. These fell into the three

14

themes of, (a) professional attributes (goal appropriateness, motivational appropriateness,

professional preparedness and academic preparedness), (b) personal attributes (personal maturity,

flexibility and emotional stability), and (c) interpersonal skills (presence, social appropriateness, and

verbal skill). Nagpal and Ritchie noted that these characteristics of professional attributes, personal

attributes and interpersonal skills were similar to those characteristics cited by others in previous

literature such as Bradey and Post (1991) and Cormier and Hackney (1993)(as cited in Nagpal &

Ritchie).

Nagpal and Ritchie (2002) found there was consensus between counsellor educators on the

general personal qualities, but there was little consensus on the decision-making processes used to

evaluate such qualities. There were a wide variety of objective and subjective decision making

processes utilized in accepting or rejecting applicants. They state that the selection interviews were

used as a screening tool, to eliminate applicants with inappropriate characteristics, but this does not

necessarily mean the potentially most qualified were admitted. Whilst there was agreement on the

sought after qualities desired in applicants, there was no agreement or valid way of assessing such

qualities in interviews. They recommended that once there is agreement amongst all counsellor

educators on what qualities potential student counsellors should possess, a means to objectively

analyze these criteria during the selection interview process should be established. CACEP also

includes the following criteria for admission decisions, (a) acceptability to the Faculty of Graduate

studies, (b) appropriate background as specified by the program, (c) evidence of openness to self-

examination and commitment to self-growth, (d) evidence of a commitment to a counselling career,

(e) reputed social and interpersonal skills, and (f) evidence of satisfactory person-oriented field/work

experience (CCA, 2005a).

15

Student readiness for practicum. Initial screening procedures alone will not rule out all

potentially impaired students because not all impaired or inappropriate students can be avoided

(Frame & Stevens-Smith, 1995) and some students may develop problems after admission (Enochs

& Etzbach, 2004; Jordan, 2002). After admission and prior to placements, counselling departments

need to define how to determine when a student is eligible for a practicum. Pitts (1992) recommends

the development of policies regarding courses satisfactorily completed, endorsements by faculty and

student’s advisors’ as a means to assess student readiness and suitability for practicum placements.

Jordan (2002) discusses the use of the Personal Characteristics Evaluation Form (PCEF) by

Frame & Stevens-Smith (1995) as a tool to evaluate student clinical training readiness that was used

in a western university (the University of Colorado) accredited by CACREP. This form is used to

identify students who show inappropriate behaviour for the profession, who may have psychological

and/or substance abuse problems, who may be immature, who may have difficulty transferring

learning into practical situations and/or who may be unwilling or unable to incorporate faculty

feedback (in Jordan). Frame and Stevens-Smith established specific guidelines to be utilized with the

PCEF on monitoring and addressing impairment issues, and in implementing a three-step

remedial/dismissal procedure which was reviewed by the university’s legal staff and the

Ombudsman’s office.

The PCEF specifies nine characteristics essential for counsellor development including (a)

openness, (b) flexibility, (c) positive, (d) cooperative, (e) willingness to accept feedback, (f) an

awareness of one’s impact on others, (g) ability to deal with conflict, (h) personal responsibility, and

(i) appropriate and effective expression of feelings. The University of Colorado decided that all

students would be assessed on these characteristics at the midterm and at the end of the semester.

Students were rated on a five point Likert scale and a “3” was considered a minimum standard of

16

behaviour to proceed to a practicum placement. If a student received less than a “3” on any form

during the semester, they were required to meet with the professor to discuss remediation plans. If a

student received the same score twice or more in a semester from more than one form or professor,

students were required to meet with their academic advisor for further remediation plans and/or to

reconsider remaining in the program. If a student received three forms and low scores on all in one

semester, the student met with an academic advisor and other faculty members to discuss

continuation in the program. If students are unable to successfully implement remediation plans and

demonstrate improvement, faculty decided if the student’s personal and professional behaviour is

appropriate to the counselling field and if they viewed the student’s behaviours as potentially

detrimental to the clients, faculty remove the students from the program. Frame and Stevens-Smith

(1995) note all students were aware of the PCEF evaluation form and procedures upon admission

and signed consent forms to be regularly evaluated by faculty prior to working with clients at

practicum/internship sites.

There are no reports of this evaluation form being empirically validated, although Frame and

Stevens-Smith (1995) report a one-year post-evaluation of the implementation of this model with six

faculty members and randomly selected students (number of students is not provided). In the one-

year follow up survey, 82% of the students were aware of the monitoring process; 93% of students

and faculty agree that student monitoring is important; and 81% believed faculty have an ethical

responsibility to monitor students. Fifty percent of the faculty thought this evaluation method had

assisted them in providing a concrete approach for dealing with students who may have professional

liabilities; 25% were neutral on its use; and 25% disagreed that this process assisted in providing a

concrete evaluation method. Finally, 86% of faculty felt that because of this model, they had become

17

more intentional about evaluating students’ personal qualities since the implementation of the

monitoring process.

Although the PCEF has not been empirically validated (survey itself or post evaluation of its

use) and it is based on American research, it provides is a promising example of means and method

to assess student readiness for practicum/internship placements beyond academic performance and

based on personal characteristics and abilities.

Preparing students for practicum. Along with screening entry and assessing student readiness

for practicum/internship experiences, there is support for the implementation of a pre-practicum

course to enhance the success of the student’s learning experience at a placement site (Kaplan,

Rothrock & Culkin 1999; Schwitzer, Gonzalez & Curl 2001; Woodard & Yii-Nii, 1999). For

example, Woodard and Yii-Nii, state that a pre-practicum course is useful in transitioning students to

a practicum site and such courses aid in uncovering and dealing with student difficulties that may

have been previously undetected. The goal of such courses is to further enhance a student’s ability to

adapt and function effectively at a practicum/internship placement site, to reinforce counselling

skills so that clients receive appropriate care, and to address any potential student problems that may

arise prior to placement. Pre-practicum courses can include observational learning of the application

of direct counselling skills with live clients (Kaplan, et al.) and/or semester long role plays

(simulations) of agency settings and clients (Schwitzer, et al., Woodard & Yii-Nii). CACEP

standards recommend a pre-practicum experience including a minimum of 40 hours of laboratory

experience practice in counselling skills and simulated client interviews (CCA, 2005a) prior to site

placement. Pre-practicum courses assist with the development and training in counselling skills and

assist in uncovering and addressing any potential student difficulties prior to placement at a site.

18

Student monitoring and evaluation during practicum. According to Jordan (2002), from an

ethical and legal perspective, and at a bare minimum, enough feedback and supervision should be

provided so that clients are receiving at least minimal care. Jordan recommends that students’ quality

of work be continually monitored and assessed by faculty. Questions remain as to how much

feedback and supervision are required over the practicum/internship (each session, once a week).

The amount and kind of supervision (live, video, audio, and consultation) depends on the student’s

developmental level and faculty comfort with student skills. For example, Jordan stated that

beginning students with little clinical experience (practicum level) benefit from more frequent live

supervision and frequent feedback than perhaps more experienced students. Ongoing and regular

monitoring/feedback allow students to address identified problem areas early on thus preventing

problems in the student subsystem. According to Jordan, all supervision and feedback should be

verbally communicated to the student and recorded in a document. Jordan suggested using a weekly

monitoring/evaluation form such as a form she developed called the Weekly Evaluation Rating

Sheet (WERS) which evaluates students on, (a) core counselling skills (e.g.: active listening,

warmth), (b) skills and techniques (e.g., role-playing) (c) supervision (e.g., openness to supervisor’s

feedback).

Jordan (2002) suggested more comprehensive and detailed evaluations on a number of

dimensions of student performance occur during the mid-term and final evaluation reviews that

should also be communicated verbally and documented in a written form. These dimensions include,

(a) process skills (e.g.: displaying relaxed behaviour with clients), (b) personal and professional

behaviour (e.g.: expresses feelings appropriately), (c) clinic policies (e.g.: prepares and plans for

sessions and discussions), (d) supervision (e.g.: openness to feedback and new and different

procedures), (e) ethics (assessed ethical decision making ability of students), and (f) overall

19

performance (e.g.: main strengths and main areas requiring improvement). Jordan recommends two

faculty members review a student’s taped work to assess clinical skills and to enhance the objectivity

of the evaluation. At the mid-term and the final evaluation, the faculty supervisor and the student

should identify the student’s strengths and clearly delineate a specific action plan for areas, which

may require improvement, and again, this should be verbally communicated and documented. Some

ideas Jordan suggested for action plans (depending on the nature of the student issue or

incompetence) are (a) counselling for the student themselves, (b) the completion of exercises, (c)

reviewing clinical tapes, and (d) role-plays (first-order changes). If there are areas requiring

improvement, students should be more frequently monitored and supervised (weekly) and they

should be given guidance, support and time to make the necessary changes. Potentially serious

ethical violations require the provision of closer supplemental supervision, requesting a student take

a break from the program and/or leaving the counselling program altogether (second-order change).

A thorough and comprehensive review by the faculty or a sub-committee should be conducted prior

to asking students to leave the practicum site (take a break) and/or to leave the counselling program.

Jordan suggests that students must also be provided with an opportunity to respond to faculty

requests in writing and to also present their case (due process). For Jordan, ultimately, faculty has an

ethical and legal obligation to proactively monitor and evaluate students and to share their

evaluations with those students and other faculty in making decisions about professional readiness.

When student impairment/incompetence continues. If there is no improvement or growth in an

impaired/incompetent student, and there is a risk to clients in receiving below minimal care, then

counsellor educators need to terminate the student’s practicum for protection of the client, the PIS,

the counsellor education program as a whole and the profession (Enochs & Etzbach, 2004; Jordan,

2002; & Kerl, Garcia, McCullough & Maxwell, 2002). CACEP standards reflect this as well and

20

state if performance reviews indicate inappropriateness for the counselling profession, then faculty

must facilitate the student’s transition out of the program (CCA, 2005a).

Yet, dismissal of impaired students may be difficult for counsellor educators. For example,

research by Olkin and Gaughen (as cited in Kerl, et al., 2002) found in 100 masters level programs

(counselling psychology, clinical, community and marriage and family and child programs) faculty

members identified 3% of all counselling students as problem students during the year and 24% of

these programs identified more than four problem students a year. Similarly, Gaubatz and Vera

(2002) summarize various studies and report that 93% to 95% of mental health faculty and students

have reported observing impaired students in their programs and yet only 66% to 76% of the faculty

members in these programs have reported that their programs actually engaged in remediation or

dismissed such students.

It also seems that many master’s level counselling education programs have no clear policies

on handling incompetent/impaired students. Olkin and Gaughen (as cited in Kerl et al., 2002) found

that 45% of the programs surveyed had no written policies on remediation and/or dismissal

procedures for students demonstrating lack of professional competence. Further, only 28% of these

programs had formal evaluations to identify problem students (as cited in Gaubatz & Vera, 2002).

Olkin and Gaughin found that most counselling/clinical programs hope that students choose to

voluntarily leave or get counseled out (as cited in Kerl et. al., 2002). Bradey and Post (1991), Kerl et

al,(2002) and Enochs and Etzbach (2004) all recommend that counselling programs have clear and

concise formal and written procedures in place for dismissing the impaired counselling student and

provide a concise means to measure student competence. There is no similar Canadian research on

the numbers of potentially impaired/incompetent students and/or remedial and dismissal procedures

and policies employed by counselling programs.

21

Fear of litigation. Developing policies and procedures for remediation and dismissal (an

example of second order change) is important yet many counsellor educators are reluctant to

implement such approaches because of possible litigation and personal recrimination (Frames &

Stevens-Smith, 1995 in Kerl, et al., 2002) particularly in the United States. Kerl et al. state that

students who are dismissed from the program as incompetent may sue the university, although

dismissals based on personal reasons are more likely to go to court than those based on professional

reasons. However, not dismissing an impaired student could also have potential litigation issues for

the counselling education department in the future. Frame and Stevens-Smith (1995) noted that

counsellor education programs may be held liable for graduating incompetent students or ones who

could cause harm to clients. Kerl et al. (2002) discuss an example of where there was a 1994 lawsuit

filed against Louisiana Tech University (LTU) for graduating a counsellor who had insufficient

training. The judge ruled it is a university’s responsibility to ensure the people they graduate are

competent to the public and as Kerl et al note, this particular case was settled for 1.7 million dollars.

In most legal cases (based on medical school cases), the courts defer to the educational institutions

for judging academic, skill and professional competence of students and educational institutions are

the best judge regarding student performance, not judiciary boards (Kerr et. al., 2002). If litigation

becomes a more common practice in Canada, sound and well developed remedial and dismissal

policies will be important.

Summation of problems in the student subsystem. As noted, strong and valid screening

procedures alone don’t guarantee student incompetence/impairment will be eradicated and students

must be assessed for clinical readiness and prepared for practicum/internship placement as

demonstrated in the above literature. Again, there is a lack of Canadian research in this area. It is

unknown if there is a specific and similar form or measure such as the CPEF to assess a student’s

22

readiness to be placed at a practicum site in Canada and it is also unknown if the use of such a tool

actually reduces potential student incompetence/impairment once at a practicum placement.

Intuitively, it makes sense to pre-assess clinical readiness and to prepare students for practicum (pre-

practicum courses) but it is unclear if such courses reduce the overall incidence of student

incompetence/impairment and this is worthy of study. Developing such courses would be considered

a second order change. It could be again, that perhaps if potential placement sites know that students

are assessed for clinical readiness and properly trained in pre-practicum courses, that they may be

more willing to accept counselling students from that particular counselling program. Again, this

could be an enhancing factor in facilitating high quality practicum placements and reducing barriers

to entry.

Faculty Subsystem

The faculty subsystem includes the counsellor educators involved in the counsellor education

program, and particularly those persons (practicum coordinators) involved in practicum/internship

placements. For Pitts and Miller (1990), the faculty also has needs and these needs must be met

within the PIS. Needs in the faculty subsystem are met through the structure of the program and

clear expectations, guidelines and roles, particularly in relation to the PIS (e.g.: clinical supervision,

clear structure in place for grading). One of the most important needs of the faculty is to provide and

create an environment that fosters the free exchange of information between students, faculty and

placement site supervisors. Faculty needs to be clear on the roles, guidelines and expectations

regarding practicum/internship placements and faculty supervision and evaluation and there must be

an effective means in place for them to communicate with students, other faculty and site

supervisors.

23

Some of the other faculty needs that practicum coordinators must attend to according, to Pitts

and Miller (1990), are appropriately matching faculty to students for supervision. They suggest

matching faculty to students who have shared interests in particular client groups or issues, similar

theoretical orientations, interpersonal dynamics, scheduling, and matching students to faculty who

are appropriate for the students’ professional and/or skill developmental stage. A positive experience

for both ultimately affects how a student and a faculty member relate to a practicum site and such a

positive experience could be a facilitative factor in maintaining a high quality practicum placement.

Faculty and practicum coordinator roles. All faculty, especially those who supervise

practicum/internship students, are involved to some extent in all the activities that are required to

coordinate a practicum/internship program and these activities can range from simple to complex,

depending on the size of the counselling education program (Pitts, 1992). It is better to have one

faculty person in the role of practicum coordinator to manage the PIS (CCA, 2005a; Pitts, 1992) who

can manage the internal parts of the system and coordinate the practicum/internship program’s

activities as they relate to the external parts of the system over which less direct control can be

exerted. Specific responsibilities of this designated practicum coordinator include, (a) organizing and

maintaining the structures and procedures that foster an environment conducive for interactions

between students, faculty and placement sites (e.g. such as establishing formal and informal

communication procedures and facilitating meetings), (b) assisting students in applying for and

obtaining practicum sites, (c) providing for and/or setting up clinical supervision individually and as

a group, (d) communicating with the site supervisor, (e) evaluating and/or arranging other faculty

evaluation of students (f) monitoring and evaluating the PIS itself, and (g) responding to problems or

barriers (first and second order changes) that might arise in the PIS.

24

Pitts (1992) elaborates on the specific structural functions of the practicum coordinator. He

recommended that practicum coordinators secure the placements sites and provide a pool of sites

from which students can choose. In seeking out and approving sites, practicum coordinators choose

placement sites that will have the ability to fulfill the counselling program practicum goals and

provide meaningful learning experiences for students. Once sites have been screened, approved, and

secured practicum coordinators are responsible for (in collaboration with faculty and perhaps

university legal advisors) establishing written contracts and agreements with sites and clearly

delineating the expectations and roles of all parties involved and guidelines around video/audio

taping. Indeed, Pitts and Myer (as cited in Pitts, 1992) found in a survey of CACREP approved

programs, that over 90% of the counsellor education departments have such formal agreements with

placement sites. Boylan, Malley, and Scott (as cited in Pitts) recommended a standard written

agreement contract that includes the following elements (a) statements about the conditions and

guidelines to be followed by the site, faculty and counsellor, (b) preparation programs, and (c) a list

of expected practicum/internship activities. Pitts believes that the effort it requires to establish a

standard contract is worthwhile because it eliminates the need for case-by-case approval of contracts

and agreements thus eliminating delays. Delays in this area of the PIS could be viewed as a barrier to

obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements, particularly if a potential site is lost

due to a timing issue if an agreement is not reached prior to the student’s placement at a site. Clear

guidelines and expectations also potentially prevent problems surrounding roles, expectations, and

activities for all once a student is at a practicum/internship placement by reducing the incidence of

possible confusion.

Once sites are secured and written contracts are established, the practicum coordinators role is

to orientate and to assist students in applying for the various placement sites. This involves an

25

orientation about the application process, interviewing skills, developing potential questions for

students to ask potential sites and exploring what types of expectations and needs students have to

ensure they are applying for appropriate placements. Pitts recommends documenting the application

process as part of the student’s records and maintaining a roster with site information. Maintaining a

roster of such information is an efficient way to document the current status of site information and

thus could be a facilitative factor in enhancing practicum placements. Effectively preparing students

and ensuring they are matched appropriately could also contribute to reducing potential problems in

the PIS, particularly student problems in the student subsystem if students are not a right “fit” for a

particular placement site.

According to Pitts (1992), practicum coordinators facilitate faculty supervision for

practicum/internship students and they should develop and implement a clearly defined grading and

evaluation structure. There should also be a process for students to offer feedback for the

supervisory/evaluation experience. Although not mentioned here, this structure could also include

policies and procedures for remediation and dismissal as discussed in the student subsystem. Pitts

states faculty supervision can be a program faculty member, an affiliate faculty member or an

adjunct faculty member. In Canada, CACEP accreditation standards specify that a supervisor spend

a minimum of 1 hour per week supervising a student (CCA, 2005a). Pitts states the practicum

coordinators should also coordinate group supervision by a faculty member. CACEP standards

specify 1.5 hours per week of group supervision by a program faculty member or a supervisor under

the direction of a program faculty member, and this supervision should be based on video recording

and case studies provided on a regular schedule throughout the practicum course (CCA, 2005a). Pitts

states that group supervision provides an avenue for students to confidentially but freely discuss

client cases, discuss issues which may be arising at the site which they may not wish to discuss with

26

their site supervisor, and to assist each other with insights and to provide each other with emotional

support. It would appear that such an avenue for students would enhance the overall functioning of

the PIS by directly addressing student needs under faculty supervision.

University Subsystem

The university subsystem consists of the wider university and its structure, bylaws and policies.

Pitts and Miller (1990) state practicum coordinators in counselling education faculties operate in this

larger university system and must be conscious of working within all university policies and

procedures. Practicum coordinators must work with university staff (e.g. university lawyers) in

ensuring all public dealings are appropriately following the proper protocols (e.g. establishing

written contracts with sites) and all insurance and liability issues for the department and the student

have been sufficiently addressed (faculty and student liability insurance in place prior to practicum).

Although not stated, another example of this could be adhering to university policies regarding

proper student remediation and dismissal procedures. Pitts and Miller state that the emerging

definition of the legal status of the practicum/internship is a growing concern (Cormier & Bernard,

1982, as cited in Pitts & Miller). To compound the complexities of navigating the university policies

and bylaws, counsellor educators must navigate and ensure they are fulfilling placement site

procedures and legal guidelines. Some sites may have their own legal contracts which faculty and

students are required to agree to. Thus, a lack of attention to the university and external procedures

in coordinating different systems could create problems in the overall functioning of the practicum

system and create potential barriers in the facilitation of practicum placements.

Unfortunately there is no Canadian or American research that may be appropriately applied in

this subsystem. One can speculate that if a university has cumbersome policies, legal requirements

and procedures to be followed in establishing contracts with potential placement sites, that this could

27

create a barrier in facilitating high quality practicum placements. Potential placement sites may

refuse practicum/internship students if they feel they are committed to signing laborious and

meticulous legal contracts. One can also speculate about the reputation and credibility of a university

impacting practicum placements. Potential placement sites may favour practicum/internship students

from more reputable universities if there are limited placement positions available. Another factor

that may impact obtaining potential placements is the economics and funding situation of the

university, particularly in regards to the counsellor education program. If there have been recent

funding cuts to this department, potential placement sites may wonder about faculty having adequate

resources and staff to meet their and student needs. It is also unclear as to whether traditional

programs are preferred over universities that offer counsellor education at a distance. To date, there

is no research on how the university subsystem may impact the overall functioning of the PIS system

and create enhancing factors or barriers in facilitating high quality practicum placements.

Distance Masters of Counselling Education Programs. Universities that offer counselling

programs at a distance are one type of counsellor education program that may have unique

procedures and challenges for practicum placements. Lalande (2004) discusses the first-ever

Canadian delivered master’s level counselling psychology program through the Campus Alberta

Applied Psychology Initiative which was launched in 2002 and she notes this program plans to

admit up to 120 students a year. In terms of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum

placements, the sheer numbers of students could place increased demand on existing sites. Many

students in rural and remote areas now have the opportunity to pursue a master’s degree in

counselling education without relocating, but perhaps students in these areas could be challenged to

obtain a suitable practicum placement where services and agencies may be limited. Practicum

28

coordinators and faculty may need to be very instrumental in facilitating and/or developing potential

practicum placement sites in order for students to fulfill practicum program obligations.

Another possible challenge for practicum coordinators and faculty of this program could be to

organize and manage the PIS on a national basis. In Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS, the practicum

coordinator is responsible for organizing and coordinating the practicum placements and supervision

within a limited locale. Coordinating and managing placements and supervision across the nation

could present a more ominous and larger task. All of the roles which Pitts (1992) outlines for

practicum coordinators could take on more complexity. For example, establishing one standard

written contract and legal agreement could be difficult in some circumstances given the vastness and

diversity of placement setting needs and policies across the nation. Faculty site visits (for

supervision) could also be difficult. It would be interesting to explore how this unique masters of

counselling program, of which I am a part of, manages and coordinates the PIS over time given its

unique and vast national focus, and how it is similar or different to more traditional programs.

Placement Settings Subsystems

Pitts and Miller (1990) state the demands placed on the PIS in meeting the needs of the

placement sites are similar to meeting the needs of the university subsystem and they make a number

of suggestions to improve this subsystem. Placement settings need to perceive that counsellor

educators are capable of meeting their needs and this is again, fostered by open communication and

a free exchange of information. One way to enhance this perception is provide clear expectations and

guidelines up front along with the methods and documents necessary for managing and supervising

practicum/internship students during their placements. The standard written contract agreement

outlining the various roles and expectations (Pitts, 1992) was discussed in the faculty subsystem and

could be an effective way to prevent misunderstandings and miscommunications about placement

29

hosts’ roles. Another way to enhance this perception is to send only qualified and screened students

whose skills; attitudes and knowledge correspond with the setting needs. Placement sites may

appreciate faculty pre-screening appropriate students thus saving them time interviewing prospective

placement candidates. It minimizes the disruption to routines at the sites and they are more likely to

have favourable perceptions of the counsellor education program and may be more willing to accept

students for practicum/internship placements. Lastly, as Pitts and Miller recommended, it may be

beneficial to offer a fee for hosts so that sites may benefit financially from working with students. If

counsellor educators can recognize and honour placement sites needs and meet their demands whilst

meeting and navigating student learning needs and counsellor education program expectations and

needs, the likelihood of increasing the overall functioning of the PIS is enhanced.

Pitts (1992) states that good placement sites are essential to the PIS and the more

comprehensive the programs and specialties a counselling education department has, the more

variety of placements sites (e.g.: mental health, schools, higher education) is required. Pitts and

Miller (1990) also suggest that in selecting and obtaining sites, practicum coordinators should screen

sites to ensure they have the necessary and appropriate on-site supervision, adequate facilities, client

flow and suitable policies including video/audio taping policies. If sites are pre-screened and

approved, this assists in ensuring that students will have beneficial learning and professional

experiences and potential problems in the placement subsystem can be prevented. For example,

knowing what type of client flow exists in an agency prevents putting students in a position to not

have enough clients and hours required during a practicum.

There are two main issues that emerge in the literature with relation to the placement

subsystem, and these are the issues of quantity of appropriate sites available to place students in and

quality of training and supervision students receive from onsite supervisors. Lack of high quality

30

sites and/or lack of quality of supervision impact the effectiveness of the training and practicum

experience.

Quantity and availability of sites. The data here are presented for doctoral level psychology

students seeking internship (completed after a practicum); there is no available data for master’s

level counselling psychology students in Canada. In 1998, the Association of Psychology

Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) implemented a computerized matching process to

match doctoral students to potential internship sites across Canada and the United States (Keilin,

Thorn, et al., 2000). The APPIC Match allows the profession to have a clearer picture of the

numbers of students applying for internship, number of available positions, and numbers of unplaced

applicants (Keilin et al., 2000). Since the inception of the APPIC Match, Keilin et al. (2000) report

that the numbers of internship positions (with the APPIC match) are now nearly balanced (demand =

supply of sites). In 1999-2000, only 263 applicants didn’t find a match where as in previous years, it

was estimated nearly 400-500 applicants had been left unmatched. This process saves time for

students researching sites on their own and provides them with enough information to decide which

potential sites they may be interested in.

At this point, it is not known if quantity of placement sites is an issue for masters programs and

given its importance in training, this would be very beneficial to know. At the master’s level, there is

no similar matching system and counsellor educators and students navigate and manage potential

placement sites on their own. A similar matching system may be beneficial to ensure sufficient

numbers of quality practicum placements for these students.

Quality of site supervision. Overwhelmingly, the literature focuses on the many issues of

supervision and its impact on the quality of training at the practicum and internship level. Ward and

House (1998) state, “Counseling supervision is central to both counselor education and to the

31

ongoing professional development of counselors” (Counselling supervision, ¶ 2). They state skill

enhancement is important, but it is the supervision process which “encourages greater self-

awareness’ and fosters an integrated professional and personal identity related to the roles and tasks

of counselors (Holloway, 1995)” (Ward & House, Counselling supervision, ¶ 2).

The definition of supervision utilized in this project is defined as a “…teaching procedure in

which an experienced person aids a less experienced person in the acquisition of a body of

knowledge and experience that will foster competence and skill in handling therapeutic situations”

(Kurpius & Gibson, 1991, Ethical issues in supervising, ¶3). Goodyear and Bernard (1998) note that

supervision, as a component of training generally refers to a student engaging in counselling

activities with real clients in a counselling setting being supervised outside the university

environment.

Training of supervisors. A major theme emerging in the literature, that could be a barrier to

effective training during a practicum/internship placement, is the lack of training of supervisors.

Johnson and Stewart (2000) state, “In contrast to our knowledge about the theory and practice of

psychotherapy, where we know a great deal, the literature on clinical supervision remains in its

infancy (Watkins, 1997b)” (Johnson & Stewart, ¶1).

Johnson and Stewart (2000) conducted a national study on the background preparation of

clinical supervision, workplace support for supervision, and satisfaction with current supervisory

load. They sent 357 surveys to 63 sites (28 academic settings, 35 service settings) across Canada

listed in the 1997 CCPPP Directory of Pre- and Post-Doctoral Internships in Clinical Psychology.

They received 156 responses (43.7%) from a total of 45 sites (71.4%) from every province listed in

the CPPP directory with 20 academic sites (n=28) and 26 of the service sites (n=35) responding. The

main finding of the research was that of the 156 clinical supervisors in academic or service settings

32

across Canada, almost two-thirds of the respondents had received no formal training in supervision.

In fact, 63% had selected 1 (“not at all”) on a 7-point Likert scale in regards to the extent of their

training in supervision in graduate school and 19% had selected the next lowest value. Most felt

inadequately prepared to supervise; the respondents who reported feeling somewhat prepared to

supervise had received some training in supervision in graduate school.

Although supervision training was low in graduate school, 55.1% of the respondents indicated

that their initial supervision was supervised and this “supervision of supervision” was perceived as

moderately helpful. They also found many supervisors engaged in supervisor self-study (e.g., books,

workshops) to enhance their supervision knowledge. One of the most important factors that

contributed to the supervisor’s self-study activities was the encouragement and support of the work

place environment. Johnson and Stewart (2000) also confirmed that supervisors in academic settings

were more likely to supervise novice therapists at the practicum level where as those supervisors in

service settings tended to supervise more advanced therapists at the internship level. Finally, the

respondents suggested their ideas for improvements to enhance supervision and these were, (a)

increasing the amount of time available for supervision (b) receiving more training in supervision (c)

peer supervision (d) increased recognition for the supervisory role (e) more support in supervisory

role and, (f) addressing supervisee developmental issues including the remediation of impaired

supervisees and increasing trainees’ background preparation for clinical practice. Johnson and

Stewart concluded that clinical supervisors need and ask for increased training in supervision in

graduate school and through continuing education.

Borders and Bernard (1991) reported that many American writers have also made calls for

more systematic training in clinical supervision such as Hart & Falvey, 1987; Hess & Hess, 1983;

and Lumsden, Grosslight, Loveland, & Williams, 1988 (as cited in Borders & Bernard). Borders and

33

Bernard discuss a draft of a standardized curriculum for training supervisors. prepared by a group of

counsellor educators, practitioners, researchers in the field of supervision and supervisors across

many settings. The committee established three main threads in the resulting curriculum, which were

self-awareness, theoretical and conceptual knowledge and skills and techniques. The seven core

curriculum areas were: (a) models of supervision, (b) counselor development, (c) supervision

methods and techniques, (d) supervisory relationship, (e) ethical, legal and professional regulatory

issues, (f) evaluation and, (g) executive (administrative) skills.

The authors stated the implementation of this guide will contribute to curriculum planning,

assist in establishing standards of supervision for practica in counselling education, contribute to a

supervisor credential, and stimulate further research on supervisor training. It could also provide a

means to assess supervisor competency. Canadian data on training programs for supervisors are

unavailable.

In Canada, CACEP states site supervisors must, (a) have a master’s degree in counselling, (b) a

minimum of two years professional experience, (c) knowledge of the program’s expectation,

requirements and evaluation procedures for students and, (d) reputable competence (CCA, 2005a).

In terms of specific training and/or supervisory approaches, there are no national standards other

than the minimum requirements.

Counselling Profession Subsystem

All counselling education programs including students, faculty and placement setting

subsystems and related professional counselling organizations, associations and bodies exist within

the larger context of professional counselling. It is professional associations that set guidelines, and

standards for the counselling profession and masters’ level counselling academic programs. CACEP

34

accreditation standards will be discussed below as part of the Canadian professional subsystem along

with the CPA accreditation standards and regional licensing requirements in Canada.

CCA Council on Accreditation of Counsellor Education Programs (CACEP). At the

supervised practice level, CACEP states that practicum’s in counselling education are likely the most

critical experiences of any program (CCA, 2005a). They set ten guidelines for a practicum/internship

and these are included in Appendix A. Some of these standards in terms of hours and site supervisor

qualifications have been discussed. Other highlights are that students complete an initial practicum

with a minimum of 100 supervised hours. Half of these hours must be in direct client contact and

during this practicum; students should receive a minimum of one hour of direct supervision per week

and 1.5 hours of group supervision from a faculty member and/or a supervisor under the supervision

of a faculty member. For the final practicum, students must complete 400 hours of supervised

practice with 200 hours spent in direct client contact. These 200 hours should include 160 hours in

individual client contact and 40 hours in-group work. Although CACEP does not specify the number

of required supervision hours during the 400-hour practicum, the standard for supervision may be

the same as the requirement for the 100-hour initial practicum. During the second practicum students

should also become familiar with a variety of professional activities and upon completion; a formal

evaluation from a program faculty member in consultation with the site supervisor should be

conducted. It is recommended that faculty and site supervisors’ roles are clearly defined and it is also

recommended that practicum supervisors use a combination of methods to evaluate (direct

supervision, video, audio, client and peer reactions). Again, standards for site supervision are, (a)

minimum of masters degree in counselling (b) two years professional counselling experience (c)

knowledge of program’s expectations (d) and reputed competence.

35

At an individual level, counsellors can certify as counsellor through the Canadian Counselling

Certification process (CCA, 2005b). Among course criteria, a student who wishes to certify as a

counsellor is expected by the CCA (2005b) to have obtained a minimum of 120 hours of supervised

practice in direct client contact. The primary objectives of the individual counsellor certification

process is to promote professional accountability and visibility; to identify to the public and

professional peers that specific counselling professional standards have been met; and to encourage

the continued growth and development of counsellors (CCA, 2005b).

Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) and Regional Licensing Requirements. The CPA

(2002a) also maintains accreditation standards for the education and training of students and

institutions albeit from a doctoral level and currently the CPA has accredited three programs: the

University of Alberta, the University of British Columbia and McGill University (in Lalande, 2004).

From a licensing perspective in Canada, the regional psychological associations are responsible for

licensing and setting provincial standards and according to Lalande, these boards are usually more

closely affiliated with the CPA. Despite this affiliation, there is a great variety in terms of setting

criteria for licensing and setting educational and training requirements across the jurisdictions;

however, 2/3 of the 12,000 registered psychologists in Canada, are licensed at the masters level

through their regional boards (Lalande). It would seem imperative that regionally, counselling

educational programs would strive to develop master’s programs to meet minimum practicum and

supervised practice requirements where possible in fulfilling their own regional licensing

requirements.

Jobs and Potential Placement Sites. Counselling practicum experiences could prepare students

for the types of jobs and activities that graduates will engage in. Hiebert and Uhlemann (1993)

surveyed 300 registered members of the CPA and the counsellor educator’s chapter of the Canadian

36

Guidance Counselling Association (CGCA) and found that counselling psychologists work in a

number of settings such as academia, schools or university settings, and private practice. The largest

category of client concerns which counselling psychologists addressed were remedial and these

client concerns included issues such as unemployment, relationship problems, bereavement, abuse,

chronic illness, career concerns, stress and anxiety, low self-esteem, and special issues (Hiebert &

Uhlemann). The second largest category of client issues was preventive and included adolescents

with career concerns, students with low self-esteem and special needs clients. Lalande (2004) also

cites a more recent survey of counsellor graduates (1990-1998) from a Master of Educational

Counselling program in Ontario. Smith and Drodge (as cited in Lalande) found that these graduates

worked in the following settings: “…schools, community agencies, colleges, universities,

government, medical/rehabilitation settings, private practice, and industry” (Lalande, 279). The

professional counsellors surveyed reported participating in the following work activities:

personal and career counselling offered individually and in groups, intake and assessment,

academic advising, crisis intervention, staff training and development, administration,

standardized testing, research and program evaluation, academic teaching, family and couple’s

counselling, clinical supervision, and rehabilitation counselling. Counsellors reported to

provide services most frequently to adults. They served adolescents, children and elders in

decreasing order of frequency (Lalande, 279).

Such information regarding where counsellors are employed and what types of activities they

engage in is useful for the counsellor educator to know in seeking practicum placement sites.

Code of Ethics. Other profession factors, which may impact the PIS, are the CCA Code of

Ethics (Schulz, 2000) and the Canadian Psychological Code of Ethics (CPA, 2001). In the CCA code

of ethics for example, the ethical articles in section F list 11 ethical principles for counsellor

37

education, training and supervision (CCA, 2000). The CPA (2001) incorporates supervision ethical

issues amongst the four overarching principles and the author found 32 direct and indirect ethical

standards in respect to the training and supervision of students. Part of the role of the practicum

coordinator would be to ensure that students, faculty and site supervisors are adhering to these Codes

of Ethics and promptly addressing the necessary first and/or second order changes to maintain sound

ethical practice in the PIS.

Socio-cultural-political subsystem

I have included this as a subsystem although it is not included in the original PIS (Pitts &

Miller, 1990). All of the practicum subsystems in the PIS exist within a wider context including

political, legal, and health care policies that can impact the training of students. These include, (a)

new, and developing mobility acts across Canada and the U.S. (Gauthier, 2002; Lalande, 2004)

which could affect type of training and licensing procedures, (b) new national and provincial privacy

laws which could affect how students share their work (for example through the use of video tapes)

(Lalande, 2004), and, (c) new changes in national and provincial Health Care Acts which could

impact funding and ultimately training, research and service in counselling psychology. All of these

broader socio-political forces may create new challenges or barriers in achieving and maintaining

high quality practicum sites and some of these will be described in detail.

Privacy Laws. It is beyond the scope of this project to discuss all provincial policies and laws

that may impact the profession of psychology and training. However, these privacy laws and

legislation may greatly impact internet based counsellor education programs and they have the

“potential to limit the use and sharing of technological communications, such as video taping

students’ counselling practice in counsellor education practicum placements” (Lalande,2004, 283).

In terms of the internet based training, Lalande recommends the profession advocate in regards to

38

privacy legislation issues. Limits regarding video taping of counselling sessions have significant

implications for the sound supervision and evaluation of students’ counselling practice with clients

at practicum sites. CACEP recommends the use of audio and/or video tape of students work, and

unless faculty can regularly attend practicum sites to provide live supervision, the means and

methods of effective evaluation could be limited by such privacy acts (CCA, 2005a).

Commission on the future of health care in Canada (CFHCC). One theme in the broader socio-

political landscape in the Canadian psychological literature is the future role of psychologists in a

different and broader health care system as outlined by the Romanow report for the CFHCC (2002).

The primary goal of the CFHCC is the sustainability (costs) and the delivery of high quality health

care to all Canadians. Briefly, some of the major recommendations for change are, (a) a move

beyond the traditional Medicare model which evolves around doctors and hospitals, (b) more

comprehensive health care programs with a focus on wellness and prevention, (c) enhanced and

extended home care and community services, (d) better access and services for remote, rural regions

and the Aboriginal population, (e) collaboration between healthcare providers, and (f) accountability

to the public.

Initially, the CPA (CPA, 2002b) conducted an analysis of this report and as Lalande (2004)

noted, they expressed concerns that the psychological aspects of health were not included in this

report. Romonow and Marchildon (2003) and Romanow and Marchildon (2004) responded to

concerns raised by the CPA (2003) and their subsequent advocacy by discussing how the proposed

changes could greatly include psychologists on publicly funded health teams. They saw

psychologists’ playing a role in: (a) providing wellness, prevention and educational services (b)

being case managers for extended home care and community services (c) and in providing high

quality and effective counselling services and interventions for a variety of mental health issues, thus

39

assisting in the reduction of expensive drug costs often associated with the treatment of these issues.

Romanow and Marchildon (2003) agreed with Dobson et al. (1999) that psychologists should

develop treatment lists and practice guidelines for a host of mental health services in order to be

accountable and provide evidence based treatments to qualify for public funding. They also agreed

with Arnett, Nicholson, and Breault (2004) in stating that psychologists may need to expand their

roles and training if they wish to have a greater role in the future of Canada’s health care system, (in

Romanow & Marchildon, 2004)

Although referring to clinical psychology, Arnett (2001) stated that over the last 25 years, the

curriculum and training for psychologists has maintained a unidimensional focus on mental health

and the current education is training students more for the past than the future. He states other

professions, such as medicine, nursing, pharmacy, social work, and occupational therapy, have

broadened their approach to health and have embraced broader training and more diversified roles.

Although efforts in the mental health area should continue, the education and training of

psychologists must expand greatly into other aspects of physical health where psychological

interventions can be effective such as in lifestyle management (e.g. diet, exercise and control of

substance abuse). Arnett, Nicholson, and Breault (2004) stated this training should occur early on in

the educational process and in health settings. Ultimately, from their perspective, “Ignoring major

areas of health in educating future psychologists will significantly increase the risk of the field losing

credibility with both the Canadian public and ultimately the governments that support psychology”

(Arnett, et al, 2004, ¶10).

Dobson (2002) and Dobson, Johnston, Mikail and Hunsley (1999), also advocate for the role of

psychologists being further expanded and integrated into the new health care system. They believe

psychologists’ should be more trained in empirically supported treatments (EST) and that public

40

funding should be limited to those psychologists who are trained in and specialize in the delivery

EST for mental health concerns. In terms of training and accreditation, Dobson (2002) stated, he

didn’t believe that counselling psychologists are taught EST as much as clinical psychologists.

Dobson, et al. (1999) offers many recommendations on how to integrate the training, practice and

use of EST in the profession of psychology and in training. Dobson, et al. fear as the Canadian

health care system restructures, professional psychology risks being marginalized unless psychology

organizations make an effort to develop practice guidelines of evidence based practice.

Many American psychologists (e.g. Humphreys, 2000; & Knapp & Keller, 2001) also call for

an expanded role of psychology into new settings, beyond the traditional psychotherapy clinic (e.g.

government agencies, mental health advocacy groups, business) which embrace more diversified

roles in training and practice (e.g. evaluation, prevention, public policy and program development).

Humphreys believes even if there are no direct clients, these roles and hours should be counted

towards the practicum hours. As suggested in by the above Canadian psychologists (Arnett, 2001, &

Dobson, 2002), Humphreys stated the profession of psychology’s long term growth is questionable

if the profession and training programs don’t expand into new territories where psychology can

contribute to many areas of human welfare. If the views and ideas of the Canadian and American

writers are realized, significant second order changes would be required in counselling education

programs and the PIS. Problems could arise in the PIS if despite significant forces and changes in the

broader socio-cultural-political subsystem, counsellor educators fail to respond appropriately and

change and adapt.

Summary. The PIS exists in the wider socio-cultural-political landscape which can potentially

influence training programs and ultimately affect the facilitation of practicum placements. Privacy

laws were discussed in regards to how they may impose guidelines and restrictions surrounding the

41

use of students’ video taping their work with clients at a placement site. This has implications for

monitoring and evaluating students’ counselling performance and could pose concerns for distance

counselling education programs where it is not always possible for faculty to conduct supervision at

a placement site. Recent changes in the political landscape of national health care could also impact

the education and training of psychologists. In light of these changes, there have been

recommendations by clinical psychology for the psychology profession to expand into broader and

more general areas of health and to increase the training and use of EST in training and in practice.

Canadian counselling psychologists’ perspectives on these issues are lacking. If these proposed

changes are embraced, this could have implications for training and the practicum placement as the

type of setting and type of practicum activity may vary and change. For example, if counselling

training and practice expands into new and broader general health areas or other areas discussed, this

could potentially enhance the numbers of practicum placements obtained and secured. If there is a

limited response by counsellor educators and/or the profession to such changes in socio-cultural

political system, in adapting to the changes, then this could potentially restrict the facilitation of

practicum placements.

Finally, American perspectives on the expansion of the profession and potential

practicum/internship settings and activities were briefly highlighted and again, these areas represent

potential practicum/internship settings and activities. There is no similar literature in Canada, which

reflects this position, and it would be interesting to explore if Canadian counsellor educators views

on this. On the one hand, the profession of psychology would be broadened, but it could become

more diluted as a specialty, on the other hand; expansion into these areas could increase the quantity

of potential practicum placements and represent an appropriate response to the changing socio-

cultural-political landscape.

42

Summary of the Literature Review

The PIS captures how the practicum component of counsellor education is impacted and

interacts with many internal (within the academic program) and external (beyond the academic

program) factors and subsystems. With the addition of a socio-cultural-political subsystem, this

framework provides an effective means to organize research and literature. Although any faculty

member can coordinate and manage the PIS, it is recommended that this be done by a practicum

coordinator. Most importantly, should any problem or fluctuation arise in any of the subsystems, the

practicum coordinators must respond effectively and deliver the appropriate first and/or second order

change to restore functioning of the PIS and ensure the effective facilitation of practicum

placements.

The review of the literature related to the Master’s level practicum suggested a variety of

factors that facilitate or create barriers for high quality practicum placements. In the student

subsystem, issues range on a continuum from student generated (e.g. student

impairment/incompetence) to system generated issues (e.g. unclear roles for site supervisors). A

number of strategies (first and second order changes) were suggested to prevent student problems

from arising in the PIS, including screening policies, assessment of student readiness for practicum,

preparing students with a pre-practicum, monitoring and evaluating, and addressing student issues

during practicum.

In the faculty subsystem, having one practicum coordinator can prevent problems as he or she

take on the role to obtain sites, write practicum/internship site agreements, strive to meet other

faculty needs by providing a structure with clear guidelines, create an environment of open

communication, and effectively match students to faculty supervisors. There was a lack of research

regarding the faculty subsystem.

43

Regarding the university subsystem, the PIS must operate by the bylaws, legal requirements

and policies of the university. Such policies and legal requirements could be barriers to achieving

high quality practicum placements particularly if sites view the guidelines as cumbersome. Distance

counselling education programs may pose new challenges in obtaining and facilitating practicum

placements because the role of the practicum coordinator takes on more complexity as he/she seeks

to manage the PIS on a much broader, national level and students in rural or remote areas may find it

difficult to acquire high quality practicum placements in areas where limited counselling services

exist.

In the placement subsystem the practicum coordinator can strive to meet placement setting

needs (clear guidelines, open communication, effective matching of student to site), to enhance the

likelihood that settings will accept and maintain practicum students. Practicum coordinators should

screen sites themselves to ensure the provision of a quality practicum placement in terms of client

hours, activities, and supervision. There are two important issues regarding practicum settings: the

quantity of available sites and the quality and quantity of supervision. The fewer high quality sites to

choose from, in terms of client hours and counselling activities offered the more barriers that exist

for quality practicum placements. The lack of supervisor training can also create barriers in

achieving a high quality practicum experience.

National regulatory bodies influence and shape the profession of counselling and the training

within the counselling profession subsystem. CACEP has standards for supervised practice however;

there are currently no accredited masters programs in Canada. Individual counsellor certification

standards, licensing requirements, and the Code of Ethics, all influence the nature of the practicum

placement and counsellor educators must balance these professional standards within the PIS. The

effectiveness in carrying out this task could have implications for the facilitation of practicum

44

placements. Lastly, research on where Canadian counselling psychologists work (settings), with

whom (client type) and with what issues may inform and guide counsellor educators in seeking

potential practicum placement settings.

Finally, the overarching socio-cultural political subsystem from a national perspective is the

wider context that can influence the nature of the practicum and the functioning of the

practicum/internship. Privacy policies and laws may limit the use of vide taping of students

counselling interactions with clients thus impacting the process of performance evaluation at a site

and potentially limiting how counsellor educators evaluate practicum students. Changing national

health care policies may impact the profession and the training of counsellors by broadening the

profession and training into general health areas in education, wellness and prevention. The use and

practice of EST is also increasingly recommended in the counselling profession. If the training of

psychologists does not change in light of the health care revisions, the profession of psychology as a

whole could be threatened. All of these broader forces (government policies and acts, changing

market place) provide opportunities and barriers for the training of counselling psychologists and

shape and influence the nature of the practicum setting and activities.

It is evident that there are many gaps in the research regarding the PIS and the various

subsystems. For example, there is no direct research on the university subsystem and very little

research on how faculty and/or practicum coordinators manage their roles and/or what their

perspectives are on obtaining and maintaining practicum placements. There is also no known

Canadian research on issues of student incompetence/impairment and how this may impact the PIS

and no Canadian research on screening and selection procedures, practicum preparation, and student

remediation and dismissal policies. There is also a lack of research regarding the quantity and quality

of placement sites in Canada from master’s counselling educators’ perspectives and a similar lack of

45

research in the quality and quantity of site supervisors available for master’s level students. In terms

of the socio-cultural political subsystem, there was some literature and research presented, albeit

from a clinical psychology or American viewpoint and it would be interesting to explore Canadian

counsellor educators’ perspectives on this. Other research gaps have been discussed. What is missing

in all of this is the Canadian counsellor educators’ perspective at the master’s level. It would be

worthy to explore some of their perspectives initially particularly in regards to the nature and

facilitation of the practicum placements.

The primary research questions in this exploratory study were: What are some of the issues and

barriers in obtaining high quality practicum placements in Canada for master’s level counselling

students? What are some of the facilitative factors? How do Canadian counsellor educators assist

students in obtaining high quality practicum placements? How do Canadian counsellor educators’

perceive the current state of professional training and what recommendations do they offer in

addressing the issue (overcome barriers) of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum

placements? This initial exploratory study may inform future research conducted on this topic.

46

CHAPTER III: Methodology

Sample and Participants

A survey was developed and distributed to Canadian Counsellor Educators. The purposes of

this survey were to better understand the topic of practicum placements from Canadian counsellor

educators’ points of view and inform future research in this area. One hundred and forty-six

counsellor educators in the Education Chapter of the Canadian Counselling Association were invited

to participate in a web-based survey (Appendix D) in June of 2004.

The survey was distributed electronically through the Canadian Counselling Association

member list serve in June 2004 (see Appendix B for the research invitation) and two reminder

invitation notices to participate were sent in September and October 2004 through the same list

serve. The sample was a purposive, theoretical and homogeneous as those participating were likely

to have expertise and experience in managing and coordinating the practicum placements.

Unfortunately, it was not possible to get information on how many of the 20 English speaking

universities offering a master’s program in counselling psychology or educational psychology, were

on the CCA list serve. There were three responses from a potential of 20 (15%) English speaking

universities. Despite the low number of returned surveys, the data is useful for the purposes of this

exploratory research. Of the three respondents one was from Central Canada, one was from Western

Canada and one was from Eastern Canada, providing a cross regional perspective of the nation. To

protect their identity (and upon their request), I will label them A, B, and C when reporting results.

Data Collection

If members were interested, they selected the link to the cover letter, and if still interested, they

selected the submit button to the informed consent form (see Appendix C for the consent form). If

they agreed to the terms, participants selected the submit button that led them to the survey. The

47

survey combined open/closed questions seeking descriptive information in the following areas:

demographics, securing practicum sites, the nature of practicum placements, videotaping and privacy

policies and general issues (barriers and facilitative factors) and recommendations. The use of open-

ended questions was appropriate because of the exploratory nature of this research.

Upon completion of the survey, participants selected a submit button that transferred their

responses to a database at the University of Calgary with the Educational Technology Department.

Access to the database was password protected and limited to the researchers. The Survey Kit

(University of Calgary, Educational Technology Department, 2004) program accepts and stores

online surveys in a safe and secure fashion and allows one to view and download results in a tabular

database format. Prior to the survey being distributed a variable key was created (with a logical label

and numerical value for questions/responses) and integrated into the database so that the survey

results could be sorted and accepted according to the key variables. Once the data was collected and

stored, the data was downloaded and manually organized according to the survey questions, since

the program automatically sorted all data categories numerically and alphabetically.

Theoretical orientation and procedure for data analysis

The research combined quantitative (frequency counts) and qualitative analyses of the written

responses to the open ended questions. Qualitative analysis is appropriate as a means to analyze the

text responses in this exploratory study. The following quote seems fitting for the research in this

unexplored territory: ‘“We undertake qualitative inquiry not so much from our recognition that we

do not know all the answers to our problems but rather from an appreciation of the fact that we do

not know all the questions (Edson, 1988, p, 45)”’ (as cited in Burge, 1994, 25).

The written text data was interpreted from a constructivist/interpretive theoretical orientation.

In this research, we sought detailed information on the perspectives of counsellor educators in

48

placing students in high quality practicum placements in terms of barriers and facilitative factors. I

have followed and combined the qualitative analysis principles outlined by Tesch (as cited in

Mertens, 1998), the steps in qualitative analysis as outlined by Miles and Huberman (as cited in

Mertens), and a grounded theory analysis approach by Glaser and Strauss (as cited in Rennie, 2000).

It should be noted that grounded theory analysis is generally recommended for 30-50 interviews (in

Mertens, 1998), however, the general approach of analyzing the data and generating higher-level

themes proved useful in the research here.

Briefly, Tesch stated (as cited in Mertens, 1998) that in qualitative analysis, the researcher

carefully studies all the data, seeking differences, similarities, correspondence, categories, concepts,

ideas and themes, and then analyzes the logic of previous analytical outcomes, categories, and

themes searching for weakness or gaps in the data. The analysis is systematic and comprehensive

and as Guba and Lincoln recommend (as cited in Mertens), continues until no new information or

categories emerge.

All reflective activities and steps were carefully kept track of and are reported here. The data

analysis began with reading all the data at once. As per Glaser and Strauss suggestions (as cited in

Rennie, 2000), I made personal thematic reflection (theoretical memoing) notes for each response on

the second reading, in the bottom margin, noting ideas, questions and thoughts about the data. Then,

for each response, I wrote out key phrases and ideas in the margin and repeated this process again,

dividing the key phrases and ideas into smaller and meaningful units and words. I recorded key

words in the right hand margin and, as Rennie describes Glaser and Strauss (1967) grounded theory

analysis, these fragments of texts were then sorted and grouped into descriptive categories

“…according to shared meanings, and the meaning of each cluster is represented as a category”

(Rennie, 485). Going over the key words and ideas again, I sorted through the data to find similar

49

words, relationships, patterns and themes, looking for distinct differences in subgroups and common

sequences (in Mertens) in arriving at the initial categories. These categories were later combined into

a “…higher order synthesis in the form of…patterns or themes,” (Tesch, in Mertens, 1998, 351).

I met with two individuals (Dr. Vivian Lalande, my supervisor and a fellow graduate student

conducting similar research) to check my interpretation of these higher order categories and themes.

This was accomplished by sharing the open-ended survey responses with them, providing a list of

the ideas and themes, and seeking their input on what ideas and themes they derived from particular

responses. In most instances, we had similar ideas and themes and in a few instances, I incorporated

their ideas. I went back to the data and again, systematically began to group some of the themes into

higher order categories and themes again, looking across all the data at once. This analysis of the

written responses resulted initially in identifying eighteen themes or categories with corresponding

ideas and sub-themes for each category (Appendix E).

Following the method of analysis of Glaser & Strauss, (as cited in Rennie, 2000), I repeated the

analysis on these 18 descriptive categories to build and refine these categories into higher order

abstract categories that subsumed the lower descriptive ones (in Rennie). These higher order

categories gathered the shared meanings and relations (in Rennie) amongst the initial 18 categories

and resulted in five higher order themes and one category unique to one respondent. The resulting

five higher order themes were: Government regulations and policies, agency policies, quality and

quantity of placement settings, quality and quantity of supervision, and faculty and/or practicum

coordinator. There was one unique category, accreditation, which will be commented on as it

appeared central to one of respondent comments. These five themes and one category were written

beside the corresponding 18 original categories and themes, and often, one of the 18 themes applied

to more than one category demonstrating how each theme inter-relates and impacts the other. For

50

example, the level of student satisfaction at a practicum placement is related to and a sub theme of

the broader themes quality and quantity of placement setting, quality of site and faculty supervision,

and interpersonal dynamics between supervisor and student. This is reflective of the grounded theory

approach whereby the understandings of the text are represented in the form of categories and the

relations among them (Rennie) thus each theme and sub theme interacts and affects the other. As

Rennie states eloquently, “…the understanding of the whole of the text influences the understanding

of a part of it, and the understanding of each part in turn influences the understanding of the whole”

(484).

Finally, I then repeated the process by listing the five main themes and one category and

grouped the 18 sub themes and categories under the appropriate broader, higher order theme and/or

category. The list of the five higher order themes and related sub themes, along with the

accreditation category is included in Appendix F.

In addressing the credibility of this data analysis, I followed Mertens (1998) suggestion of

using peer debriefing as one strategy. These two individuals assisted me in challenging and checking

the list of original ideas, categories and themes. In addressing transferability as Mertens states,

“…the burden of transferability is on the reader” (182) to determine how applicable this particular

research context is to another and I attempted to address this by providing thick descriptions and

actual quotes thus enhancing transferability. The description of the method of analysis provided

contributes to enhancing the dependability of my procedures and methods (Mertens). Stainback &

Stainback (as cited in Mertens) define authenticity as presenting a balanced view of all perspectives

and beliefs and in this case, authenticity was addressed simply since there were only three responses

to report so all their responses were fairly presented and included.

51

CHAPTER IV: Results

The research utilized both quantitative (frequency analyses) and qualitative analysis of the

survey responses. The socio-demographic information regarding the responding counsellor educator

programs and frequency analyses are presented first, followed by the results of the qualitative

analysis of the written responses.

Quantitative Analysis

General Counselling Program Information. As noted earlier, three universities (one from

Eastern Canada, one from Central Canada, and one from Western Canada) responded, providing a

small, somewhat, regional perspective. The counselling specialties, reported were (with the number

of responses in brackets) school counseling (3), career counselling (2), counselling psychology (1)

and community psychology (1).

Of the three respondents, one reported having a specific practicum coordinator, one reported

that professors coordinated their own and one did not respond. The numbers of counselling students

placed in practica each year varied from 10 to 85 students, with most programs having some

fluctuations each year. For example, respondent A stated that in 2001 and 2002, there were 60

students placed. This increased to 85 students for 2003 and it was expected to decrease to 50

students for 2004. Respondent B stated they place 10 students each year (2001-2003) with expected

placements increasing to 16 students for 2004. Respondent C stated they place 20 students each year

from 2001 to 2003 and it was expected to place the same number of students in 2004. Two of the

respondents indicated they would be changing the numbers of students admitted to their programs.

Respondent A stated they would be admitting 60 students in the fall of 2004 and didn’t comment on

the reasons why. Respondent C reported expected decreases for September 2005 as they are moving

towards an accredited program and the program’s current resources cannot handle 20 students. As

52

such, their new admission goals will be 10 full time and 18 part time students for September 2005.

Respondent B reported no change, they admit 20 students every second year.

The Nature of the Practicum. Expected student practicum hours at each program ranged from

10 to 32 hours per week. Respondent C reported the expected practicum hours of client contact (32

hours per week) for the fall of 2005 as the program intends to move towards accreditation.

Respondent A stated they required students have 15 hours per week of client contact at a practicum

site; respondent B stated 10 to 12 hours per week of client contact at a practicum site. The total

number of practicum weeks for each program was: 13 to 15 weeks (A); 13 weeks (B); and 15 weeks

(C). Calculating the number of expected client hours during practicum for each program over the

number of expected weeks results in a range of total client hours from 130 hours to 480 hours. If one

removes the program that is intending to accredit (32 hours per week over 15 weeks), the range for

total client hours during the practicum is 130 to 225 hours. For respondent A, the total possible hours

are: 195 hours, 210 hours, and/or 225 hours. For respondent B the total possible number of hours is:

130 hours; 143 hours; and/or 156 hours.

In terms of supervision hours per week per student, Respondent A stated, 2.5 hours faculty

supervision and one hour of on-site supervision; respondent B stated 1 hour per week; and

respondent C stated as per accreditation guidelines which is 1.5 hours per week.

The respondents were asked to check the type of counselling activities they desire students to

partake in during practicum and here are the response frequencies: intakes (2), assessments (2), crisis

intervention (2), psycho-educational activities (2) and testing (1). In the open-ended response for this

question, one stated they desire general individual counselling experience, and one stated they desire

group and personal counselling with minimal administrative consultations with outside groups and

agencies.

53

In regards to testing experience, one respondent reported administering tests as a desired

counselling practicum activity and two reported interpretation of tests as desired counselling

practicum activities. One of the respondents specified the types of tests as being mostly Schedule B

tests (Strong inventory, CPI and MBTI).

Two of the respondents stated students at practicum placements engage in group counselling

activities and the type of group appears to be related to the setting including relationship, anger

management, grief, parenting, obsessive compulsive disorder, defiant children, career, social skills

training, and assertiveness groups. One counsellor educator didn’t indicate whether practicum

students participated in groups. In acquiring practicum placement settings, two of the counsellor

educators stated they had set agreements with practicum sites. All three stated using the following

processes for acquiring practicum placements for students (a) Faculty approaches individuals in

agencies/organizations, (b) historically there are set agreements with agencies/organizations, and (c)

encouraging students to approach potential sites as processes for acquiring practicum placements.

Each respondent reported different placement settings as being difficult to access. Respondent

A reported colleges, universities, and hospitals as being difficult settings to access for practicum

placements. Respondent B reported primary and secondary schools (elementary, junior high, high

school, colleges and universities), private clinics and non-profit clinics as being difficult to access.

Respondent C stated hospitals and non-profit clinics were difficult to access for practicum placement

settings. In the open-ended part of this question, one respondent stated there is a preference to place

students in settings that serve a broad range of client issues.

Some types of client groups and issues were more difficult to access in placement settings than

other types of client groups and issues for each respondent. For example, accessing placement

settings, which serviced primarily individuals (2), couples/family (2), specialized (1) and group (1),

54

were reported as being difficult client groups/issues to access for practicum students. It should be

noted that one category, educational counselling, did not show up due to a technical difficulty.

Unfortunately, when transferring the results from the data base, this particular cell was lost when

copying the data. I attempted to contact the respondents and successfully contacted two: one

reported that they had checked educational counselling as a difficult client group/issue to access in

practicum settings; the other reported that they had not checked this category. It is unknown if the

third respondent checked this category. No one mentioned other client groups.

All three counsellor educators indicated they were able to successfully place students 90% to

100% of the time in practicum placements. On a 4-point scale from “not satisfied at all” to “highly

satisfied”, one of the counsellor educators reported that generally students are highly satisfied with

their practicum placements, and two reported students generally being moderately satisfied with

practicum placements.

Summary of Quantitative Results

From the above results, there is some commonality and some differences amongst the

responses. There was similarity reported in the methods utilized in acquiring practicum placements

as all three stated that (a) faculty approaches placement settings, (b) historical agreements are

utilized in placing students, and (c) students are encouraged to approach placement settings on their

own.. There was also agreement on the percentage of time each counsellor educators’ reported as

being able to successfully place students in practicum sites (90-100%). One counselling program

stated they had a specific practicum coordinator to organize and manage placement settings, one

stated each professor coordinates their own.

There was a wide range between counselling programs in the numbers of students placed in

practica from 2001 to expected numbers for 2004, probably due to the size of region and the size of

55

the academic program (10 to 85). The number of students placed each year (2001 to expected 2004)

in practica varied and fluctuated within the counselling programs for two of the respondents.

Respondent A indicated the largest change in the numbers of students placed each year but did not

provide any information on this change. Respondent C reported a decrease in the numbers of

students being placed in a practicum placement for 2005 due to their intention to accredit and thus

reducing the numbers of students being admitted to the program.

The expected practicum hours and weeks also varied, and for respondent C, the expected

practicum hours for September 2005 (reported) was significantly higher (32 hours per week) than the

other two respondents and this is related to the intention to become an accredited program. If one

removes respondent C who reported accreditation practicum hours, there is still a range of 130 to

225 and this appears to depend on the variable hours per week for respondent B; and variable weeks

for respondent A. There was variance in the types of counselling activities that counsellor educators’

desire students to partake during practicum; types of settings that they find difficulty in placing

students; and types of client and client issues they find difficulty in placing practicum students with.

Students are generally satisfied with practicum placements as two reported moderate student

satisfaction and one reported high student satisfaction.

Qualitative Analysis

Below is a description of the one category and each of the five higher order themes and the sub

themes in relation to barriers and facilitative factors in obtaining and maintaining high quality

practicum placements. Identifying information has been removed and simply replaced with “our

province” in all quotes used to exemplify the themes.

Government regulation and policies. This theme incorporates ideas and words that reflect how

government regulation and policies can impact the facilitation of high quality practicum placements

56

and create barriers or impose restrictions. It incorporates the two sub themes of (a) how provincial

health policies can create barriers in accessing certain placements, and (b) how provincial privacy

laws influence students videotaping of work with clients at a placement site.

It seems that in Canada, provincial policies can regulate and impact counselling and other

professions in education and practice. For example one respondent here reported provincial health

policies created barriers in achieving high quality practicum placements in certain settings with

particular counselling activities as follows:

Mental health. Our province is governed by a health board that has deemed that social workers

at a bachelor’s level or master’s level can work in health settings. This limits our access to

addiction services, mental health services etc., it is an ongoing battle.

“Ongoing battle” seems to suggest that limited access to desired practicum placement settings

can be frustrating for educators who place practicum students. This same counsellor educator had

indicated a preference for (but found difficulty) placing students in hospitals and non-profit settings

and this may be related to this provincial health policy. It may also demonstrate in this case, how

provincial health care policies may create competition for placement settings amongst other related

disciplines; increasing demand on a perhaps a limited supply. This could create barriers in accessing

such practicum placements.

Privacy laws also seem to impact practicum placements in terms of how and if students’ can

record their work with clients at a practicum for faculty to view and evaluate. From the same

counsellor educator above, there was one comment in relation to provincial policies regarding the

limits and use of videotapes with clients. “Institutions which house young offenders will allow

taping here in our province, but the person cannot be seen in the video. As long as consent forms are

in order we are generally okay”. It appears that provincial regulation and policies allow taping, but

57

there are some restrictions in regards to minors and consent forms must be in place. Overall, this

doesn’t restrict the evaluation procedure, but it does reflect how privacy laws can impact evaluation

procedures in regards to video taping work with clients at a placement site.

Agency Policies. Agency policies also were identified as an influence on the nature and the

ability to obtain a high quality practicum experience. This theme refers to any agency polices or acts

(formal/informal) that created barriers to securing high quality practicum placements and/or agency

policies regarding privacy and videotapes of a client at a practicum site. It embraces the two sub

themes of agency policies regarding who they select as practicum students and agency policies

regarding if and how they can use videotapes of their work with clients at a practicum site.

An example of an inability to obtain high quality practicum placements due to agency policy

was stated as “…often agencies have policies that favour others like social workers do not favour

counselling students”. It appears that for this counsellor educator, some agency policies can create

barriers in achieving high quality practicum placements is. Agencies that favour and prefer students

from other disciplines limits access to certain placement settings and could create competition

amongst various disciplines that seek practicum placements.

Agency policy also seems to place restrictions about videotaping students’ work with clients.

For example, two counsellor educators spoke of videotape limitations during and at placement sites

due to agency policy as exemplified in the following quote.

In some settings, the agency does not allow tapes to leave the agency. This makes it impossible

to prepare effective case conferences. However, it does serve the primary needs (which are to

provide a mechanism by which individuals can review their own practice). In virtually all

cases, the agency requires consent/release forms to be signed, and in the odd setting, where that

is not an agency requirement, we make it a program requirement.

58

From this comment, the limited use of videotapes to record students work with clients (tape not

allowed to leave site) does not in and of itself pose a barrier to high quality practicum placements;

but it does create difficulty for faculty to view and evaluate students’ work. Consent forms were

mentioned as an agency and/or program requirement to allow students to videotape their work with

clients at a practicum site. It is unknown if agency policies or privacy may be unique to the agency

context, or influenced by the provincial and/or national policies and laws.

Quality and quantity of placement settings. What a potential placement setting can offer in

terms of hours, client flow, counselling activities, and facilities is also important to high quality

training. Quality of setting embraces some sub themes and these are: (a) criteria by which counsellor

educators reported approving a setting, (b) barriers regarding accessing high quality placement

settings including the quantity of settings available, (c) the quality of activities offered in a

placement setting that impact student satisfaction, and (d) recommendations for enhancing the

facilitation of high quality practicum placements.

In terms of qualifying criteria, it appears that the counselling programs approve sites on the

basis of the following criteria (a) the site supervisor’s qualifications and commitment to supervision;

(b) the nature of the counselling services offered with a preference for broad based services; (c) the

opportunity for students to engage in a variety of counselling activities, preferably with individuals

and some group work; and (d) whether sites can offer the required client hours as per accreditation

guidelines.

Although these are the site criteria by which placement settings are approved, it appears that

there is some difficulty in obtaining and maintaining placement settings that meet each criteria all of

the time. For example, there was a fairly consistent theme about the lack of qualified and trained

supervisors in placement settings as being a barrier to obtaining and ensuring a high quality

59

practicum placement experience and this is discussed in the following sub theme. There were also

barriers reported in accessing preferred settings and/or preferred various counselling activities. One

counsellor educator reported a preference for settings that provided counselling activities that

included “counselling families, victim/perpetrators of abuse, child and adolescent counselling,

mental health counselling” and yet they reported difficulty in accessing such populations and

settings which service these clients and issues. The same counsellor educator also reported that

occasionally (once or twice a year) when students cannot find a placement, faculty persist until a

placement is found, and this sometimes results in an acceptable placement but not necessarily a

preferred placement. Another respondent reported that barriers to obtaining high quality practicum

placements exist because there is a limited range of counselling services available in their small

region with high quality supervision. For this counsellor educator, the quantity of high quality

placement settings appears to be a direct barrier. In terms of client hours, for one respondent, it was

important that future placement settings be able to offer the required number of client hours for

students as these hours will increase through the accreditation process. It seems that in terms of

qualifying site criteria and counsellor educator preferences, there are some barriers in accessing high

quality placement settings some of the time and this is related to barriers surrounding a lack of

qualified and trained supervisors, accessing certain placement settings and/or certain counselling

activities, and sometimes barriers regarding the quantity of available placement settings.

Student satisfaction can also be affected by the quality of a placement setting in terms of client

hours and/or the type of counselling activities available. For example, one counsellor educator stated

“Students are happy when they see lots of clients. They love settings where they have lots of

personal counselling”. It appears that settings which can provide the client flow and hours and

desired counselling activities can influence a student’s satisfaction with the practicum experience.

60

In terms of recommendations to enhance the practicum placement process, a suggestion was

made about establishing a procedure to create a list or registry of approved sites. This registry could

assist students and counsellor educators in selecting sites that have already been approved to meet

certain placement setting and/or supervision criteria. There were no direct suggestions from any of

the respondents on how to address the quantity issue or limited number of available settings in a

region.

In summation, it appears that for these counsellor educators, there are some barriers in

accessing high quality practicum placements in terms of meeting site approval criteria and

preferences for types of clients and counselling activities. The quality of the placement site by the

nature of the counselling activities and amount and type of clients, may also impact student

satisfaction. There is also a quantity issue for one – a lack of sites available and a lack of qualified

supervisors in these settings for smaller regions.

Quality and Quantity of Supervision. The quality of supervision in terms of supervisors’

credentials, expertise, and commitment (time) to the supervision process in supervising counselling

students during a practicum is important for high quality training and the professional development

of student counsellors. The quality of supervision theme emerged from the responses here and it will

be described in terms of the following sub themes, (a) minimum criteria counsellor educators’ set for

site supervision, (b) the quality of supervision being a barrier in achieving high quality practicum

placements, (c) the quality and quantity of supervision as it impacts student satisfaction, (d) the

interpersonal factors between site supervisors and students that impact student satisfaction, (e)

faculty support and supervision, and (f) an insight and recommendation on how one counsellor

educator addresses the barrier of a lack of qualified supervisors.

61

It would appear the first step in ensuring high quality supervision is for counselling programs

to set minimum criteria and standards for site supervisors. All three respondents stated they required

site supervisors to possess a minimum of a master’s degree in counselling and/or a master’s degree

in a related field and a minimum of 2 to 5 years counselling experience. One counsellor educator

also stated that supervisors be willing to engage in the supervisory process, which suggests that on

site supervisors be willing to provide the time and commitment to their supervisory role with

practicum students.

Both of the respondents above indicated a lack of qualified supervisors as a barrier in achieving

high quality practicum placements, and one commented on the lack of trained supervisors in certain

settings in regards to student satisfaction. For example, one directly stated one of the obstacles in

placing students is due to a, “Lack of qualified supervisors in agencies or settings where services are

currently offered in our region”. It is important to note, that although site supervisors may meet the

minimum standard supervision criteria (a master’s degree and experience), this doesn’t seem to

always guarantee that a supervisor is trained, committed and engaged in the supervisory process.

The quality and quantity of supervision also impacts and affects student satisfaction during the

practicum placement. In terms of student satisfaction, one counsellor educator stated that the key

factor contributing to student satisfaction is “good supervision and mentorship”. Another counsellor

educator stated:

There is quite a bit of variety of student experience; some are highly satisfied and there is

usually one or two a year who are not at all satisfied. This reflects the limited number of

agency settings that employ highly qualified counsellors, who also have an interest in

professional development. The problem is most acute in educational settings, where many

counsellors have limited or no training.

62

It appears that in the few instances when students are not satisfied at all, it has been attributed

to the lack of quality supervision received that may be due to limited supervision training. It may

also be important for supervisors to be committed to the roles of supervising and assisting in

professional development.

Along with the qualifications of supervisors (being trained and interested in professional

development and providing good mentorship), the quantity of time supervisors spend with students

also impacts their satisfaction. For example, one of the counsellor educators stated that students

don’t like it when supervisors cancel sessions or when they are left on their own. Spending time with

a student maybe related to the supervisor’s commitment and interest in the student and the student’s

professional development.

Personal and interpersonal factors between supervisor and students could also impact student

satisfaction at a site. For example “Sometimes they do not have positive experiences with a student”

and “often times it is a supervisors’ idiosyncratic needs or personal needs”. This suggests that the

quality of the supervisory relationship and the quality of interaction between student and supervisors

can impact student satisfaction and quality of practicum and training experience.

Lastly, student satisfaction is also impacted by faculty supervision. One counsellor educator

stated “Support from the university supervisor is also a key element. Students need to be free to

express their frustrations, concerns, etc. with a university supervisor. Their support is crucial to a

student’s level of satisfaction.”

A lack of qualified supervisors may also create extra work on the part of the counselling

program and faculty supervisors. One of the counsellor educators offered a solution into how they

handle a lack of qualified supervisors at placement settings: “In the interim, we have arranged for the

course instructor to serve as a site supervisor when needed, making regular site visits and conducting

63

weekly supervisory meetings with the students”. This demonstrates how the lack of qualified

supervisors can create extra work and cause faculty to exert more time and effort in compensating

for this lack of qualified site supervision. As a policy or procedure recommendation to improve the

facilitation of high quality practicum placements, this counsellor educator stated: “That is tough –

We need to raise the floor of practice, and that is a long-term solution” which perhaps refers to the

lack of high quality settings and lack of highly qualified and trained supervisors since this was a

consistent theme throughout this respondent’s answers.

Faculty and/or Practicum Coordinator. The respondents reported on who is ultimately

responsible for the coordination and management responsibilities for securing and obtaining

practicum placements for students. The sub themes are (a) how faculty actually assist students who

are having difficulty in finding placement settings, (b) the persistence in acquiring a placement, (c)

the amount of time involved, (d) and the recommendation of having one person to obtain and

maintain high quality practicum placements.

In terms of the counsellor educator’s role in assisting students who are experiencing difficulty

in finding practicum placements, all the respondents suggested that faculty must contact past

supervisors and known counsellors in the community with past and current contacts to secure

placements. They did this by “contacting supervisors and making requisitions”; and for another by

“…calling people we know who have supervised in the past and asking for their assistance”. One

counsellor educator said this generally happens once or twice a year and stated “…basically, faculty

members work with the student to get a placement. If there is difficulty, we continue until they get a

placement. Sometimes, this is not the preferred placement but it would be an acceptable placement”.

It appears that faculty involvement in assisting students can be very demanding on their time.

One counsellor educator stated students not being placed usually only occurs once or twice a year,

64

but despite its infrequency, finding placements for these students “is very time consuming” and

“Obtaining and maintaining sites is a full time job”. Finding placement sites and conducting the site

supervision seems to add to the workload of counsellor educators requiring significant extra time and

effort.

One counsellor educator suggested the process would be enhanced if there was one sole person

coordinating field placements and in recommending policies or procedures that would enhance the

process. He or she said “I believe the process would be enhanced by having a person, coordinator,

whose job is solely field placements”.

Accreditation

The concept of accreditation was unique to one respondent and is included as a separate

category as this was emphasized for this particular respondent. Reflecting how CACEP accreditation

standards impacted the counselling program practicum component. The respondent mentioned

accreditation four times in relation to, (a) the numbers of students being admitted in the fall of 2005,

(b) new required practicum hours, (c) conditions for site approval (being able to meet the required

student practicum hours for accreditation) and (d) as noted above, in terms of recommending

policies or procedures to enhance the process, having a practicum coordinator. The numbers of

students being admitted in the fall of 2005 were expected to decrease because of limited department

resources. Required practicum hours per week would increase and sites would be approved on the

basis that they can provide students with the necessary client hours. With accreditation, this program

hopes to have a practicum coordinator. Accreditation procedures have impacted the structure and

processes of one counsellor education program in Canada in this manner, but it is unclear if other

programs that become accredited will undergo the same changes.

65

Summary of Qualitative Results

The qualitative analysis suggests that there are some barriers in obtaining and maintaining high

quality practicum placements in Canada. Some of the barriers discussed were: government

regulation and policies, agency policies, lack of quality and quantity of sites which may not meet all

site approval criteria, lack of high quality and trained supervisors who can provide a high quality

training experience, and the time involved in assisting students in finding practicum placements.

Possibly related to government and agency policy barriers, is interdisciplinary competition

amongst related disciplines that seek similar practicum placements in similar settings. This could

increase the demand for placements on a limited pool of available high quality sites. Also related to

government and agency policies is the use of videotapes of clients during practicum at a site. Limits

and/or restrictions could impact how students work with clients is evaluated by faculty and sound

evaluation would seem important in achieving high quality training.

Two of the three respondents listed site approval criteria and for both, qualifications of

supervisors were listed first suggesting their importance in achieving a high quality practicum

placement. It appears that there is difficulty in meeting each of the criteria all of the time. There is

also some variation in the types of counselling activities, and clients and settings in which counsellor

educators deem difficult to access for practicum placements. For example, it appears that both

respondents approve sites on the basis of being able to provide a broad range of counselling services

with a variety of counselling activities and that sites can offer preferably personal and individual

counselling experience with required hours, yet it is difficult to access some of these activities and/or

populations. Quantity of available sites was also listed as barrier for one counsellor educator due to

the region size. Student satisfaction is related to the quality and quantity of placements, in terms of

the types of clients and counselling activities offered.

66

Meeting supervision criteria seems to be important for site approval and it appears the

minimum standards for approving site supervisors for all three respondents is for site supervisors to

possess a minimum of a master’s degree in counselling and/or a masters degree in a related field, and

to have a minimum of 2 to 5 years counselling experience. One counsellor educator also stated that

supervisors must be willing to engage in the supervisory process, which suggests that on site

supervisors be committed to their supervisory role.

In regards to high quality supervision being a barrier, one counsellor educator directly stated

that this is a significant barrier in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum experiences. To

compensate for a lack of supervision, they sometimes send faculty to sites to provide site supervision

on a weekly basis for students. Quality of supervision also impacts student satisfaction as both stated

supervision is key to the students’ quality of experience. Interpersonal dynamics, quantity of time

that supervisors spend with students and faculty support also appear to affect student satisfaction.

It appears that all three respondents become directly involved in assisting students to acquire

practicum placements (contacting people they know) when there is difficulty and this was noted as

time consuming by one. Accreditation impacted the practicum program structure for one counsellor

education program in terms of number of students, required practicum hours, and conditions for site

approval.

Lastly, in terms of recommendations in how to facilitate and overcome barriers in achieving

high quality practicum placements, one suggested developing a registry of sites and “raising the

floor of practice”, and one suggested having one person being solely responsible for practicum

placements such as a practicum coordinator.

67

CHAPTER V: Discussions and Conclusions

This section will highlight some of the research findings and implications and discuss the

themes in relation to the literature review and Pitts and Millers’ (1990) PIS. The strengths and

limitations of this research and suggestions for future research within the PIS framework will also be

presented. Finally, some concluding comments are made.

Discussion and Implications

There are four comments worth stating in relation to some of the quantitative results. Firstly,

respondent C reported a notable change, as the program moves towards accreditation and plans to

decrease the number of full time students by eight for the fall of 2005. CACEP guidelines

recommend that there is one full time faculty member for 10 full time students, and for faculty

supervision of practica students, the standard is set at five students per one faculty member for each

term. This could have implications for other Canadian counselling programs that wish to obtain

accreditation. To meet the faculty ratios, within the program and for faculty supervision, there must

be an increase in funding and/or a decrease in the numbers of students admitted. Obtaining increased

funding could interact with two other subsystems, the university (in terms of funding academic

programs) and the socio-cultural political subsystem (in terms of funding universities). To decrease

the numbers of students to meet the CACEP accreditation standards implies that perhaps, the

standards to enter counselling programs may need to change and become higher and this has

implications for the faculty subsystem in terms of screening and selection policies (e.g. Nagpal &

Ritchie, 2002). If the numbers of students decreases, this could potentially enhance the facilitation of

high quality practicum placements because there are less students applying for possibly a limited

number of placement sites in the regions.

68

Secondly, programs that choose to become accredited will need to increase the number of

direct client contact hours to 200 hours over the practica term, and it is unclear whether this will be a

facilitative factor or a barrier in terms of obtaining high quality practicum placements. It is possible

some placement settings may find the practicum hours too high to accommodate, however they may

favour programs that are accredited and prefer higher student practicum hours at their site.

Thirdly, two of the respondents indicated that they have ongoing agreements with agencies for

practicum placements and all three selected that they have historically set agreements as a process to

place practicum students with agencies. Ongoing agreements refers to the future continuance of

practica agreements that are new; historical set agreements refers to utilizing past agreements with

placement settings. For one counsellor educator, their program utilized past, historical agreements,

but did not have set ongoing agreements, suggesting, that perhaps acquiring new and ongoing

agreements is challenging. It is also possible, there may have been some confusion about the terms

(historical and ongoing) and perhaps “ongoing” should have been more clearly defined. Often

students find new and different placement settings on their own, thus increasing the pool of available

sites and paving the path to establish new and ongoing agreements with the academic program. Most

notably, no one selected that they received information or brochures from agencies/organizations as

an attempt to recruit students for their placement setting and no one listed other possible methods of

acquiring placement settings in the open ended response. Since all three respondents indicated some

barriers to accessing high quality practica settings, creating new means of acquiring placements

(second order change) may be valuable.

Lastly, all three respondents indicated that they successfully placed students 90-100% in

practica each year yet this is surprising since all reported barriers in accessing certain settings and/or

reported difficulty in obtaining high quality placements. In retrospect, an exact percentage should

69

have been sought, since a 10% range can be significant. Also, even if students are placed 100% of

the time, this doesn’t reflect the quality of the placement in terms of counselling activities and client

hours. It also does not reflect the amount of resources needed to place all students in such settings.

From the qualitative analysis, it appeared some barriers in obtaining high quality practicum

placements do exist and these evolved around the themes of: government regulations and policies,

agency policies, quality and quantity of placement settings, and quality and quantity of supervision.

In terms of government policies and acts potentially creating barriers to achieving high quality

practicum placements, one of the respondents mentioned how their provinces’ health board policy

allows other professions to work in mental health, thus limiting their access to preferred practicum

placements in addictions and mental health. In the literature review, it was beyond the scope of this

project to discuss each provincial health act; however the revised national health care policy

(CFHCC, 2002) along with Canadian clinical psychologist’s responses was presented. For example,

Arnett (2001) and Arnett, et al. (2004) perspective, the profession of psychology and the training of

psychologists must broaden and change and adapt to new health care policies and changing health

needs. The examples in the results and in the literature illustrate how broader socio-cultural political

forces at a provincial and national level could have implications for potential practicum placement

settings and potential practicum activities. These results support the inclusion of the socio-cultural

political subsystem within the PIS, as suggested in the literature review. If there is no response to

these forces in the broader socio-cultural political subsystem, at the professional or educational level,

further barriers in obtaining high quality practicum placements could persist.

Agency policies were also cited as a barrier in facilitating high quality practicum placements in

the results, and it is important to note that agency policies may be impacted and influenced by other

broader policies and acts in the socio-cultural political system. It may be beneficial for counsellor

70

educators to become familiar with the intricacies of agency policies in their regions in order to

facilitate the successful placement of students in practica. There was no related literature which

referred directly to agency policies.

The use of videotapes to evaluate students’ work with clients during a practicum was discussed

by Jordan (2002) and cited as a supervision and evaluation guideline in the CACEP accreditation

standards (CCA, 2005a). Privacy laws, provincially and/or nationally, can certainly impact how and

if students are able to record their work with clients during practica. Both government and agency

policies were mentioned in the results reported here in terms of limits and restrictions of students

videotaping their work with clients at a placement site. Privacy laws were also discussed in the

socio-cultural political subsystem, and as Lalande (2004) stated, as privacy laws evolve and change,

this could mean further limitations on how faculty supervisors evaluate students’ work with clients.

This could have implications for training and practice and could pose challenges for effective student

evaluation, particularly for distance education programs that may not be able to conduct faculty site

visits for supervision. If video tapes are the only and primary means available for faculty supervision

and more sites restrict this completely, then this could potentially restrict the pool of available sites

of which to place students in for a practicum.

The quality and quantity of placement settings were discussed as themes in the above results

and discussed in the placement subsystem literature review. In terms of quality of sites, Pitts and

Miller (1990) also suggest faculty screen sites to ensure there is good client flow, quality supervision

and appropriate counselling activities from which the student can achieve a sound professional

experience. CACEP accreditation standards also set guidelines around the types of activities and

settings in which students should conduct their practica (CCA, 2005a). Quantity of available high

quality placement settings was considered a barrier in the results; in addition, the issue of placement

71

setting quantity was discussed in the literature in relation to the APPIC match for doctoral students

(Keilin, et al., 2000). There is no similar matching system for master’s level practicum students,

however, the suggestion by one respondent of maintaining a registry of approved sites could initially

address more effective matching of students to sites and perhaps contribute to some decreases in any

supply and demand issues by providing a list of pre-approved sites.

The quality (criteria and training) and quantity of supervision was also a theme in the results in

terms of barriers to securing high quality practicum placements. The lack of highly qualified

supervisors who are trained echoes what Johnson and Stewart (2000) found in their study of clinical

supervisors. Quality of supervision is important because as Borders & Bernard (1991) state, it is an

ethical requirement; untrained supervisors pose risk to students (low quality of training) and

potentially clients if students are not adequately trained and supervised. Given the importance of

clinical supervision in counsellor education (Johnston & Stewart, Ward & House, 1998), the quality

of site supervision is a concern for master’s level counselling programs and has important

implications for counsellor educators as they assist students in seeking practicum placements and

approving placement settings.

The quality of supervision also had implications for student satisfaction in the results above. As

one of the respondents indicated, faculty supervision and support is also important in student

satisfaction and Pitts (1992) also stated, it is important for faculty to support students and meet their

needs and demands. Interpersonal dynamics (between supervisor/student) was also mentioned as

factor contributing to student satisfaction and this reflects Pitts and Miller’s (1990) idea of unhealthy

dynamics, which may occur at a practicum placement. From this, it would seem imperative that

counsellor educators monitor and assess student satisfaction during practicum placements as

dissatisfaction may indicate something else in the PIS is not working.

72

Because the quality of supervision appears to be a dominant theme in the literature and in the

results of this survey, perhaps it would be possible for counsellor educators and placement settings to

collaborate in addressing this. Johnson and Stewart (2000) suggested developing supervisor training

seminars, courses and programs and Borders and Bernard (1991) described a supervision training

course to enhance the quality of supervision. Together, counsellor educators and site personnel could

develop and implement supervision training courses. In this way, the needs of particular placement

settings will be heard and met (as suggested by Pitts and Miller, 1990, as important in the overall

functioning of the PIS) and counsellor educators could step out of the “ivory tower” so to speak.

This could link theory to practice and practice to theory as well as enhance cooperative relationships

between faculty and placement settings, thus possibly enhancing potential practicum placements.

The practicum coordinator could recruit potential site personnel to partake in this collaboration. Such

an endeavour is ambitious, but it could benefit all stakeholders (students, faculty, site supervisors

and ultimately clients) in the PIS.

The issue of whether there should be a practicum coordinator was reflected in the results and

discussed in the literature as a sub system of its own (Pitts & Miller, 1990). One of the counsellor

educators stated that the process of facilitating high quality practicum placements would be

improved if there was one practicum coordinator. This could enhance the efficiency of obtaining and

maintaining practicum sites and it could reduce the work load and time involved in doing this for

other faculty members. CACEP accreditation standards also state there should be one core faculty

member identified as the clinical coordinator and/or practicum coordinator for student field

experiences (CCA, 2005a).

It is worth commenting on some of the factors not mentioned by the respondents but discussed

in the literature review. Not one respondent mentioned students’ behaviour and/or performance

73

(student subsystem) as being a barrier in the obtainment or maintenance of high quality practicum

placements as discussed thoroughly in the literature review of the student subsystem (Enochs &

Etzbach, 2004; Jordan 2002; Pitts & Miller, 1990). The university subsystem and related issues was

also not mentioned as a potential barrier in obtaining and maintaining sites and this seems to be

reflective of the lack of literature in this subsystem too. This may indicate that the measures that

these counsellor programs are using to prevent student related issues are effective. It also suggests

that the universities provide adequate support for the practicum component of the counsellor

education programs.

It appears the practicum component of the counsellor education does seem to be a complex,

interacting system and the respondents indicated how factors outside the program, can impact the

success of the practicum. For one respondent, the quality of supervision and the limited quantity of

placement sites (placement subsystem) seemed a paramount factor, beyond the counselling program

itself, impacting the success of the practicum. To compensate, they sent faculty to provide weekly

site supervision for students; clearly a time consuming task. For another respondent, government

health policies (socio-cultural political subsystem), impacted the ability to acquire particular

practicum placement settings. This respondent too, had indicated the time involved for faculty in

obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements (faculty subsystem) and recommended

one practicum coordinator. Effectively managing and coordinating practicum placements could be a

full time job in and of itself, particularly for larger programs, and it seems that counselling programs

and the success of the practicum component would benefit if the resources are available to support

one faculty member in this full time role. Overall, the results of this survey tend to support the PIS

model: barriers existed in the additional socio-cultural political subsystem, in the placement setting

subsystem, and in the faculty subsystem (in terms of resources).

74

Strengths and Limitations

In terms of strengths, this the initial research is useful because to date, there have been no

studies conducted on what Canadian counsellor educators’ at the masters level regard as barriers and

facilitative factors in obtaining high quality practicum placements. Another strength is how the

literature review was conducted and presented in terms of the PIS model as a means to categorize

barriers and facilitative factors, and organize a synthesis of the relevant literature and research on

this topic. The research results were also considered within the PIS model, highlighting the systems

that may be most relevant for Canadian counsellor educators and providing a means to demonstrate

support for the PIS model. Lastly, the addition of the socio-cultural political subsystem to the PIS

adds another important dimension that can and does impact the facilitation of high quality practicum

placements.

The most obvious limitation of this research was the low return rate, however, enough initial

information was provided to build on for further research. Perhaps follow-up research would be best

conducted with direct and personally addressed mail out surveys to each and every counsellor

educator in Canadian universities that offer master’s level programs in counselling. This may

enhance response rates, since there was no guarantee that all counsellor educators were members of

the CCA in the Counselling Education Chapter; and if they were, there was no guarantee they were

on the list serve. There were a few questions in the survey that may need to be reworded since in a

few questions, it appears may have not been clear. For example, asking for an exact percentage of

successful placements and specifying site and faculty supervision hours so both would be included in

all responses may have been helpful. Lastly, it may also have been beneficial to ask the types of

settings counsellor educators successfully place students in and what specific factors account for this

success so as to illuminate the enhancing factors that are currently operating.

75

Recommendations for further research

In the socio-cultural political subsystem, it would be beneficial to seek counsellor educators’

perspectives on other laws, policies or acts that may be impacting the facilitation of practicum

placements in their region. It would be worthy to explore counsellor educators’ responses to the

changes in the national health care act and to seek their perspectives on how they think the education

and training of counselling students may need to change and adapt to changes in the wider health

care system. Do they agree with some of the clinical psychologists’ perspectives on broadening the

role of psychologists (e.g. Arnett, 2001) and/or becoming more trained in EST (e.g. Dobson, 2002)?

If so or not, how does this impact the nature and the setting of the practicum placement for

counselling students? In regards to Humphreys’ (2000) perspectives on expanding the settings and

nature of the practicum, what do Canadian counsellor educators think about the possibility of new

and different potential practicum placement settings and roles? Do they view this as enhancing the

practicum placement opportunities or reducing the quality of essential counsellor training? In regards

to privacy laws, how have privacy laws further impacted the evaluation of students at a practicum

site and has this been a significant barrier in achieving high quality practicum placements? More

importantly, how do they overcome this barrier?

In relation to the professional subsystem, as noted, it would be interesting to explore how

accreditation standards will impact the facilitation of practicum placements. Research on employed

areas of practice by Hiebert and Uhlemann (1993) and Smith and Drodge (as cited in Lalande, 2004)

was presented in the literature review in the professional subsystem. It would be interesting to

explore if the settings and activities in which students participate during practica, reflect the types of

work positions graduates acquire. If graduates are working in settings and performing roles that are

76

quite different from their practicum experiences, perhaps counsellor educators’ may need to respond

and seek practicum placements in these types of work settings.

In regards to the placement settings subsystem, there is no research nationally on the quantity

of placement sites available for the master’s level practicum or how often master’s students are left

unplaced. What are the gaps between demand and supply for masters programs? Also, it may be

beneficial to explore what some of the placement settings’ needs are in hosting practicum students.

Knowing and meeting such needs may assist in the facilitation of high quality practicum placements

as indicated by Pitts and Miller (1990).

The quality of supervision was a dominant theme in the findings and the literature, yet there is

very little research from Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives. It would be worthwhile to

further explore what qualities (beyond minimum supervision criteria) and training they regard are

important. For example, Freeman and McHenry (1996) conducted a study on the perspectives of 329

counsellor educators with CACREP accredited masters level programs and sought their views on the

ideal roles, methods, goals and ideal functions that supervisors should have. Repeating such a study

in Canada would be beneficial to uncover what high quality supervision clearly entails in order to

maximize the training opportunities for students. Along with this, it may also be interesting to

explore what counsellor educators’ perspectives are on training supervisors (e.g.: Johnston &

Stewart, 2000) and what some of their suggestions would be in regards to courses and training for

supervisors at the masters level (e.g. Borders & Bernard, 1991).

In the university sub system, it would also be interesting to compare the practicum placements

between traditional counselling education programs and distance programs such as Campus Alberta

in terms of types of settings, unique issues, barriers and facilitative factors. In the faculty subsystem,

it would be worthy to explore how faculty manages their roles and how they manage issues in the

77

PIS. Specifically exploring potential barriers in every subsystem and the means to resolve these

barriers could provide valuable information for many counsellor educators in Canada.

As indicated, there is no Canadian research in the student subsystem, particularly in regards to

student impairment/incompetence and the means to address such issues should they arise. Although

the results of this research suggest that this may not be an issue, it may be interesting to explore if

student impairment/incompetence are problems in Canada (e.g. Olkin & Gaughen in Kerl, et al.,

2002) and if these are barriers in obtaining and/or maintaining practicum placements. Much

literature and many writers (e.g. Enochs & Etzbach, 2004) state counselling education programs

should have formalized remediation and dismissal policies to deal with impaired/incompetent

student. Research to identify whether similar policies exist in Canada would be worthwhile. If

litigation becomes an issue in Canada, as discussed by Kerl, et al. (2002) in America, then it may be

even more critical to, (a) have sound initial and selection procedures for admission (e.g. Napal &

Ritchie, 2002), (b) sound counsellor preparedness through courses and skill development in pre-

practicum (e.g. Woodward & Yii-Nii, 1999), (c) proper and formal pre-assessment prior to

placement (e.g. Frames & Stevens-Smith, 1991), (d) sound monitoring, supervision and evaluation

procedures during practicum (e.g. Jordan, 2002), and (e) formalized and sound remediation and

dismissal policies (e.g. Enochs & Etzbach, 2004; & Kerl, et. al). These are important factors in

preventing and addressing student impairment/incompetence issues and may be helpful in the

facilitation of high quality practicum placements in terms of demonstrating sound polices in

addressing student issues prior to and during a practicum placement. From Pitts and Miller’s (1990)

perspective, addressing student issues promptly and appropriately in terms of first and second order

change is critical for the overall maintenance of the PIS and in terms of maintaining good relations

with placement settings.

78

Conclusion

As indicated in the literature review, although the practicum component of counsellor

education programs at the Master’s level is very important, little is known about how to optimize the

practicum experience for students, particularly in Canada. This exploratory research sought

Canadian counsellor educators’ perspectives as a means to better understand (a) what the issues and

barriers were in obtaining high quality practicum places, (b) what the facilitating factors were, (c)

how practicum placements were acquired, and (d) what recommendations counsellor educators have

in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements.

The results of this survey were considered in relation to Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS

conceptual framework: a systemic representation of the practicum component of counsellor

education. Another subsystem, the socio-cultural political subsystem was added by the author to the

five subsystems presented by Pitts and Miller and the relevance of this subsystem was supported by

the results. Some of the relevant themes in terms of barriers in facilitating high quality practicum

placements emerged in the socio-cultural political subsystem (government policies) and the

placement subsystem (agency policies; quality and quantity of sites; and quality and quantity of

supervision). No barriers or themes emerged from the student subsystem, the faculty subsystem, the

university subsystem and/or the professional subsystem. Recommendations to overcome barriers

included raising the standards of practice for supervision and settings (placement subsystem),

developing a registry of approved sites (placement subsystem) and implementing one faculty

member as a practicum coordinator (faculty subsystem). Accreditation was reported as a category as

it was a dominant theme for one respondent throughout the comments. It also demonstrates how the

professional subsystem can impact the nature of the practicum placement through accreditation

procedures.

79

From Pitts and Miller’s (1990) PIS framework, responding to any problems or fluctuations

appropriately in any and all the subsystems is necessary for maintaining the optimum functioning of

the PIS. Being able to effectively deliver the necessary first and/or second order changes ultimately

affects the facilitation of high quality practicum placements. The respondents here indicated some

second order changes that they currently engage in to reduce some of the barriers and/or suggest

other second order changes to overcome barriers. One respondent sends faculty to supervise students

at a site to compensate for a lack of highly qualified site supervisors; one respondent plans to have a

sole person, a practicum coordinator to manage the practicum component. Interestingly, one of the

respondents suggested raising the floor of practice, in order to maximize high quality practicum

placements: supervision standards and the quality of the placement setting must be addressed over

the long term. These appear to be some of the unique Canadian issues and forces impacting the

quality of the practicum experience and training and the literature and the results, seem to

demonstrate how the facilitation of high quality practicum placements is the result of many

interacting forces within and outside the counselling program. From the results of this survey, and in

accordance to the PIS model, it appears that in order to optimize the facilitation of high quality

practicum placements, some second order changes will be required in the PIS.

The exploratory research and results presented here, provides a means for conceptualizing and

further exploring barriers and facilitative factors in obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum

placements for Canadian masters’ level counselling students. To date, the success and/or challenges

of obtaining and maintaining high quality practicum placements for master’s level counselling

students has not been explored in Canada. Significant and potential barriers in the literature were

presented and integrated into the PIS, with the author’s addition of the socio-cultural subsystem. The

research results were also explored and considered within the overall framework of the PIS and in

80

both the literature, and the results, there is evidence for the addition of the socio-cultural political

subsystem. To the author’s knowledge, there has not ever been a framework or model, such as the

one presented here, to categorize and analyze barriers to effective practicum placements in Canada.

Building on the PIS model, and adding the socio-cultural political subsystem proved valuable for

considering the issue of successful practicum placements. There were suggestions made for further

research in each of the subsystems of the PIS framework from a Canadian perspective. The value of

using the PIS framework, demonstrated how complex facilitating the successful practicum can be.

Many forces within each subsystem and between each subsystem impact and affect obtainment and

maintenance of practicum placements. This initial research attempt has provided a means for

counsellor educators to perhaps more effectively classify potential barriers and to more effectively

consider and develop solutions within each subsystem of the PIS. Because this research presented a

new approach for examining the issue of the practicum placement, and because this research is truly

a first in Canada and just a beginning, there are many more questions and answers to seek.

81

References

Arnett, J. (2001). Clinical and health psychology: Future directions [Electronic Version]. Canadian

Psychology, 42(1), 38-48.

Arnett, J., Nicholson, I., & Breault, L. (2004). Psychology’s role in health in Canada: Reaction to

Romanow and Marchildon [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 45(3), 228-232.

Borders, D., & Bernard, J. (1991). Curriculum guide for training counseling supervisors: Rationale,

development, and implementation [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision,

31(1), 23p.

Bradey, J. & Post, P. (1991). Impaired students: Do we eliminate them from counselor education

programs? [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(2), 100-109.

Burge, E. (1994). Learning in computer conferenced contexts: The learner’s perspective. Journal

of Distance Education, IX (1), 19-43.

Canadian Counselling Association (2005a). CCA Accreditation standards for counsellor education

programs at the master’s level. Retrieved April 8, 2005 from

http://www.ccacc.ca/CACEPstds.htm.

Canadian Counselling Association (2005b). Certification of Canadian Counsellors. Retrieved April

8, 2005 from http://www.ccacc.ca/cocc.htm.

Canadian Psychological Association (2001). Companion Manual to the Canadian Code of Ethics

for Psychologists, 3rd edition, In C. Sinclair & J. Pettifor (Eds.), Ottawa, ON: Canadian

Psychological Association.

Canadian Psychological Association (2002a). Accreditation standards and procedures for doctoral

programmes and internships in professional psychology, fourth revision.131 pp. Retrieved

November 14, 2004 from: http://www.cpa.ca/documents/Accreditation_standards2002.pdf.

82

Canadian Psychological Association (2002b). Psychology specific analysis of the report of the

Royal Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada.15 pp. Retrieved February 20,

2005 from http://www.cpa.ca/documents/Romanow_summary.pdf.

CanLearn (2004). Canadian student loans & Canadian scholarships – CanLearn, Retrieved April 26,

2005 from http://www.canlearn.ca/index.cfm?langcanlearn=EN.

Commission on the future of health care in Canada (CFHCC) (2002). Building on Values: The

future of health care in Canada, [Electronic Version], Roy Romanow (Commissioner); Final

Report, 2002, 392pp. Retrieved November 29, 2004 from: http://www.hc-

sc.gc.ca/english/pdf/care/romanow_e.pdf.

Dobson, K. (2002). A national imperative: Public funding of psychological services [Electronic

Version]. Canadian Psychology, 43(2), 65-75.

Dobson, K., & Meyen-Hertzsprung, M. (2000). Diversity training: conceptual issues and practices

for Canadian clinical psychology programs. Canadian Psychology, 41(3), 184-191.

Dobson, K., Johnston, C., Mikail, S., & Hunsley, J. (1999). Empirically supported treatments in

psychology: implications for Canadian psychology [Electronic Version]. Canadian

Psychology, 40(4), 289-302.

Enochs, W. & Etzbach, C. (2004). Impaired student counselors: Ethical and legal considerations for

the family. The Family Journal: counseling and therapy for couples and families, 12(4), 396-

400.

Frame, M. & Stevens-Smith, P. (1995). Out of harm’s way: Enhancing monitoring and dismissal

processes in counselor education programs [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education &

Supervision, 35(2), 9p.

83

Freeman, B. & McHenry, S. (1996). Clinical supervision of counselors-in-training: A nationwide

survey of ideal delivery, goals, and theoretical influences, Counselor Education & Supervision,

36(2), 144-159.

Gaubatz, M. & Vera, E. (2002). Do formalized gatekeeping procedures increase programs’ follow-

up with deficient trainees? Counsellor Educator and Supervision, 41, 294-305.

Gauthier, J. (2002). Facilitating mobility for psychologists through a competency-based approach

for regulation and accreditation: The Canadian experiment [Electronic Version]. European

Psychologist, 7(3), 203-212.

Goodyear, R. & Bernard, J. (1998). Clinical supervision: lessons from the literature. Counselor

Education & Supervision, 38(1), 6-23.

Hiebert, B. & Uhlemann, M. (1993). Counselling Psychology: Development, Identity, and Issues. In

K. S. Dobson & D. J. G. Dobson (Eds.), Professional Psychology in Canada (pp.285-312).

Toronto, ON: Hogrefe & Huber.

Humphreys, K. (2000). Beyond the mental health clinic: New settings and activities for clinical

psychology internships [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 31(3), 300-304.

Johnston, E., & Stewart, D. (2000). Clinical supervision in Canadian academic and service settings:

The importance of education, training, and workplace support for supervisor development

[Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 41(2), 124-130.

Jordan, K. (2002). Clinical training of graduate students: The need for faculty to balance

responsibility and vulnerability. The Clinical Supervisor, 21(1), 29-38.

84

Kaplan, D., Rothrock, D., & Culkin, M. (1999). The infusion of counseling observations into a

graduate counseling program [Electronic Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision,

39(1), 66-76.

Keilin, G., Thorn, B., Rodolfa, E., Constantine, M., & Kaslow, N. (2000). Examining the balance of

internships supply and demand: 1999 Association of psychology postdoctoral and internships

centers’ match implications [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 31(3), 288-294.

Kerl, S., Garcia, J., McCullough, C., & Maxwell, M. (2002). Systematic evaluation of professional

performance: legally supported procedures and process. Counselor Education & Supervision,

41, 321-332.

Knapp, S. & Keller, P. (2001). Professional associations’ strategies for revitalizing professional

Psychology [Electronic Version]. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32(1), 71-

78.

Kurpius, D. & Gibson, G. (1991). Ethical issues in supervising counseling practitioners [Electronic

Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(1), 48-56.

Lalande, V. (2004). Counselling Psychology: A Canadian Perspective. Counselling Psychology

Quarterly, 17(3), 273-286.

Levant, R., Reed, G., Ragusea, S., DiCowden, M., Murphy, M., Sullivan, F., Craig, P., & Stout, C.

(2001). Envisioning and accessing new roles for professional psychologists [Electronic

Version] Psychology, 32(1), 79-87.

Markert, L., & Monke, R. (1990). Changes in counselor education admissions criteria [Electronic

Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 30(1), 48-58.

85

Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with

quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Nagpal, S. & Ritchie, M. (2002). Selection interviews of students for master’s programs in

counseling: An exploratory study. Counselor Education & Supervision, 41, 207-218.

Peake, T., Nussbaum, B., & Tindell, S. (2002). Clinical and counseling supervision references:

Trends and needs [Electronic Version]. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice &

Training, 39(1), 114-125.

Peterson’s Guides, Inc. (2005). Peterson’s Gradline [Electronic Resource]. Restricted to authorized

users; SilverPlatter International, Norwood: Mass. Retrieved April 4, 2005 from

http://web5.silverplatter.com/webspirs/start.ws?customer=c3983&databases=PG

Pitts, J. (1992). Organizing a practicum and internship program in counselor education [Electronic

Version]. Counselor Education & Supervision, 31(4), 196-208.

Pitts, J., & Miller, M. (1990). Coordination of clinical supervision in practicum and internship

programs. Counselor Education & Supervision, 29(4), 291-300.

Rennie, D. (2000). Grounded theory methodology as methodical hermeneutics: Reconciling realism

and relativism. Theory and Psychology, 10(4), 481-502.

Roe, R. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist? [Electronic Version]. European

Psychologist, 7(3), 192-202.

Romanow, R. & Marchildon, G. (2003). Psychological services and the future of health care in

Canada [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 44(4), 283-295.

Romanow, R. & Marchildon, G. (2004). History, politics, and transformational change in Canadian

Health care: A rejoinder [Electronic Version]. Canadian Psychology, 45(3), 239-243.

86

Schulz, W. (2000). Counselling Ethics Casebook 2000, Ottawa, ON: Canadian Counselling

Association.

Schwitzer, A., Gonzalez, T., & Curl, J. (2001). Preparing students for professional roles by

simulating work settings in counselor education courses [Electronic Version]. Counselor

Education & Supervision, 40(4), 308-320.

Sexton, T. (2000). Reconstructing clinical training: In pursuit of evidenced-based clinical training

[Electronic Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 39(4), 218-228.

University of Calgary (2004). Educational Technology Database Survey Kit.

Ward, C. & House, R. (1998). Counseling supervision: A reflective model [Electronic Version].

Counselor Education & Supervision, 38(1), 23-34.

Woodard, V., & Yii-Nii, L. (1999). Designing a prepracticum counselor education programs

[Electronic Version] Counselor Education & Supervision, 39(2), 134-145.

87

Appendix A

CCA Accreditation Standards for counsellor education programs at the master’s level

For the Supervised Practice requirements

D. Supervised Practice

Clinical instruction includes supervised practice completed within a student’s

program of study. Practicum requirements are considered to be the most critical

experience aspects of the program.

1. During their training, students must complete an initial 100-hour supervised

practicum. The purpose of this practicum is to foster the development of

counselling skills under supervision. The practicum will include:

a. 50 hours of direct service with clients, including experience in

individual counselling (minimum 40 hours) and group work (minimum

10 hours);

b. weekly interaction with an average of one hour per week of individual

and/or joint (two students and one supervisor) supervision;

c. an average of one and one half hours per week of group supervision

based on video recording and case studies that is provided on a regular

schedule over the course of the student’s practicum by a program

faculty member or a supervisor under the supervision of a program

faculty member; and

d. evaluation of the student’s performance throughout the practicum

including a formal written evaluation after the student completes the

practicum.

88

e. Faculty supervisors are responsible for the supervision of no more than

five practicum students during any term.

f. Supervision of practicum students is credited by the university as a

significant part of the faculty member's normal workload.

2. Students must complete a final 400 hour supervised practicum:

a. Of the 400 hours of supervised practicum, a minimum of 200 hours is

spent in direct client contact.

b. Of the 200 hours spent in direct client contact, a minimum of 160

hours is spent in individual counselling.

c. Of the 200 hours spent in direct client contact, a minimum of 40 hours

is spent in group work.

d. The practicum should provide the opportunity for the student to

become familiar with a variety of professional activities in addition to

direct service (e.g., record keeping, supervision, information and

referral, team work, in-service and staff meetings);

e. The practicum should provide an opportunity for the student to

develop program-appropriate audio and/or videotapes of the student’s

interactions with clients for use in supervision;

f. The practicum should provide the opportunity for the student to gain

supervised experience in the use of a variety of professional resources

such as assessment instruments, technologies, print and multimedia,

professional literature, and research; and

89

g. There should be a formal evaluation of the student’s performance

during the final practicum by a program faculty member in

consultation with the site supervisor.

3. For their practicum experience, students are placed in settings compatible with

their career goals and their program of studies.

4. Opportunities are provided for students to develop professional relationships

with staff members in their practicum settings.

5. The practicum supervisor's role is clearly identified and a specific time for

supervision is allocated.

6. Practicum supervisors employ a combination of the following methods in

discussing the student's counselling sessions: direct observation, review of

audio tapes, review of video tapes, client reactions, and peer reactions,

7. Practicum experiences received off-campus are supervised by site personnel

who have, at minimum, a master’s degree in counselling; significant

(minimum two years of pertinent professional experience) counselling

experience; reputed competence; and knowledge of the program’s

expectation, requirements, and evaluation procedures for students.

8. The program faculty provides orientation, assistance, and consultation to

supervisors.

9. Field personnel who assume major responsibility for the supervision of a

student's practicum experience are assigned no more than two students at a

given time unless the field supervisor is released from other work

responsibilities.

90

10. Doctoral students who serve as practicum supervisors:

a. have completed counselling practicum experiences equivalent to those

within the Master’s program;

b. have completed or are receiving training in counselling supervision;

and

c. are themselves supervised by qualified program faculty with a faculty

/student ratio of 1:5.

Source and adapted from: Canadian Counselling Association (2005a). CCA Accreditation standards

for counsellor education programs at the master’s level. Retrieved April 8, 2005 from

http://www.ccacc.ca/CACEPstds.htm.

91

Appendix B

The Invitation to Participate Invitation to Participate in Research on Student Practicum Placements in Counsellor Education

Counsellor educators and individuals who work in agencies or organizations that provide practicum placements or supervision for counselling students are invited to participate in research regarding the current Canadian context for counselling student practicum placements. Successful practicum placements are essential to counsellor education, however, many issues can prevent the placement of students, such as a shortage of practicum sites or new privacy policies. Likewise, many organizations rely on practicum placements and may find it difficult to know how to acquire students to do practicum placements in their organizations. The results of this research will be of value to all counsellor education programs and agencies/organizations in Canada who can apply this knowledge in their placement processes and training programs. The results may also have implications for policy development.

If you are interested in participating in this research, please click on the appropriate button below.

COUNSELLOR EDUCATORS

INDIVIDUALS IN AGENCIES OR ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE COUNSELLING PRACTICUM

PLACEMENTS PROCEED PROCEED

If you have any questions, please contact me by e-mail at lalande@ucalgary.ca or by phone at (403) 220-7573. Thank you.

Vivian Lalande, PhD, C.Psych. Associate Professor Division of Applied Psychology Faculty of Education

92

Appendix C Informed Consent

Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education

INFORMED CONSENT

INVESTIGATORS Dr. Vivian Lalande, Division of Applied Psychology, University of Calgary

Heather L. A. Demish, Graduate Student, Campus Alberta Applied Psychology Initiative

This consent screen is only part of the process of informed consent. It should give you the basic idea of what the research is about and what your participation will involve. If you would like more detail about something mentioned here, or about information not included here, please contact Vivian Lalande at (403) 220-7573 or at lalande@ucalgary.ca. Please take the time to read this screen carefully and to understand any accompanying information. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND WHAT IT INVOLVES You have been invited to participate in this study because of your professional knowledge in counsellor education. In this study, you will be asked to complete a questionnaire about your knowledge of counselling practicum placements. We will also ask you to provide some demographic information about your program, such as the number of counselling practicum placements and the number of counselling graduate students you place each year, as well as possible admission goals. Collecting this information will allow us to provide a better understanding of the current Canadian context for counselling practicum placements. A second part of this research involves a survey of organizations and individuals who offer counselling practicum placements to identify relevant information from their perspectives as well. The objectives of the research include: 1. To better understand the needs, barriers and recommendations regarding practicum placements from the perspective of counselling education programs. 2. To better understand the types of practicum placements available, policies, procedures and possible issues of organizations that could place counselling practicum students. 3. To summarize the results from these two perspectives in terms of implications for Canadian counselling education programs regionally and nationally. The results of this research will be of value to all counsellor education programs in Canada that can draw on these results in their practicum placement courses. It may also indicate areas for future policy development for agencies that value counselling practicum students and can

93

utilize the results to facilitate placements. The results may have implications for other professional training programs and lead to the identification of specific policy recommendations. Survey participants can indicate on the survey whether they prefer to have their responses linked with their organizations, or whether they would prefer to remain anonymous in the presentation of results of the research. EXPECTED TIME COMMITTMENT We expect that it will take approximately 45 minutes for you to complete the survey. DATA ANALYSIS Your responses to the questionnaires will be combined with those of other participants in the study and the resulting data will be analyzed on a group rather than on an individual basis. You can indicate in the survey whether you agree to have the results linked to the name of your organization. If you do not agree, your participation in this survey will remain confidential and anonymous. YOUR RIGHTS AS A PARTICIPANT If you agree to participate, you should know that your are free not to answer any specific items or questions. Participation in this research will not cause any risk or discomfort to the participants. You may also withdraw from the study at any point without penalty (if you choose to withdraw, we will destroy your data immediately to maintain your anonymity). All information you do provide (including information that could identify you) will be kept confidential and anonymous unless you indicate otherwise. Your anonymity will be guaranteed in two ways. First, we will not be tracking IP addresses. Second, your data will be assigned an arbitrary participant number and any identifying information will be deleted from the surveys. All materials will be password-encoded and only authorized persons will have access to these data. Electronic files of the data may be kept indefinitely but can in no way be linked back to you. You may request a summary of this research, if you are interested, by sending an e-mail to lalande@ucalgary.ca. By clicking the SUBMIT button, I fully understand the information regarding participation in the research project and agree to participate as a subject. In no way does this waive your legal rights nor release the investigators, sponsors, or involved institutions from their legal and professional responsibilities. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time. Your continued participation should be as informed as your initial consent, so you should feel free to ask for clarification or new information throughout your participation. If you have further questions concerning matters related to this research, please contact:

Heather L. A. Demish, Graduate Student Dr. Vivian Lalande

94

Campus Alberta Applied Psychology Initiative Division of Applied Psychology

University of Calgary 2500 University Drive. N.W. Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4 (403) 220-7573 heather.lynn21@shaw.ca lalande@ucalgary.ca If you have any questions concerning your participation in this project, you may also contact Mrs. Patricia Evans, Research Services Office, Room 602, Earth Sciences at the University of Calgary at (403) 220-3782.

SUBMIT

95

Appendix D Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education Survey

Student Practicum Placements In Counsellor Education Survey

* You are required to answer the questions preceded by an asterisk. Participant Information * 1. Name of University: * 2. Address of University: 3. Name of practicum coordinator (optional): * 4. Number of counselling graduate students placed each year:

2001

2002

2003

2004 (expected) * 5. Do you intend to change the number of graduate students admitted each year?: Yes No * 6.If yes, what is your admission goal and estimated date for achieving this goal?:

* 7. Please check specialties in your academic department:

SCHOOL COUNSELLING

COUNSELLING PSYCHOLOGY

CAREER COUNSELLING

COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY

REHABILITATIVE PSYCHOLOGY

HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY

96

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY

APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY OTHER (please list):

* 8. What is the required number of client hours for student practica per week?:

* 9. How many weeks in length is the practicum placement?:

* 10. How many hours of supervision are required weekly?:

11. What qualifications or experience are required for supervisors of practicum students?:

12. If you have criteria by which you approve practicum sites, please list them below:

Securing Practicum Placement Sites and Types of Placements * 13. Do you have ongoing agreements with organizations or agencies for practicum placements?:

Yes No 14. Please check the processes by which you acquire practicum sites for your students:

You approach individuals in agencies each year to arrange practicum placements

You receive brochures or information from agencies/organizations each year describing the nature of their training programs and application processes for practicum placements

97

Historically, there are set agreements (formal or informal) with agencies to place practicum students

You advise students to approach potential practicum setting for information/applications OTHER (please list):

15. Are there preferred practicum settings where you try to place students but have difficulty finding placements?:

Yes No 16. If the answer to the previous question is Yes, please check the types of settings that you would like to be more available for practicum placements: Schools:

Elementary

Junior High

High School

Technical Post-secondary settings:

Colleges

Universities Community agency settings:

Hospitals

Non-profit clinics

Private clinics OTHER (please list):

17. What types of client issues do these agencies serve?:

98

18. Many practicum sites offer a variety of services and have a mandate to serve particular client groups. Please check the types of services or client groups that you find difficult to place students in:

Individual Counselling

Educational

Career

Couples/Family

Specialized (e.g., sexual abuse, addictions, etc.)

Group Counselling OTHER (please specify):

19. If you require practicum students to participate in psycho-educational groups, what types of groups are these?:

20. What specific types of counselling experiences do you expect your students to partake in?:

Intakes

Assessments

Crisis Intervention

Psychoeducational Activities

Testing OTHER (please list):

99

21. If you checked testing, please list the types of tests you would like students to utilize during training:

22. What types of testing experience do you require students to have?:

Administration of tests

Interpretation of tests 23. Please list any other counselling activities required for training but for which you have difficulty obtaining practicum placements:

Nature of Practicum Placements and General Information It is generally agreed that developing highly competent practitioners in counselling psychology requires high quality training in a practicum. This section addresses related issues which may impede or enhance this process for students and educators. * 24. What is the percentage of students that you are able to successfully place in practica every year?:

90-100% of the time

80-90% of the time

70-80% of the time

60-70% of the time

50-60% of the time

40-50% of the time

30-40% of the time

100

20-30% of the time

10-20% of the time

0-10% of the time 25. Please comment on any factors or reasons that prevent successful placements, such as policies, lack of qualified supervisors, competition with other programs, etc.:

26. What is the process for assisting students who are not placed or experience difficulty in finding practicum placements suitable to their interests?:

27. In general, how would you describe most of the practicum placements in terms of student satisfaction?:

highly satisfied

moderately satisfied

only somewhat satisfied

not satisfied at all 28. What factors contribute to this identified level of satisfaction?:

Videotaping and Policies 29. High quality practicum placements utilize videotape reviews of counselling sessions by the student's supervisor. Please describe any organizational or government policies you are aware of regarding videotaping of clients and reviewing of videotapes:

30. Please add any recommendations you have regarding procedures or policies that would facilitate

101

obtaining practicum sites in organizations or agencies in general in your region:

Closing Comments 31. Please add any additional comments regarding existing factors that enhance the placement of students in practica:

32. Please provide any additional comments regarding this survey or practicum placement experiences:

Personal Preference Options 33. Do you prefer to have your University name associated with the survey results?:

Yes No 34. Do you agree to have the name of your University reported in the research results as one of the participants, but not linked to the data presented?:

Yes No Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please submit the completed survey by clicking on the button below.

Submit

102

Appendix E

First 18 Themes and Ideas

1. Numbers of students admitted and graduated – Accreditation.

2. Program resources – Accreditation.

3. Accreditation standards – Accreditation.

4. Practicum placement settings and activities and expectations of practicum – Quality and

Quantity of Placement Sites and Accreditation.

5. Required practicum hours – Accreditation and Quality of Site.

6. Supervisor qualifications, criteria and training - Quality and Quantity of Supervision.

7. Site approval - Quality and Quantity of Sites and Accreditation.

8. Barriers in types of placements– Quality and Quantity of Sites, Quality and Quantity of

Supervision, Agency policy, Government Regulations and Policies.

9. Provincial Health care policies – Government Regulations and Policies.

10. Varying practicum activities – Quality and Quantity of Site and Accreditation.

11. Student satisfaction – Quality and Quantity of sites, Quality and Quantity of Supervision at

site (from site and faculty supervisors), interpersonal dynamics.

12. Videotaping – Agency policies and Government Regulations and Policies.

13. Contacting counsellors and supervisors in community – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator.

14. Privacy laws, minors, consent forms – Government Regulation and Policies and Agency

Policies.

15. Recommendations: raise floor of practice, registry, one coordinator – Quality and Quantity of

Supervision, Quality and Quantity of Sites, Faculty/Practicum Coordinator, Accreditation.

103

16. Time consuming to place students, one person – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator

17. Interdisciplinary competition – Agency Policies.

18. Faculty role in coordinating practicum placements – Faculty/Practicum Coordinator.

104

Appendix F

Resulting Five Higher Order Themes and One Category

1. Government Regulations and Policies

• Provincial health law allowing social workers to work in mental health areas – limiting

access to addictions, mental health service (barriers).

• Competition amongst related disciplines for practicum placements (inferred).

• Provincial privacy policy and laws which state young offenders cannot be seen in videos.

2. Agency Policies

• Some agencies have policies that favour social workers.

• Competition amongst related disciplines for practicum placement settings (inferred).

• Some settings don’t allow videotapes to leave the agency.

3. Quality and Quantity of Placement Setting

• Criteria by which counsellor educators approve a placement setting for practicum.

• Site supervisors must meet counselling program criteria.

• Criteria for agencies that offer broad base of counselling services for individuals.

• Preference and criteria for various counselling activities, client types and settings.

• Criteria for agencies to provide some group work.

• Criteria that agencies provide required client hours for accreditation.

• When limited, students end up in acceptable placements, but not preferred.

• When agencies can provide lots of clients with lots of personal counselling activities, this

impacts student satisfaction.

• Registry with site information as a recommendation.

• Lack of available settings in region.

105

• Lack of settings with qualified and trained supervisors.

• Lack of quality settings with lack of trained supervisor’s impacts student satisfaction.

4. Quality and Quantity of Supervision

Quality of Supervision

• Supervisor criteria must be met for site approval.

• Willingness to engage in supervisory process.

• Lack of qualified and trained supervisors as a barrier.

• Interpersonal dynamics between supervisor and student impacting student satisfaction.

• Supervisor personal qualities impacting student satisfaction.

• Quality of supervision impacts student satisfaction.

• Faculty supervisor support important for student satisfaction.

• Interim solution – send faculty to conduct practicum site supervision.

• Raise the floor of practice as a recommendation.

Quantity of Supervision

• Willingness to engage in supervisory process requires time.

• Impacts student satisfaction – students don’ like canceled appointments and they like when

supervisors spend time with them.

5. Faculty/Practicum Coordinator

• Faculty become directly involved in assisting students find practicum placements when there

is difficulty.

• Faculty contact past supervisors and people they know.

• Faculty persists until placement is found, sometimes an acceptable placement, but not a

preferred one.

106

• Time consuming and full time job for faculty to seek and maintain high quality practicum

placements.

• One person recommended assisting in facilitating high quality practicum placements –

practicum coordinator.

Accreditation as a separate category for one respondent

• Decreasing numbers of students admitted because current program resources can’t handle.

• Impacts number of expected client hours at practicum (increased).

• Site approval- must be able to provide student with client hours required for accreditation.

• With accreditation – hope to have one practicum coordinator.