Paraprofessionals in
Career Services
Technical
Report 32
Janet G. Lenz, Ph.D.
Julia Panke, B.S.
Florida State University
Career Center
Tallahassee, FL.32306-4162
June 19, 2001
Dr. Janet G. Lenz is
the Associate Director for Career Advising, Counseling, and Programming in the
Florida State University Career Center. She is also a Senior Research Associate
in the Center for the Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development
(http://www.career.fsu.edu/techcenter/).
Julia Panke is a Career Advisor in the FSU Career Center and a doctoral student
in the Department of Human Services and Studies. Appreciation is expressed to
Robert Reardon for his review of this document. For further information contact
Janet Lenz at The Career Center, Dunlap Success Center, 100 S. Woodward Avenue, Florida State University,
Tallahassee, FL, 32306-4162, (850) 644-9547, jlenz@admin.fsu.edu
©Copyright by Janet
G. Lenz and Julia Panke, Florida State University Career Center, Tallahassee,
Florida. Please do not reproduce without permission of the authors.
|
Introduction...................................……………………………...……………………….. |
3 |
|
What’s In a Name..................................…………………….…..……………………… |
4 |
|
Recruitment & Selection.......................………………………....……………………… |
4 |
|
Recruitment
Methods.........................………………………………………….. |
4 |
|
Qualifications
Sought...............……………………........………………………. |
5 |
|
Interview/Selection Process.........………………….......………………………. |
6 |
|
Training..............................................…………………………………………………… |
6 |
|
Roles/Responsibilities................................…………………...………………………... |
8 |
|
Hours.............................................……………………………………………………… |
10 |
|
Office Space..........................................……………………….……………………….. |
10 |
|
Supervision/Performance Appraisal......……………………....………………………... |
11 |
|
Funding/Pay..........................................………………………………………………… |
12 |
|
Ethics/Standards.......................................……………………………………………… |
12 |
|
Challenges/Issues....................................……………………………………………… |
13 |
|
Benefits/Strengths......................................…………………………………………….. |
13 |
|
Conclusion..........................................…………………..……………………………… |
14 |
|
References..........................................………………………………………………….. |
15 |
|
Appendices...........................................……………………….………………………... |
18. |
|
|
|
B. Organizations
That Provided Information for this Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. University
of Florida Career Ambassador Position Description |
|
|
|
|
|
G. Guidelines
for Referring Persons to Individual Counseling |
|
The
use of paraprofessionals, pre-professionals, and related peer advisors is a
long standing practice in a wide variety of educational, human services, and
healthcare settings, ranging from schools, libraries (Oberg, et al., 1992), community
service agencies, student affairs units (Carns, Carns, & Wright, 1993;
Frigault, Maloney, & Trevino, 1986; Winston & Ender, 1988;), counseling
centers (Eason, Platt, & Van House, 1985; Lenihan & Kirk, 1990), and
career services (Erickson & Olp, 1978; Kenzler, 1983; McKenzie &
Manoogian-O’Dell, 1988; Whitt, 1993). With such great dependence on the use of
paraprofessionals, it is surprising how little information has been published
in formal career development journals. One of the longest standing models of
the use of paraprofessionals in career services can be found at the University
of Missouri-Columbia. Several articles and publications have highlighted
various aspects of this program (Feehan & Wade, 1998; Hansen &
Johnston, 1986; McDaniels, Carter, Heinzen, Candrl, & Wieberg, 1994). As
best as the author can determine, there has not been a detailed survey on the
use of paraprofessionals in career services since the study conducted by Whitt
(1993). The survey used by the authors of the current report can be found in
Appendix A. This paper is intended to provide a current overview of the status
of paraprofessional programs using information from a sampling of settings
across the country. The settings were contacted based on the fact that they had
a currently functioning paraprofessional program that was documented in the
literature or through their web site, or personally known to the authors.
Appendix B provides a list of the schools or settings that provided information
for this report. Appendix C contains a list of additional resources that may be
helpful to persons researching this topic.
Due
to the variety of interpretations of the term “paraprofessional,” the authors
believe some discussion of this term is necessary before proceeding. Webster’s Collegiate
Dictionary (1997) defines paraprofessional as “a trained aide who assists a
professional person” (p. 843). This very general definition is subject to a
wide variety of interpretations and can be used as an umbrella term for a wide
range of positions. Various professional organizations in the field have
developed more detailed definitions. For example, NACE’s 1998 Professional
Standards for College and University Career Services included a discussion of
pre-professional staff which contained the following statement:
“Paraprofessionals, work-study, interns, graduate assistants, or volunteer
staff must be carefully selected, trained in helping skills and institutional
procedures, closely supervised, and evaluated regularly. Under supervision,
interns from appropriate graduate programs may counsel students within the
limitations of their knowledge and skills” (NACE, 1998). Ender, Schuette, and
Neuberger (undated) in their statement on the use of paraprofessionals in
student affairs focused on “undergraduate students employed by a division of
Student Affairs for the purpose of providing direct services to other students”
(p. 16). The California Registry for Professional Counselors and
Paraprofessionals (www.california-registry.org)
includes a very specific set of requirements for paraprofessionals. For
purposes of this report, the authors will use the term paraprofessional (PP) to
refer to all types of peer and paraprofessional career service providers.
This
paper primarily focuses on the use of paraprofessionals in college and
university career services, including both undergraduate and graduate students,
as well as persons not currently enrolled in school. However, much of what is
covered may be applicable to other student and human services settings. The
intent is to share information gathered from a variety of sources including the
current literature, web sites, listservs, telephone interviews, and the
authors’ personal experience. Topics include discussion of program titles,
recruitment and selection, the training process, roles of paraprofessionals,
supervision and evaluation, challenges and issues, and concluding remarks.
One
of the interesting findings in reviewing information related to this topic is
the varied titles given to persons working as PPs in career services. Some of
these titles include: career advisors, career assistants, career specialists,
peer advisors, and peer career assistants. A list of additional titles can be found
in Appendix D. Very little discussion can be found in the literature regarding
the choice of a particular title. “Peer” is defined as “one that is of equal
standing with another, one belonging to the same societal group especially
based on age, grade or status” (Merriam-Webster, 1997). The term peer in many
settings often implies that undergraduates are seeing their undergraduate
peers. As the UC Berkeley web page notes in its description of its peers
advisors: “Peer advisors offer students the opportunity to speak to an
individual who has been extensively trained about the services of the Career
Center, but who is also experiencing some of the same academic and social
issues with which many Cal students struggle” (http://career.berkeley.edu/peers/Peers.stm).
A similar description is provided on Indiana University Career Development
Center’s (CDC) web page (www.indiana.edu/~career/features/peer_advising.html):
“The Peer Advisors are undergraduate students who can answer any of your basic
career questions, help you effectively use the library’s resources and tell you
about the services the CDC has to offer.” Part of the rationale for using the
term “career advisor” in the authors’ setting was to avoid the implication that
a person might be seeing a professional counselor. We are less comfortable with
the term “peer” because our Center is open to the public and provides services to
persons from the community, including non-university students and adults.
Severy and Hernandez (2000), in choosing the title “career ambassador,” noted
that their goal was to choose a title that didn’t compete with other student
groups on campus. Career services and other settings that are planning to use
PPs may want to consider what working title best conveys the role of
paraprofessional staff and helps avoid confusion with other campus student
groups.
Career
services offices use a variety of means to recruit their peers or PPs. The
majority of the programs described in this report were targeting
undergraduates. Some of the most common methods for recruiting these
individuals included letters to key faculty, advisors and other staff,
advertising on the office web page, placing ads in the student newspaper and
“table tents in residence hall cafeterias” (McDaniels, et al, 1994, p. 100),
fliers on campus, recruiting through the work-study office, and announcements
in classes. Many offices relied on current peers to refer students. Cornell has
its peer advisors take information on the program to large lecture classes.
Other offices indicated that they recruit from their current pool of student
assistants who are already there functioning in some capacity, but not the peer
career advisor role (M. Ardino-Annucci, phone interview, July 2000; Severy
& Hernandez, 2000). One option that does not seem to have been fully
exploited is having PPs apply on-line. Auburn offers this option for its peer
career counselors; see the following Web site: www.auburn.edu/student_info/student_affairs/success/career/students/news/pcc/peer_info.html (J.
Walls, phone interview, July 2000). Most offices used a brief application form
or asked for a cover letter and resume. Only a few of the settings contacted
indicated that they include references as part of the application process. A
link to the career advisor application used in the authors’ setting can be
found at the following address: http://www.coe.fsu.edu/departments/hss/ccfinaid.html.
McDaniels, Candrl, and Blinne (1995) include a sample career specialist
application in their manual. In some cases, offices were also targeting
graduate assistants and interns from counseling, higher education and related
programs (N. Stahl, phone interview, July 2000; C. Shafer, phone interview, May
2000; G. Black, phone interview, June 2000). Offices that recruit graduate
students for internships or assistantships may even do mailings (both regular
mail and e-mail) to colleagues at institutions in their geographic area and or around
the country, as well as post the opportunity on career development-related
listservs.
Benedict, Casper,
Larson, Littlepage, and Panke (2000) offered these tips for recruiting and
selecting peer PPs:
·
Start early
·
Development
advertisement publications, brochures, etc.
·
Use networks and
referrals
·
Provide an
application and request referrals
·
Conduct the interview
process with the involvement of current peer paraprofessionals.
Hansen and Johnston
(1986) concluded that the “recruitment of top quality students is the
life-blood of any student staffed program and a career center’s para-pro
program is no exception” (p. 22).
The
qualities that offices look for in peer advisors tend to be very similar. The
University of Georgia’s Career Development Intern (CDI) brochure listed the
following qualities: “self-motivated, team player, enthusiastic, independent,
flexible, responsible, helpful, leader, comfortable speaker” (University of
Georgia Career Services Center, 1999, pg. 1). Benedict, et al (2000) suggested
the following “ideal characteristics”: student-oriented, friendly, helpful,
available time/reliability, diversity in majors and cultural backgrounds,
approachability, written and oral communication skills, and enthusiasm. Cornell
uses a two–sided application that gathers information on why the student is
interested in a peer advisor position, what their past workshop experience has
been, their top three skills, their computer skills, their campus activities,
and whether or not they are eligible for work-study funds. The interview rating
form used in selecting the University of Florida’s career ambassadors includes
items such as: motivation, coping with stress, communication, ability to
listen, knowledge of center, ability to cope with difficult interpersonal
situations, interest in career issues, ability to work with diverse
populations, commitment, campus knowledge, and desire to help others (Severy
& Hernandez, 2000). The University of Florida’s career ambassador program
also includes a GPA requirement, e.g., a 3.0 is required of prospective
applicants. At MIT, the position announcement for career development graduate
assistants stated: “candidates should be pursuing a graduate degree in higher
education administration, counseling, public or business administration, or a
related discipline. They should also be able to demonstrate a propensity toward
helping others, maturity, professionalism, and flexibility” (C. Pratt, e-mail,
March 2000). At the FSU Career Center, while the majority of PPs are graduate
level counseling students, we have occasionally brought on board undergraduates
who have completed the career planning class, who are majoring in
rehabilitation services, and who appear to have a sincere interest in being
involved in career services delivery.
Offices
varied in their preferences for the class levels of PPs. Syracuse University
targets sophomores (C. Fulford, phone interview, May 2000). Other schools
include both freshmen and sophomores in their recruiting pool, while some institutions
will consider students at any class level. At the graduate level, both masters
and doctoral level students may be recruited. With respect to PPs’ major areas
of study, some schools are not overly concerned with majors, while other
offices seek to select PPs that provide as broad a coverage as possible of
academic areas. The University of Missouri recruitment flyer (McDaniels, et
al., 1995) emphasized that their program looks for a “diversity of students,
including minorities, non-minorities, internationals, freshmen, sophomores,
juniors, greeks, independents, male and females, all majors” (p. 33). As Feehan
and Wade (1998) noted in describing Missouri’s program: “our goal is to staff
the Center with a variety of academic majors with leadership experience/aptitude
while simultaneously building a culturally diverse team” (p. 154). Offices that
also recruit graduate level students typically seek majors in counseling,
higher education administration, or related disciplines.
There is a consistent message throughout the literature that a key aspect of paraprofessional programs is the selection process. In general, the interview and selection process for PPs involves several steps. Settings use varied rating systems as part of the selection process. For example, the Auburn Career Development Services office uses a 100 point scoring system, with 50 points allotted to the package of materials the applicant submits and the other 50 allotted to the interview, appearance, and ability to communicate (J. Walls, phone interview, July 2000). Another common thread is the use of a variety of staff members in the interview process. A tendency with programs using undergraduate PPs is to involve the current ones in the interview process for the new PPs (Severy & Hernandez, 2000; M Watson, e-mail, August 2000). For its graduate assistant/internship slots, MIT uses 3 people in the interview process, but begins with phone interviews, then brings individuals to campus to participate in group interviews. The candidates are given a project to work on as a group (G. Black, phone interview, June, 2000). Regardless of the format and process used, these procedures are key to the success of any paraprofessional program. As Kenzler (1983) noted: “…we have discovered that carefully selecting competent, qualified students is the best way to guarantee success. Although selecting qualified students is somewhat subjective…we strive to identify outstanding students who possess the motivation, natural abilities, and developed skills to make a significant contribution to the center and its mission” (p. 60).
Many
of the offices involved in using peer advisors or PPs have developed extensive
training materials for use with their program. Hansen and Johnston (1986),
while acknowledging the importance of recruiting talented students, also stated
that the training component may be the key factor that contributes to the long
term success of a paraprofessional program. Similarly, Angela Bannon at DePaul
University (e-mail, August 2000) noted that for peer advising services to be
successful, peers must go through extensive training.
One of the longest standing and most comprehensive PP training programs has been developed at the University of Missouri-Columbia. The University of Missouri’s training consists of more than 100 hours, which includes classroom training, mentoring and on-the-job training. They make their training manual available for purchase to interested persons. For more information contact: Craig Benson, Director, Student Career Services, at the University of Missouri-Columbia Career Center, e-mail: BensonCA@missouri.edu. One feature of the Missouri training program, is the opportunity for their career specialists to evaluate the training program. The PP trainees are asked to comment on such things as: size of the training group, time of the training sessions, topics covered, what they liked best and least, ideas to improve the training process, etc. (McDaniels, et al, 1995).
Most
schools seem to conduct their training some number of days before the start of
school. Some schools begin in the spring semester before the PPs actually start
their assignment in the fall. Syracuse University provides 24 hours of initial
training in the fall, which includes one 6 hour retreat and approximately 12
weeks of 1 ˝ hour training on the basics of career development. The spring
training is an additional 16 hours, one 6 hour retreat and ten 1 hour training
sessions continuing on the career development process and on leadership and
character-ethical development as it pertains to counseling students (C.
Fulford, phone interview, May 2000). The University of Wisconsin River Falls
orients its peer advisors one week prior to the beginning of classes. The
training covers resume and cover letter writing (as well as hands-on activities
such as critiquing cover letters and resumes); interviewing (including
participation in mock interviews); job-hunting strategies; orientation to the
career resource center; hands-on work with DISCOVER and FirstPlace
registration; and training on office operations (C. Croonquist, e-mail, May
1997). Lehigh University (M. Watson, e-mail, August 2000) covers the following
topics in its peer educator training:
·
office operations and
staff
·
resume critiquing and
cover letters
·
on-campus recruiting
systems and online registration process
·
library and related
resources
·
basic counseling
techniques, interventions, and referral
·
job search techniques
·
graduate school
information
·
basic interviewing
techniques
Angela
Davis (e-mail, August 2000) reported that their training takes place 7 days
prior to the first week of classes in the fall, and then ongoing training is
provided throughout the school year at bi-weekly staff meetings. Rice’s PP
training program includes a full day retreat on a Sunday (H. Glantzberg, phone
interview, May 2000). Auburn University has a 5 week training program for its
Peer Career Counselors (PCCs). They train for 10 hours per week and are paid
during training. Jack Walls at Auburn is willing to share his PowerPoint
presentation used in the peer training. He can be reached at wallsll@auburn.edu. At Florida State
University, our career advisors are required to complete the training on an
unpaid basis. To learn more about Florida State’s Career Advisor training
program visit the following web site: http://www.career.fsu.edu/documents/technical%20reports/Technical%20Report%2027/Technical%20Report%2027.htm.
Most
offices use a variety of training techniques which includes lecture, practical
hands-on, role plays, discussion, and reading. Many settings also use a series
of self-directed checklists which trainees can complete on their own time.
Severy and Hernandez (2000) provided a syllabus for a semester long course used
in training the career resource center’s career ambassadors. A key resource we
use for training PPs who may have less experience in a helping/counseling role
is the book by Meier and Davis entitled The Elements of Counseling
(2001). Many centers involve their experienced or advanced peers advisors in
training activities. A key aspect of the training process is providing
opportunities for observation and shadowing. A consistent message we’ve
received from our PPs is that they learn best by observing other staff. Warren
Kistner at Illinois Wesleyan University (e-mail , August 2000) noted that their
new peers shadow their counterparts during the spring semester before their
year starts. One school requires its peers in training to shadow or observe 3
career counseling sessions, 3 on-call advising sessions and to participate in 2
hours of shadowing current career ambassadors (Severy & Hernandez, 2000).
One of the difficulties we’ve experienced with our paraprofessional training is
that it is done in late summer during a period when Center traffic is slow so
there is less of an opportunity to observe experienced staff working with
clients. PPs are encouraged to continue their shadowing of experienced staff
once the fall semester begins and the client traffic picks up.
Benedict, et al
(2000) offered the following tips regarding training peer paraprofessionals:
·
conduct primary
training and orientation before classes begin
·
provide written
training manuals and support materials
·
use both group and
individual work during training
·
provide time for
staff teambuilding
·
bring guest speakers
in to discuss their areas of expertise
·
provide for ongoing
training and evaluation throughout the academic school year
Most offices provide some form of ongoing training, both through informal mentoring and a weekly or monthly meeting. The focus of these meetings may be a specialty topic (how to effectively use computer-assisted career guidance systems, how to deal with “difficult” clients or “heavy” issues”) and/or office issues (e.g., policies, procedures, etc.), and/or internal communications (upcoming events, presentations, etc.). Some settings include case reviews as a key aspect of the ongoing training.
A resource for training that has
recently emerged that has the potential to be useful in training
paraprofessionals is the Career Development Facilitator (CDF) curriculum (http://ncda.org/cdf.htm), published by the
National Career Development Association. Most of the initial use of this
curriculum has tended to be in non-college and university settings, although
some institutions have put their staff through the training. Most of the 12
competencies addressed by the CDF curriculum are directly relevant to the work
of peer career advisors, including: helping skills, working with diverse
populations, ethical and legal issues, career development theories, labor
market information and resources, technology and career development,
employability skills, promotion and public relations. Given that many offices
don’t have formal training manuals that they use with peer advisors, the CDF
curriculum, with some minor modifications, could serve a useful function in
this regard. Another source of information with regard to the training of
persons in career services is the recent special issue of the Adult Career
Planning and Development Journal (Feller & Davies, 1999). While much of
this is focused on graduate students in training, it may serve as a source of
ideas for training other populations as well.
The
roles of peer career advisors or PPs tend to be similar across a variety of
settings. Some places view them as their “front line” advisors (A. Bannon,
e-mail, August, 2000). Ithaca College (Office of Career Planning and Placement,
1998) included the following requirements for its Peer Career Assistants (PCA):
four scheduled office hours per week; one-hour meeting for training and
evaluation every Thursday at 12:00 Noon, and participation in the recruitment
and selection of the following year’s PCA staff. Many offices require their PPs
to do some minimum amount of walk-in career advising each week. For example,
MIT’s PPs all do walk-in career advising each weekday for 2 hours (G. Black,
phone interview, June 2000). Some of the most common paraprofessional tasks
include: assisting clients in locating information in the career library;
resume critiquing (Green, 1995), mock interviews, assisting clients in using
CACG systems and Internet resources; helping with major selection, staffing
information tables, assisting at job fairs, and conducting outreach
presentations. At Rice University (H. Glantzberg, phone interview, May 2000)
each peer career advisor is assigned to one of the 8 residential colleges.
In
many settings, PPs play a key role in helping to get the word out about career
center services and programs. One very common model for outreach program
training is to allow the peer advisors to observe a staff member presenting a
workshop prior to giving their own; then they have the opportunity to co-lead a
workshop with a professional staff member, before launching out on their own.
Staff members assist peers in this process by creating “scripted workshops” on
key career development and job hunting topics, that may include overhead
transparencies, PowerPoint presentations on disk, key hand-outs, etc., to
alleviate some of the prep work and to have a “presentation kit” that is ready
to go. At DePaul University, peer advisors attend a session on “Presentation
Skills” (A. Bannon, e-mail, August 2000). Many offices use peer advisors to
reach out to targeted populations (e.g., residence halls, academic
organizations, commuter groups, etc.).Lenz (2000) provided a job description
for their office’s graduate student career advisors. For a more detailed look
at specific paraprofessional roles, see the job descriptions provided by the
University of Florida and M.I.T., in Appendices E and F respectively.
Some offices assign PPs to various staff members based on what they’d like to do and the needs of the office, and these unique responsibilities are reflected in their position titles. For example, some PPs may have an interest in the career resource area, others may be more interested in outreach/publicity or technology. Warren Kistner (e-mail, August 2000) at Illinois Wesleyan University provided some examples:
Publicity Coordinator—handles all publicity for office including listserv,
posters, fliers, newspaper advertising, radio station, etc.
S.E.A.R.C.H. (Start Early and
Reach Career Heights) Assistant—plans
programming targeted to underclassmen and undecided students.
Communications Peers—publishes three Career Center newsletters; involves writing
and editing the work of other students.
Volunteer Coordinator—serves as liaison between the community and campus.
Technology Peer—maintains web site and trouble shoots technical problems
within the office.
Recruitment Peer—coordinates a mock interview program which involves
inviting Human Resources professionals to conduct mock interviews with
students.
With the increasing use of the Internet as a virtual
source of information on college and university career services, many centers
are highlighting the roles of PPs on their career center web sites. Some
examples can be found at the following addresses:
http://www.ithaca.edu/careers/who2.htm
http://web.missouri.edu/~cppcwww/staff/carspec.shtml
http://www.indiana.edu/~career/features/peer_advising.html
http://riceinfo.rice.edu/projects/careers/students/getting-help/advisors.shtml
One
key difference in many paraprofessional programs has to do with the use of
career assessment resources by PPs. In the majority of programs contacted for
this report, undergraduate peer career assistants were not using any type of
career assessment resources. As Carmen Croonquist at the University of
Wisconsin River-Falls noted: “Students (i.e., peer advisors) are exposed to developmental
career planning assessments (such as the Myers-Briggs, the SDS, and the Strong
Interest Inventory so they understand what information these assessments
provide) but they do not engage in any actual counseling” (C. Croonquist,
e-mail, May 1997). The exceptions were a few settings where PPs were allowed to
use card sorts and the Self-Directed Search. Also noticeably absent was the use
of any type of pre-screening or readiness assessment (Sampson, Peterson,
Reardon, & Lenz, 2000) tools by PPs, including such things as the Career
Beliefs Inventory, Career Factors Inventory, Career Thoughts Inventory (http://www.career.fsu.edu/documents/career%20thoughts%20inventory/Use%20and%20Development%20of%20CTI.htm),
My Vocational Situation, etc. In settings where graduate assistants and interns
were part of the staffing mix, these individuals did make regular use of career
assessment tools. For example, as Sue Sgambelluri reported: graduate assistants
(GA) at Indiana University’s Career Development Center largely function as
professional staff. Prior to administering career assessments with clients, GAs
must observe interpretations, shadow, and process interpretations with a supervisor
(phone interview, May 2000). In the authors’ research for this report, it
seemed clear that most offices work very hard to make sure PPs do not engage in
tasks outside the bounds of their expertise. It is interesting to note that
many offices use PPs to assist clients using computer-based guidance systems.
What is not entirely clear is how they insure that PPs explain and interpret
the assessments in CACGs systems in a manner consistent with ethical
guidelines.
Finally,
one important issue for many offices is distinguishing students functioning in
peer advisor roles from other work study students who may be performing duties
that are more clerical in nature. This is often accomplished not only through
the job description and training process, but also through more visible means
such as providing peer career advisors with specially designed shirts and name
tags, and creating separate work areas/office space. Recognizing PPs in this
way acknowledges the time and energy they have put in to reach this level of
responsibility. It is also important that clients coming into a Center know
when they are engaging someone who possesses a certain level of skill and
expertise in providing career assistance, e.g., a PP and when they are talking
to someone who is simply functioning in a clerical role.
Offices
vary in the hour requirements they place on PPs. Ten hours seems to be the most
common amount. Severy and Hernandez (2000) indicated that their peer career
ambassadors work 6-10 hours per week, including paid time to attend a weekly
supervision meeting. Their university publishes the schedule for its career
ambassadors on its web site: http://www.crc.ufl.edu/Library/semesterschedules_shell.shtml.
They stressed the importance of asking for a minimum time commitment. One
school reported that their career advisors work 12 hours per week. Another
indicated that their peers can do up to 20 hours. Some offices are very
structured with respect to the time schedules PPs must keep, e.g., they must
cover the drop-in career advising desk a set number of hours, while others
allow their PP staff to simply put in their hours as their schedules permit.
MIT’s Graduate Assistants/Interns work 18-20 hours per week for up to 9 months.
As MIT noted on its position announcement, graduate interns must be available
for periodic evening career-related programs, as well as commit one morning a
week to be at the office at 8 AM (C. Pratt, e-mail, March 2000). In the
authors’ center, the minimum commitment for graduate assistants is 10 hours per
week, while interns may work up to 20 hours.
One
important logistical issue is considering the use of PPs has to do with the
allocation of office space. A center may need to ask some of the following
questions:
·
Do we have sufficient
space to house PPs?
·
Will they have a
separate office where they can work on projects, make phone calls, etc.?
·
Will they have
mailboxes located with the rest of the staff or in a separate location?
·
Will they have access
to a phone, computer, etc. in their work area?
·
Will they have a file
cabinet or other storage space for maintaining their work materials, projects,
training information, etc.?
·
If the office uses a
copier with a code, will each peer have a code or will they use another staff
member’s code?
It is unlikely that most offices can
afford to allocate much more than possibly one office that is the work space
for paraprofessional staff. The kind of space made available may be to some
extent dictated by the roles and responsibilities of the PPs. Some will need
regular access to a computer, others may need access to a phone, others may
need a large area to spread out in when doing project work, and others may need
a space that allows for some level of confidentiality. Besides just having
space to work, it seems important for PPs to have an area they can “call their
own.” This area is also a place to socialize, catch up on personal projects
before coming on duty, and/or do school work. In our center, the
paraprofessional office is often a place where food appears for the group to
share in, cartoons are put on the bulletin board, and related activities occur.
Most
offices seem to have one or two models for supervision of PPs. Either there is
a primary coordinator of the program who provides supervision, or the PPs are
assigned to several professional staff members who provide the primary
supervision. Some settings have one supervisor who focuses on the graduate
level staff, while another person focuses on supervision of the undergraduate
paraprofessional staff. PPs who may have a special area of focus, e.g.,
technology, marketing, may receive specific supervision and evaluation from the
staff member overseeing those functions. One program described in the early
literature indicated that each paraprofessional in its office received a final
performance appraisal which involved written, self, supervisor, and peer
evaluations (College Placement Council, 1986). Many settings noted that
supervision also occurs in the format of a weekly staff meeting. PPs may share
difficult cases or situations they have dealt with and gather ideas from the
group on other strategies for dealing with those cases. It may be the case in
some settings that persons who end up supervising PPs have not received formal
supervision training, particularly in the area of counseling supervision. The
author has found it helpful to rely on some key resources in the profession to
help guide the supervision process. Books on this process are readily available
through professional counseling associations. Some examples include: Borders
& Leddick, 1987; Campbell, 2000; and Falvey, 1987. One area that was not
addressed by most schools had to do with situations where PPs violate office
guidelines. The University of Missouri at Columbia appears to be one of the few
schools that has a detailed procedure in place for handing these types of
situations. They use what are called “CPPC Incident Reports.” Students would
receive up to 3 warnings before they would be terminated by the Center for a
fourth offense.
Another important consideration is
how to give positive feedback. One non-school based setting (Telephone
Counseling & Referral Service, 2000) that uses volunteer PPs, has a special
section in its Daily Log Notebook, which is read by all PPs when they come on
duty. The section contains certificates that single out individuals for special
recognition. University of Missouri Columbia has a “Center Stud(ette) of the
Week” form that congratulates a particular paraprofessional for accomplishments
above and beyond the call of duty. In many offices, weekly staff development
meetings also provide an opportunity to offer positive feedback and
recognition. At Rice University (H. Glantzberg, phone interview, May 2000), the
staff picks out one peer career advisor who did something above and beyond the
call of duty, and he or she receives a goody bag which is presented at the
beginning of the weekly meeting. In the authors’ setting, PPs are singled out
for their contributions in e-mails that are sent to all staff.
The
written performance evaluation of PPs varies somewhat from setting to setting
and also in terms of the evaluation of undergraduate vs. graduate students. In
the case of graduate students, they may have a formal evaluation form required
by their department. There may also be a form used by the particular office or
center where the paraprofessional is working. McDaniels, et al (1995) provide
several examples in their Career Specialist Selection & Training Manual.
The authors’ setting (Lenz, 2000) uses an evaluation form that reflects the
National Career Development Association competencies (http://ncda.org/about/polccc.html).
Many settings did not have a formal form that was used with undergraduates.
Based
on a review of the literature and telephone interviews, it appears that the
more common model is for PPs to be paid. Programs that began with unpaid PPs,
often evolved to paid PP staffing. Many offices recruit their PPs through
work-study programs. Some offices will continue to fund students whose work
study money runs out using “temporary services money.” The author’s setting
uses funds that are allocated through the primary budget, which are referred to
as OPS funds which also function as a funding source for other temporary staff
working in the Center (e.g., graphics assistant, technical assistant). When
these funds are no longer available we also have access to auxiliary funds
which are generated through fees charged to employers and students. Settings
vary in the extent to which they offer higher salaries to PPs who continue on
with them. One of the options that some offices have when offering positions to
graduate students is to provide a “tuition waiver” in addition to the actual
salary. This option makes a fairly low paying position much more attractive,
especially to students who may be paying out-of-state tuition. One university
funds its undergraduate Career Development Intern program through donations
provided by a corporate sponsor. Another office received a small grant from one
of its recruiters to cover the cost of training manuals, shirts, snacks, and
other goodies to support and encourage the peers advisors (C. Fulford, phone
interview, May 2000). UCLA’s career advocates are unpaid but they have a more
limited role that primarily involves publicizing career services to students.
One unique arrangement involved the peer career assistants (PCAs) at the
University of Minnesota-Morris. The group started as volunteers in the career
center, but then they became a formal student organization and received
activity fee funding from the school’s Student Activities Council. Now the PCAs
are paid work-study students-employees of the Career Center (G. Donovan,
e-mail, April 2000).
Persons
who train and supervise PPs in career services as well as other areas of
student affairs must give some thought to communicating information about
ethical issues and professional standards. While many professional associations
(e.g., American College Personnel Association, ACPA – www.acpa.nche.edu/pubs/prncstan.htm,
American Counseling Association, ACA – www.counseling.org/resources/codeofethics.htm,
National Career Development Association, NCDA – www.ncda.org/about/poles.html,
National Association of Colleges and Employers, NACE – www.naceweb.org/about/principl.html,
National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, NASPA – www.naspa.org/about/standards.htm)
produce guidelines in this area, much of what is included in these documents
does not speak directly to the work of PPs. When training or supervising PPs,
staff may want to highlight aspects of one or more of these documents that
particularly speak to the tasks that PPs are involved in that particular
setting. Depending on the setting, PPs may have access to confidential files
and/or may have one-on-one interactions with students where personal information
is shared. The training program used at University of Missouri Columbia for its
Career Specialists PPs includes a section on paraprofessional ethics and an
outline of an Ethical Decision-Making Process (McDaniels, et al, 1995). In the
authors’ setting, because we are working primarily with graduate students in
the field of career counseling, the NCDA ethical guidelines are used. Key
aspects of these guidelines that typically need to be emphasized with PPs are
confidentiality, knowing when to consult with a supervisor, and knowing when to
refer a case that is beyond their expertise. Carns, Carns, and Wright (1993)
indicated that one of the problematic areas identified in their research
“centered around legal/ethical issues, screening, and the ability of student
PPs to respect their limits and abilities” (p. 362). Paritzsky (1981) noted the
lack of guidelines for peer counselors to assist them in making effective
referrals. Most persons contacted for this report stressed the fact that
professional staff were available for consultation when PPs felt they were in a
situation beyond their skills and training. Our center has developed a general
set of guidelines for staff, including PPs, to use in making determinations
about referrals to individual counseling (see Appendix G).
While most offices offer positive endorsement of peer or paraprofessional programs, these programs are not without their issues and challenges. While PPs often contribute a valuable service to an office, as Frigault, Maloney and Trevino (1986) suggested, student services who are considering implementing a paraprofessional program must be aware of the increased time demands it will place on them. While PPs provide additional staff resources, they also increase staff responsibilities with respect to training and supervision. Benedict, et al (2000) noted a number of challenges associated with peer paraprofessional programs including: the loss of students during the training process, pressures of student’s academic life may not mesh well with office pressures, danger of asking too much of these students, limitations on their time schedule due to class conflicts, takes time and money to do these programs well, and non-paid peer programs are competing with paid positions.
Another issue has to do with funding. In her study, Whitt (1993) noted that some programs had dissolved due to budget-related issues. There are definite costs associated with paraprofessionals, ranging from the actual salaries, to printing of training materials, and to the extras like shirts, name tags, etc. If a center opts to initiate a paraprofessional program, they need to consider possible sources for funds to support this type of program, be it a corporate sponsor, campus-based grant or student government funding. There is a great deal of anecdotal data that supports the continuation of these programs but very little cost effectiveness/cost efficiency data.
With respect to the use of PPs in the service delivery process, in the authors’ setting there is an ongoing concern that while the PPs are thoroughly trained, they are often lacking in the in-depth skills and knowledge that permanent staff members with advanced degrees possess. One can’t help but have some concern about the unevenness in service delivery that may occur under these circumstances. As McDaniels, et al (1994) suggested, committing to a PP program means letting go to some extent. “Giving up responsibility may mean that some programs, presentations, brochures, etc., may turn out differently than envisioned, in fact they may not resemble anything a career professional would have created” (p. 108). Settings considering the use of PPs to supplement their services must decide how willing they are to bestow a level of trust and confidence in their paraprofessional staff.
There seems to be a fairly universal perspective among the settings sampled for this report that, despite the challenges and issues that PP programs often present, these programs bring many benefits as well. Benedict, et al (2000) listed “Top Ten Benefits for Peer Paraprofessional Programs” which included such things as: they are the best advertisers for our programs; they bring in a constant flow of new ideas and energy; they offer amazing talent at a bargain price; they bring in specialized expertise and they keep us young! Another person described them as “invaluable” (M. Merrill, e-mail, August 2000). McDaniels, et al (1994) cited numerous examples of where paraprofessional programs have proved to be a valuable resource. Heppner and Johnston (1993) suggested that many students actually prefer to receive help from a peer rather than a professional. For many educational and human services settings, PP programs allow them to reach many more students than they would be able to otherwise (Easton, Platt, & Van House, 1985). Feehan and Wade (1998) echoed a similar point of view noting that “the Career Center could not feasibly provide either the quantity or quality of services presently available without the contribution of its paraprofessional staff” (p. 153).
This report reflects a limited, but current survey of paraprofessional programs in career services and related fields. The information reinforces the notion that PPs continue to play an important role in the provision of career services. Issues that need further attention in this area include how best to deliver all the training information that these individuals need to know to function effectively. Training of these individuals requires a significant investment of staff time and resources and decisions must be made about how best to use this time and what are the essential knowledge and skills these students must master before they can serve students and other clients effectively. An area that is not widely reported on is the screening process used by offices to determine which individuals seeking services can best be served by a paraprofessional and which individuals need the services of a more highly trained staff member. The criteria for making these determinations seemed to be vaguely defined at best. Also, there seems to be a great deal of variability with respect to evaluation. This includes evaluation of the work done by the PPs as well as evaluation of these types of programs in general. It is increasingly common to find information about paraprofessional programs being shared on career services-related listservs such as Professional JobTalk and JobPlace. This type of ongoing exchange will play an important role in the continued development and evaluation of these programs.
Borders, L.
D., & Leddick, G. R. (1987). Handbook of counseling supervision.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.
Benedict, A.,
Casper, B., Larson, L., Littlepage, G., & Panke, J. (2000). Utilizing
paraprofessionals to expand student outreach. National Career Development
Association annual conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
Campbell,
J. M. (2000). Becoming an effective supervisor: A workbook for counselors
and psychotherapists. Philadelphia, PA: Accelerated Development.
Carns,
A. W., Carns, M. R., & Wright, J. (1993). Students as paraprofessionals in
four year colleges and universities: Current practice compared to prior
practice. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 358-63.
College
Placement Council. (Spring 1986). Using paraprofessionals in the career center:
an award-winning model. Journal of Career Planning & Employment, 46,
59-61.
Eason,
M. J., Platt, C. P., & Van House, C. L. (1985). A cost-effective training
program for paraprofessionals in a university counseling center. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 64, 151-153.
Ender, S. C.,
Schuette, C. G., & Neuberger, C. G. (no date). Proposed standards on use of
student paraprofessionals in student affairs. Cited in the University of
Missouri Career Center’s Career Specialist Selection and Training Manual.
Columbia, MO.
Erickson,
E., & Olp, G. (Eds.). (1978). A model for developing and operating an
adult guidance center (Report No. CG012849). Tucson, AZ: Arizona Center for
Educational Research and Development, University of Arizona. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 160 917)
Falvey,
J. E. (1987). Handbook of administrative supervision. Washington, DC:
Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.
Feehan,
P. F., & Wade, S. L. (1998). The paraprofessional alternative. Journal
of Career Development, 25(2), 149-57.
Feller,
R., & Davies, T. G. (Eds.) (Summer 1999). Innovative models of teaching
career counselors (Special Issue). Career Planning and Adult Development
Journal, 15(2).
Frigault,
R., Maloney, G., & Trevino, C. (1986). Training paraprofessionals to
facilitate leadership development. Journal of College Student Personnel,27(3),
281-282.
Green,
M. E. (Summer 1995). Training paraprofessionals in the art of the resume
critique. Journal of Career Planning & Employment, 55(4), 40-44.
Hansen,
R. N., & Johnston, M. C. (1986). College students as paraprofessional
career specialists. Journal of Career Development,13, 18-29.
Heppner,
M. J., & Johnston, J. A. (1993). Career counseling: A call to action. In J.
R. Rayman (Ed.), The changing role of career services. (pp. 57-78). New
Directions in Student Services, no. 62. San Francisco, CA:, Jossey-Bass Inc.
Kenzler,
B. (Fall 1983). A model for paraprofessionals in career planning. Journal of
College Placement, 44, 54-61.
Lenihan,
G., & Kirk, W. G. (1990). Using student paraprofessionals in the treatment
of eating disorders. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68(3),
332-35.
Lenz,
J. G. (2000). Paraprofessionals in career services: The Florida State
University model. Tallahassee, FL: Center for the Study of Technology in
Counseling and Career Development. [On-line] Available: http://www.career.fsu.edu/documents/technical%20reports/Technical%20Report%2027/Technical%20Report%2027.htm.
McDaniels,
R. M., Candrl, K. I., & Blinne, W. R. (1995). Career specialist
selection and training manual. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Career
Center.
McDaniels,
R. M.; Carter, J. K.; & Heinzen, C. J., Candrl, K. I., & Wieberg, A. M.
(Winter 1994). Paraprofessionals: A dynamic staffing model. Journal of
Career Development, 21(2), 95-109.
McKenzie,
I., & Manoogian-O’Dell, M. (1988). Expanding the use of students in
career services: Current programs and resources. Alexandria, VA: American
College Personnel Association.
Meier,
S. T., & Davis, S. R. (2001). The elements of counseling. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Merriam-Webster,
Incorporated. (1997). Merriam-Webster’s College Dictionary, 10th
ed., Springfield, MA: Author.
NACE. (1998). Professional standards for college and university career services. Bethlehem, PA: Author. [On- line] Available: http://www.naceweb.org/about/principl.html.
Oberg,
L. R. and others. (1992). The role, status, and working conditions of
paraprofessionals: A national survey of academic libraries. College and
Research Libraries, 53(3), 215-38.
Office of Career Planning & Placement, Ithaca College. (1998). Peer career advisor information sheet. Ithaca, NY: Author.
Paritzsky,
R. S. (1981). Training peer counselors: The art of referral. Journal of
College Student Personnel, 22, 528-532.
Sampson,
J. P., Jr., Peterson, G. W., Reardon, R. C., & Lenz, J. G. (2000). Using
readiness assessment to improve career services: A cognitive information
processing approach. Career Development Quarterly, 49, 146-174.
Severy,
L., & Hernandez, C. (2000). Career ambassadors: Using peer power in the
delivery of career services. Presentation at the National Career
Development Association conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
Telephone
Counseling & Referral Service. (2000). Daily log notebook.
Tallahassee, FL: Author. [On-line] Available: http://www.tcrs211.org.
University
of Georgia Career Services Center (1999). Career development interns
brochure. Athens, GA: Author.
Whitt,
M. J. (1993). Training peer paraprofessionals in career services: An analysis of
current practices. The College of William and Mary; 0261, Dissertation
Abstracts International, Vol. 54-10A, Page 3684, 00171 Pages.
Winston,
R. B., Jr., & Ender, S. C. (1988). Use of student paraprofessionals in
divisions of college student affairs. Journal of Counseling and Development,
66(10), 466-73.
Please
describe the screening, interviewing process used in selecting
paraprofessionals? Do you have a “formal” recruitment process? How are these
opportunities advertised, if at all?
On
average, how many paraprofessionals (including interns, graduate assistants,
peer counselors, etc.) are on staff in a given period (semester, quarter,
year)?
What
is the mix of undergraduates, graduate students?
Who
on the staff coordinates? What is that person’s degree/background? Who else on
the staff participates in the training?
How
long has this program been operating?
How
long is the training? How often does it occur throughout the year?
Does
the training program vary according to the background of the individuals?
Can
the training be done on an individual, self-directed basis or does a group go
through together?
What
does the training consist of? Format? Types of materials, manuals, resources
used in training? Are there any commercially published resources that you have
found particularly useful for training?
What
opportunities are there for ongoing training once the initial training is
completed?
What
services/program functions do paraprofessionals get involved in?
How
do the roles of undergraduates differ from graduates, if at all? Do
paraprofessionals select, administer, or interpret career assessments?
Who
provides supervision for the paraprofessionals?
How
do staff assess the performance of paraprofessionals?
How
is feedback given? In what format? Group vs. individual?
How
often?
Do
more experienced paraprofessionals receive a higher rate of pay?
Source(s)
of funding to cover paraprofessional appointments.
Other comments
Auburn University
Beloit College
Cornell University
DePaul University
Florida State
University
Illinois Wesleyan
University
Indiana University
Ithaca College
Loyola College,
Maryland
Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
Rice University
Southwest Texas State
University
SUNY Brockport
SUNY Cortland
SUNY Oswego
Syracuse University
Telephone Counseling
& Referral Service
University of
California-Berkeley
University of
California-Los Angeles
University of Florida
University of Georgia
University of
Minnesota-Morris
University of
Mississippi
University of
Missouri-Columbia
University of
Wisconsin-River Falls
*Information was
gathered through personal interviews, phone interviews, and e-mail
communication.
The sites below were
viewed by the authors during the course of this project and may be useful as an
additional source of information.
Sample Web sites:
A site focused on
peer educators who work in alcohol and drug education; but many of the training
materials include information relevant to a variety of peer advisor programs,
e.g., listening skills, confrontation skills, presentation and programming
skills.
http://career.berkeley.edu/peers/Peers.stm
Another example of
how a career center profiles its peer advisors on its Web site.
http://www.cdf-global.org/index2.htm
A site that explains
how a person who does not have graduate level training as a career counselor
can become credentialed as a career development facilitator (CDF).
http://www.counseling.uci.edu/
Example of a peer
education program that operates out of a university counseling center.
http://web.missouri.edu/~cppcwww/staff/carspec.shtml
An example of how one
career center profiles its paraprofessionals (called career specialists) on its
web page.
Web page of the
National Peer Helper Association; many of their resources focus on peer
programs with younger individuals (e.g., middle and high school) but some
information on the site can be useful in planning peer programs, including the
“Checklist for a Peer Helping Program.”
http://www.wartburg.edu/careers/pathjobDes.html
Wartburg College
Career Services Center’s job description for its paraprofessional consultants.
http://www.california-registry.org/paraprofessional_requirements.htm
Site that provides
information on the requirements that must be met to be on the California
Registry of career paraprofessionals.
Career Advisors
Career Advocates
Career Ambassadors
Career Assistants
Career Associates
Career Consultants
Career Development
Facilitator (CDF)
Career Development
Interns (CDI)
Career Education and
Outreach Peer Mentors (CEOs)
Career Peer Advisors
Career Peers
Career Specialists
Outreach Career
Center Presenters
Paraprofessional
Career Consultants
Peer Advisors
Peer Career
Assistants
Peer Career
Counselors
Peer Counselors
Peer Educators
University of Florida
Career Resource Center
CAREER AMBASSADOR POSITION
DESCRIPTION
Purpose:
The CRC Career
Ambassador Program provides opportunities for University of Florida
undergraduate and graduate students to assist fellow UF students with career
information and advising services within the Career Resource Center. Initial
training begins in mid-late January. Career Ambassadors provide 5-10 hours of service
per week and are asked to make a commitment of two semesters after training.
Primary Responsibilities:
Greet students
entering the CRC and direct them to appropriate personnel and resources within
the center. Answer questions pertaining to how students may utilize CRC
services.
Staff regularly
scheduled "Peer Advising Hours" in the Career Center Resource
Library. Advising covers a variety of topics including: critiquing cover
letters and resumes, assisting with on-line job searches, helping students find
information about intended majors or careers, and providing referrals to other
CRC services.
Refer students to
appropriate CRC programs including workshops, library resources, on-line
resources, Computer-Assisted Guidance Programs, on-campus interviewing and
GRAD, internships and co-ops, and counseling/advising.
Develop a strong
knowledge of major resources utilized in the CRC library and Audio/Visual Lab.
Provide proactive assistance to students in these areas.
Conduct outreach
presentations and tours of the Career Resource Center.
Conduct mock
interviews.
Participate in weekly
Career Ambassador meetings.
Additional Responsibilities:
Help with CRC
publicity.
Assist with campus
interview registration and answer questions about the recruiting process.
Assist with
recruitment and training of new Career Ambassadors.
Staff special career
programs and events.
Answer phones and
provide back-up to information desk and library personnel.
Minimum Qualifications:
Satisfactory academic
standing with a GPA of 3.0 or above.
Strong interpersonal
communication skills.
Motivated worker who
enjoys a fast-paced environment.
5-10 hours per week
and two semester minimum time commitment, after semester of training.
Training:
Career Ambassadors
will be provided training to prepare them to be effective paraprofessionals.
Training consists of a one-credit hour course offered in the spring semester.
Training will consist of initial formal training sessions followed by job
shadowing with experienced Ambassadors. There also will be regular, on-going
training sessions throughout the Career Ambassador Program.
Time Commitment:
Selected students
must be able to begin in mid-late January. Flexible scheduling of work hours is
allowed, but you should have at least 6 hours per week to commit. Training,
work, and meeting schedules are determined at the beginning of each semester by
group consensus.
Benefits:
Career Ambassadors
will be provided training in communication skills, facilitation skills,
interviewing skills, giving feedback, and career development theory and
application. In addition, they will become familiar with all of the programs,
skills, and services the CRC has to offer. Career Ambassadors will strengthen
their skills in such areas as providing information, assessing individual
needs, effective communication, and problem solving. They will gain valuable
work experience, help fellow students, and should be able to apply the career
information and theories they learn to their own career path. Due to the Career
Resource Center's high expectations of professionalism and commitment, the new
Career Ambassadors will paid bi-weekly at a rate of $5.15 per hour.
Application and
Selection:
Interested students
should complete and submit an application available at the CRC Information
desk, located on the first floor of the Reitz Union. Applicants will receive a
phone call regarding their status within two weeks. Candidates will be
interviewed starting December.
For Further
Information on the Career Resource Center and the Career Ambassador program,
check out our web-site at http://www.crc.ufl.edu
Sample Job
Responsibilities from the MIT Career Development Graduate
Assistantship/Internships/Practica Announcement
·
Career advising of undergraduate
and graduate students regarding resumes and cover letters, and quick questions
related to pre-professional advising and our web-based employment recruiting
system via “walk-in” appointments
·
Conducting practice
interviews individually with students
·
Marketing of career
development workshops and special events
·
Planning/organizing
events and workshops that involve employers
·
Presenting workshops
on topics related to: job searching using our web-based employment recruiting
system, freshman programming, and pre-professional advising
·
Data entry, use of
Word, PowerPoint, WWW, and web publishing
·
Participating in case
conferences and staff meetings
·
Organization/administrative
tasks (such as answering the phone, greeting employers, registering students
for events, assisting staff in preparation of events, etc.)
There will also be
the possibility of working on special projects. These include: Pre-Professional
Advising, the Survey of Graduates/Employer Relations, and the Freshman/Alumni
Summer Internship Program.
GUIDELINES FOR REFERRING PERSONS TO INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING:
Given the limited number of slots
allocated to individual counseling, we would like to make sure that this Career
Center resource is used with those individuals who need it the most. The
criteria below are designed to help staff make determinations regarding who
might best be helped through an individual counseling appointment. Just because
someone requests an appointment, is not a reason to schedule one!
Examples of clients considered
appropriate for individual counseling include:
1).those who
have not benefited from prior service delivery in a self-directed mode
2).those
needing more than self-help assistance with career decision-making (undecided
or indecisive)
3).those who
have a Career Thoughts Inventory (CTI) total score of 58 or higher; Career
Advisors can make their own judgments regarding referrals of clients with lower
CTI total scores who may have particular negative thoughts (individual CTI
items) that could be best addressed through one-on-one counseling; also,
through further conversation with clients, Career Advisors can use their
judgment to determine whether persons with high CTI total scores are
potentially “faking bad” and may not be as “needy” as the elevated total score
might suggest
4).those whose
presenting comments suggest that may have a low vocational identity (e.g.,
"I'm really confused," "I have no idea what I want to do,"
"I really need help"), and who continue to present themselves in this
manner after the initial intake
5).those with
a MVS Vocational Identity (VI) scores of 6 or lower; through further
conversation with clients, Career Advisors can use their judgment to determine
whether persons with low scores are “faking bad” and may not be as “needy” as
the low VI score might suggest
6).adults who
have experienced a job loss (e.g., been fired, downsized, etc.), who are
initiating a job search campaign, and who are having difficulty coping
7).adult
clients with multiple, complex issues, e.g., are clearly dealing with other
life issues in addition to their career concerns (e.g., divorce, recent onset
of a disability, loss of a loved one) and who are having difficulty coping
8).individuals
with a disability who require more time and assistance than can be provided in
a walk-in or drop-in mode of service delivery
Florida State
University Career Center. (2000). Florida State University Career Advisor
Guide. Tallahassee, FL: Author.