Addressing Student Mental Health: A College Counseling Center Director Perspective

686 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine, Spiritual
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
686
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Addressing Student Mental Health: A College Counseling Center Director Perspective

  1. 1. ADDRESSINGSTUDENT MENTALHEALTH: A CollegeCounseling CenterDirector PerspectiveVicki Chan Demographic & Social AnalysisDr. Tim Bruckner AdvisorMay 20, 2011chanvw@uci.edu
  2. 2. Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders• More prevalent than most people realize – 1 in 4 adults suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year (Kessler et. al, 2005)• College students are exhibiting more severe mental illness than in the past – More young people arrive on campus with pre-existing mental health conditions (Guthman, Locin, & Konstas, 2009)
  3. 3. Barriers to Counseling Services • Key factors associated with use of psychological services: 1. Access to counseling services 2. Affordability of counseling services 3. Academic experiences about mental health (Rosenthal, 2007; Mowbray et al., 2006; Stefl & Prosperi, 1985)
  4. 4. Research Question What factors best predict use of mental health services in college counseling centers?
  5. 5. Data Sources• National Survey of College Counseling Center Directors (2009) – 43% response rate for web survey – n = 302 administrative heads of college and university counseling centers in U.S. – Respondents invited through e-mail list serves • Association of University and College Counseling Center Directors (AUCCCD) • College Counseling Directors (CCD)
  6. 6. Data Sources (Continued)• National Survey of College Counseling Center Directors (2009)• U.S. Department of Education: National Center for Education Statistics (2010- 2011) – Total enrollment – Financial Aid – Race/Ethnicity Percentages
  7. 7. Methods• Unit of analysis: School• Dependent Variable Proportion of students served = Number of students who seek counseling___ Total number of students eligible for counseling* *Includes all currently registered students
  8. 8. Heuristic Model Levels of Access Affordability Proportion of School involvement students who receive Administrative barriers counseling Proactiveness services Ethnicity Gender
  9. 9. Independent VariablesLevels of Access = Composite scale 0-14 based on: • Number of full time mental health staff • Session limits • Client session average during past year • After-hours/weekend calls for emergencies • On campus psychiatric services • Counseling center webpage • Open at non-traditional hours • Type of response to clients and nonclients Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.36
  10. 10. Independent Variables (Continued)Affordability = Composite scale 0-8 based on: • Charge fee for counseling • Cost per session • Collect third party payments • Center supported by mandatory fee • Percent receiving any aid Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.37
  11. 11. Independent Variables (Continued) • School involvement (Index 0-11) • Administrative barriers (Index 0-13) • Proactiveness (Index 0-5) • Ethnicity (% White, Hispanic, Asian, Black) • Gender (% Males)
  12. 12. Data Analysis Step 1 • Ordinary least squares regression • Logged dependent variable – Interpreted as percent changes Step 2 • Factor analysis – To see which scale items best hold up
  13. 13. Centers that are more affordable and involved suggestlink to use of counseling services Exponentiated Coefficients Levels of Access 1.02 Affordability 1.08*** School Involvement 0.95*** Administrative Barriers 0.98 Proactiveness 1.03 Percents (Reference group=White) Hispanic 0.52 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.10** Black 0.60* Male 1.12 p<0.05* p<0.01** p<0.001***
  14. 14. Schools with higher percent of Asians and Blackssuggest link to use of counseling services Exponentiated Coefficients Levels of Access 1.02 Affordability 1.08*** School Involvement 0.95*** Administrative Barriers 0.98 Proactiveness 1.03 Percents (Reference group=White) Hispanic 0.52 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.10** Black 0.60* Male 1.12 p<0.05* p<0.01** p<0.001*** R square = 0.12
  15. 15. Factor Analysis: Significant Scale Items • Levels of Access – Number of full time mental health staff • Affordability – Charge a fee for personal counseling – Collect third-party payments
  16. 16. Conclusions on Use of Counseling Services Greater affordability 8% Greater school involvement - 5% Higher % Asian 310% Higher % Black - 40%
  17. 17. Significance and Future Directions • Now, college counseling centers have a guideline for key areas of focus to improve their counseling services • These results can improve understanding of the specific variables that influence usage of counseling services • Future research should focus on analyzing trends students who seek psychiatric services in college counseling centers by year
  18. 18. Acknowledgements Dr. Tim Bruckner Dr. Joanne Christopherson Dr. Judith Treas Dr. Yen-Sheng Chiang Dr. Julie DaVanzo Active Minds, Inc. DASA Cohort of 2011 Thank you.
  19. 19. Percent Changes Percent % Accessibility 2% Affordability 8%*** School Involvement -5%*** Administrative Barriers -2% Proactiveness 3% Percents (Reference group=White) Hispanic -48% Asian/Pacific Islander 310%** Black -40%* 2 Or More Races 1% Unknown Race/Ethnicity -1% Non Resident Alien -5%*** Male 12% p<0.05* p<0.01** p<0.001***
  20. 20. Higher percents of Asians, Blacks and Non-residentaliens suggest influence in use of counseling services Exponentiated Coefficients Accessibility 1.02 Affordability 1.08*** School Involvement 0.95*** Administrative Barriers 0.98 Proactiveness 1.03 Percents (Reference group=White) Hispanic 0.52 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.10** Black 0.60* 2 Or More Races 1.01 Unknown Race/Ethnicity 0.99 Non Resident Alien 0.96*** Male 1.12 p<0.05* p<0.01** p<0.001***
  21. 21. Checks for Multicollinearity Variable VIF % Asian 1.38 % Hispanic 1.29 School Involvement 1.14 % 2 or more races 1.11 Affordability 1.11 % American Indian 1.11 Proactiveness 1.10 % Male 1.09 % Black 1.09 % Non Resident Alien 1.07 Levels of Assess 1.07 % Race Unknown 1.02 Mean VIF = 1.13

×