1. What does 44 indicate。The number of pulses in a meter。The.docx

1. What does 4/4 indicate?
。The number of pulses in a meter
。The speed of the song
。The number of meters in a section
。The number of parts in a song
2. What does "swing" or "shuffle" indicate?
。That there is a division of three in song
。That the song is a verse, chorus song
。That it is not rock and roll
。That the measures are long
3. What do we call a hook of the song that is:
a single line and attached at the end of the primary lyrical
passage
not immediately repeated over and over
usually the title of the song
。Pre-chorus
。Bridge
。Verse
。Refrain
。Chorus
4. What usually makes a chorus more memorable than other
parts of the song? (choose all that are appropriate)（Need to
choose four correct answers）
。Tells a story
。Contains song title
。Loud
。Repetitive
。High
。Shorter than other sections
Special Issue: School Counseling Leadership in Practice

School Counselors as Curricular Leaders:
A Content Analysis of ASCA Lesson Plans
Caroline J. Lopez1 and Erin C. M. Mason2
Abstract
The authors examined school counselors design of classroom
curriculum lessons through a content analysis of lesson plans
located on the American School Counselor Association (ASCA)
Scene website. The analysis coded 139 lesson plans based on 12
lesson plan component categories and types of instructional
strategies used. Findings address the frequency of topics related
to
the three ASCA domains, grade levels, and scores on 12 lesson
components including overall total score. The article includes
implications for school counselor leadership and training.
Keywords
classroom guidance, counseling curriculum, core curriculum,
lesson plan, school counselor, school counselor leadership
The purpose of this study was to add to the body of literature
that seeks to understand school counselors’ design of classroom
curriculum lessons. By conducting a content analysis of lesson
plans from the American School Counselor Association
(ASCA) Scene resource center, this study focuses on the curri-
culum design of school counselors, including (a) the types of
classroom lessons that are used in the profession, (b) the quality
of classroom lessons, (c) school counselors’ competence in the

development of classroom guidance lessons, and (d) types of
instructional activities employed by school counselors. We dis-
cuss the application of principles of leadership to curriculum
design and delivery and implications for school counselor prac-
tice and preparation.
Implementing a Comprehensive School Counseling
Model as a Function of Leadership
Multiple studies suggest that a fully implemented comprehen-
sive school counseling program has a positive overall impact
on schools and, most important, on student achievement
(Dahir, Burnham, & Stone, 2009; Mason, 2010; Richard,
2001). School counselors who lead change efforts within the
school to improve outcomes for all students are demonstrating
horizontal leadership (Young & Miller Kneale, 2012). To drive
change efforts at any level, counselor leaders must be knowl-
edgeable about systems and know how to maneuver strategi-
cally within them (Saginak & Dollarhide, 2006). Gaining
systemic support for the counseling curriculum, both in and

outside the school, necessitates that school counselors enact
their roles as leaders.
School counselors who take an active role in
planning, preparing, delivering, and evaluating the
core counseling curriculum for all students
demonstrate their roles as leaders.
Within the comprehensive school counseling model, curri-
culum planning is a fundamental leadership responsibility. In
the School Leadership That Works framework, the school
counselor leader remains focused on established goals and core
beliefs and advocates for the program as a whole (Marzano,
Waters, & McNulty, 2005). School counselors who understand
instructional practices, especially those that support the
school’s vision and the standards of the time, create a counsel-
ing curriculum that is critical both to the school and to students’
education. As a change agent, the school counselor is involved
in curriculum design and implementation and in monitoring the
effectiveness of school practices that impact student learning

(Marzano et al., 2005). Amatea and Clark (2005) identify the
innovative school leader as one who designs and implements
curriculum as part of efforts to implement a comprehensive
program.
1 California State University, Long Beach, Long Beach CA,
USA
2 Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Caroline J. Lopez, PhD, California State University, Long
Beach, CA 90840,
USA.
Email: [email protected]
Professional School Counseling
Volume 21(1b): 1-12
ª 2018 American School
Counselor Association
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2156759X18773277
journals.sagepub.com/home/pcx
mailto:[email protected]
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X18773277
http://journals.sagepub.com/home/pcx

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1177%2F2156759
X18773277&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-06-07
School counselors who understand instructional
practices, especially those that support the school’s
vision and the standards of the time, create a
counseling curriculum that is critical both to the
school and to students’ education.
Defining Counseling Curriculum and Classroom
Curriculum
As school counseling has evolved as a profession, terminology
used in the field has shifted, so we clarify several terms for the
sake of this article. As identified by the ASCA National Model
(ASCA, 2012), “counseling curriculum” is inclusive of the
school counseling–related content that all students should
receive through the school counseling program. This content
is outlined at the national level by the ASCA Mindsets &
Behaviors for Student Success: K-12 College- and Career-
Readiness for Every Student (ASCA, 2014a), which is recog-
nized as the current set of standards for students. The delivery

mode or format may vary and the counseling curriculum can be
delivered during advisory periods, in study halls, in large
grade-wide assemblies, in groups, or most commonly, in class-
rooms. For the purpose of this article, classroom curriculum
will refer specifically to the counseling curriculum that is deliv-
ered in the classroom.
Significance and Effectiveness of Classroom Curriculum
Delivery of the counseling curriculum has increasingly become
an important leadership function of school counselors because
it reaches all students, a guiding principle of the ASCA
National Model framework (ASCA, 2012). Counseling curri-
culum, in the form of classroom curriculum in particular, con-
sists of structured lessons intended to help students attain the
desired mind-sets and behaviors for their developmental level.
Classroom curriculum has been identified as an efficient use of
time for addressing developmental issues within the academic,
career, and social/emotional domains (Dahir & Tyson, 2014).
ASCA (2012) recommends that, at the elementary level, school

counselors devote 35–45% of the counseling program to imple-
menting curriculum; at the middle school level, 25–35%; and at
the high school level, 15–25% should be devoted to curriculum.
Teachers and administrators also recognize the impact of
classroom curriculum lessons on student success. Specifically,
teachers (Clark & Amatea, 2004) and principals (Zalaquett,
2005) report that classroom curriculum is one of the most
essential functions of school counselors. Elementary school
counselors have reported that classroom curriculum is a critical
component of their role (Mau, 2008); however, it has received
little attention in the research (Whiston & Quinby, 2009).
Given the emphasis on classroom curriculum as a means of
reaching large numbers of students, the increased need for
accountability, and curriculum design as a vehicle for school
counselor leadership, the profession’s examination of the
lesson planning and classroom curriculum design practices of
school counselors is critical.
Studies have shown that classroom curriculum can posi-
tively impact students’ academic, social/emotional, and career

development. For example, Lee (1993) found that classroom
curriculum lessons on school success positively influenced aca-
demic achievement in math, and Sink and Stroh (2003) found
that schools with comprehensive counseling programs that
included classroom curriculum had higher academic achieve-
ment than schools that did not. Furthermore, classroom curri-
culum lessons using Student Success Skills were found to have
positive effects on standardized test scores (Villares, Lember-
ger, Brigman, & Webb, 2011). However, most of the literature
on the effectiveness of classroom curriculum outcomes focused
on established, commercial, and evidence-based curriculum
rather than school counselor–generated lessons.
School Counselors and Curricular Design
and Development
Among school counselors are those who have come to the
profession as former teachers or with school-based experience
and those who have not. Today, few states still require that
school counselors have prior teaching experience, although

historically this was the norm. According to ASCA (n.d.), only
six states (Connecticut, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oregon,
and Texas) require school counseling candidates to hold a
teaching license. School counselors with a background in
teaching may be more readily accepted as curricular leaders
by their teacher colleagues and thus may have a leadership edge
over those without a teaching background (Criswell, 2005).
Furthermore, school counselor preparation programs may have
inconsistencies with regard to curricular development. School
counseling evolved out of a model in which individual counsel-
ing services were the most common and many counselors may
not have backgrounds as educators; therefore, lack of training
in curricular design is likely. The Council for the Accreditation
of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP),
the primary accrediting body for counselor training programs,
lists only one standard that addresses curricular development or
design. The 2016 CACREP standards include “core curriculum
design, lesson plan development, classroom management stra-

tegies, and differentiated instructional strategies” (CACREP,
2016). Classroom curriculum is a stated component of a com-
prehensive school counseling program (ASCA, 2012), and a
2008 study found that 44 of 50 states suggest the implementa-
tion of the comprehensive model as a statewide standard, up
from 24 states just 10 years prior (Martin, Carey, & DeCoster,
2009). For these reasons, school counselors without a teaching
background may have to work harder or longer to develop as
curricular leaders than their counterparts with a teaching back-
ground. Preservice exposure to curriculum design, lesson plan-
ning classroom management, and differentiated instruction
strategies via didactic school counseling leadership classes and
2 Professional School Counseling
field experiences is critical to school counselors’ development
as curricular leaders.
Despite the increased time dedicated to the delivery of les-
son plans and curriculum development, school counselors have

limited training with both. Desmond, West, and Bubenzer
(2007) examined the mentorship experiences of novice school
counselors with no teaching experience and found that novice
school counselors reported the need for assistance with lesson
planning and delivery. Furthermore, school counselors have
ranked classroom activities as the most important topic for
continuing education (Anctil, Smith, Schenck, & Dahir,
2012; Knight, 2015). According to Sink (2005), good teaching
is essential for the efficient delivery of classroom curriculum
lessons. Because of this, a closer examination of the lesson
planning practices of school counselors, as functions of school
counseling program implementation and school counselor
leadership development, is necessary.
Using Leadership to Gain Support for the Counseling
Curriculum
School counselors who take an active role in planning, prepar-
ing, delivering, and evaluating the core counseling curriculum
for all students demonstrate their roles as leaders. Research
shows that school counselors who reported having more fully

implemented, comprehensive, developmental programs also
reported higher leadership practices than those who did not
report as high on program implementation (Mason, 2010;
Mason & McMahon, 2009). A 2016 survey of 693 school
counselors showed that those who use classroom curriculum
to implement a comprehensive program exhibited a greater
degree of confidence in their ability as counselors and rated
themselves highly regarding self-efficacy (Mullen & Lambie,
2016). Further, when others in the school value the role of the
school counselor as a leader, the school counselor is more
likely to be seen as someone who contributes to positive stu-
dent outcomes (Stone & Dahir, 2006). As leaders, school coun-
selors must have the disposition to challenge the status quo
while staying deeply connected to the members of the school
community (Marzano et al., 2005). A key strategy in serving
the needs of the school community is to connect the school
counseling program to school-wide initiatives.
Connecting to school-wide initiatives. One strategic way school

counselors can take the lead is to connect the core curriculum
to initiatives related to multitiered systems of support, a recent
but widely adopted framework in schools for providing aca-
demic and behavior interventions (ASCA, 2014b). Through
these avenues, the core curriculum can become standardized
as a part of a school-wide improvement plan for implementing
Tier 1 interventions (Ryan, Kaffenberger, & Carroll, 2011).
School-based strategic plans or improvement plans may pro-
vide data and goals from which to develop ideas for annual
classroom curriculum. Furthermore, the advisory council,
which is included in the management component of the ASCA
National Model (ASCA, 2012), can serve to help the counselor
or counseling team to connect the curriculum to school-wide
initiatives.
Gaining buy-in through collaboration. Necessary leadership
skills
for gaining buy-in for providing classroom lessons may include
knowledge of the systemic nature of schools (DeVoss &
Andrews, 2006), cultural proficiency (Lindsey, Robins, & Ter-

rell, 2009), self-efficacy (Mullen & Lambie, 2016), and nego-
tiating strategies and proposal pitching (Dollarhide, 2003). Part
of these negotiation efforts includes working with multiple
stakeholders, of whom classroom teachers are most important.
By working and collaborating with teachers, all of whom reg-
ularly design and develop curricula, school counselors can
enhance and strengthen their position as curricular leaders in
the school building. These skills recall Bolman and Deal’s
(2008) Four Framework approach, which conceptualizes lead-
ership through structural, human resource, political, or sym-
bolic constructs. The school counselor leader knows who
wields influence in the building or district (political) and pos-
sesses the communication skills to build relationships (human
resource) with stakeholders to develop resources (structural)
for the counseling program (Dollarhide, 2003). Young (2013)
expands the school counselor leadership tool kit to five char-
acteristics: resourceful problem-solving, systemic collabora-
tion, interpersonal influence, social justice advocacy, and

professional efficacy. Young’s framework shares much with
Bolman and Deal’s conceptualization of leadership, not least
of which is collaboration, especially considering that skills in
collaboration and coalition building advance the school’s mis-
sion and align with a comprehensive school counseling model.
According to Tollerud and Nejedlo (2004), school counselors
can also train teachers in the delivery of classroom curriculum
lessons and assist them in identifying ways to incorporate
social/
emotional, academic, and career objectives into their subject
matter. In the process of helping their colleagues become aware
of school counseling standards like the ASCA Mindsets &
Beha-
viors (ASCA, 2014a), school counselors aid in legitimizing
themselves and their work in delivering classroom lessons.
School counselors who collaborate with colleagues on curricu-
lum development and who share their lessons as examples (e.g.,
via professional development swaps, the ASCA Scene, Teacher-
sPayTeachers, CounselorCreated) may be seen as leaders in
their

respective professional communities.
Lesson Planning, Effective Teaching, and Data Collection
Vernon (2010) contends that in creating curriculum, school
counselors need to assume a leadership role in developing the
scope and sequence of the program. If school counselors are to
spend a significant portion of their time in the classroom, the
development of a detailed plan of instruction is critical. Begin-
ning with a curriculum action plan, school counselors detail
how they plan to design and deliver the counseling curriculum
and achieve the desired results. The curriculum action plan
Lopez and Mason 3
includes the lesson taught, competencies addressed, curriculum
used, time lines, projected students, evaluation methods, and
the person responsible (ASCA, 2012).
Womack, Hannah, and Bell (2012) examined the effective-
ness of pre-service teachers and found that four main factors
contributed to teaching effectiveness: lesson planning, teacher

and student reflection, safe school environment, and teacher
professionalism. The majority (41%) of effective teaching was
found to be in lesson planning (Womack, Hannah, & Bell
2012). Danielson (2007) stated, “Content must be transferred
through instructional design into sequences of activities and
exercises that make it accessible to students” (p. 27). Further-
more, lesson plans help school counselors stay task oriented so
that learning objectives are met and desired outcomes are
achieved (Tosado, 2014). Lesson planning and preparation
ensure that school counselors take the most thoughtful
approach to get students where they need to be (Merlin &
Knoblich, 2016).
Designing lesson plans. Rather than selecting instructional
meth-
ods based on convenience, comfort, or trends, school counse-
lors should select learning activities, materials, and strategies
that are appropriate for both the specific competency and the
student (Vernon, 2010). McIver, Fitzsimmons, and Flanagan
(2016) suggested a knowledge-in-practice approach to select-

ing instructional activities. Taking this approach, the school
counselor identifies the underlying knowledge structure of the
learning objective and matches this knowledge structure with
the most appropriate instructional method. For example, learn-
ing objectives classified under the knowledge structure enacted
information (where the information itself is the primary driver
of learning) might benefit from instructional methods such as
lecture, readings, flash cards, and quiz games. Danielson
(2007) contended, “a teacher’s role is not so much to teach,
but to arrange for learning” (p. 27). That is to say, school
counselors who are skilled in instructional design demonstrate
an understanding of the subject they teach, the important prin-
ciples and concepts within that subject, and how these compo-
nents relate to one another and the selected learning activities
(Danielson, 2007).
Components of an effective lesson plan. The school counseling
literature describes several critical components to instructional
design (Goodnough, Perusse, & Erford, 2010; Merlin & Kno-
blich, 2016; Myrick, 1997; Vernon, 2010). Tosado (2014) rec-

ommended that school counselors consider the needs of
students and school; local, state, and national mandates; mate-
rials required; and methods of evaluation. Furthermore, lesson
plans should include necessary information including the title
of the lesson, the grade level or age-group, and the length of
time required to complete the lesson. Lesson plans should align
with the ASCA Mindsets & Behaviors, which describe the atti-
tudes, knowledge, and skills that students need to achieve aca-
demic success, college and career readiness, and social/
emotional development (ASCA, 2014a).
Johnson (2000) recommended a five-step lesson planning
process consisting of (a) the development of learning objec-
tives, (b) introduction, (c) input, (d) activity, and (e) closure.
The first component in lesson plan design is measurable learn-
ing objectives, which help the school counselor determine what
students should be able to do after participating in the lesson
and which measure progress in student learning (Goodnough
et al., 2010). Once identified, these learning objectives guide

the direction of activities known as procedures. The second
component is the introduction, which provides interest and
motivation to focus students’ attention on the lesson, and its
purposes, and links new ideas to what students already know.
The third element, input, is also known as direct teaching and
involves the presentation of new material related to the learning
objectives (Tosado, 2014). Input can take the form of new
vocabulary, skills, and concepts. The fourth component is an
activity that allows students to demonstrate their understanding
of the new information. Guided practice activities (teacher
questioning, sample problems, graphic organizers, and concept
webs) and independent practice activities (role-play, debate,
report, homework, poem, skit, or project) help students build
their understanding of the new content. The last component,
closure, consists of a short review of main ideas and processing
what was learned (Johnson, 2000; Tosado, 2014). It provides an
opportunity for formative assessment and helps the school
counselor decide whether additional practice is necessary or

whether students can move on to the next part of the lesson.
Although guidelines exist for the development of classroom
curriculum lessons, primarily in school counseling textbooks
(Dollarhide & Saginak, 2017; Goodnough et al., 2010; Myrick,
1997; Vernon, 2010; Ziomek-Daigle, 2015), research on school
counselor competence in designing and developing classroom
curriculum is minimal. A content review of lesson plans can
serve as a means of evaluating school counselors’ development
in classroom curriculum design. School counselors submit
these lesson plans and a review of them can act as a method
for self-reflection and professional development. Information
from a review can provide valuable information regarding the
extent to which school counselors currently implement best
practices for classroom curriculum and lesson plan design.
Data collection and accountability. The ASCA National Model
(ASCA, 2012) emphasizes the need for data collection in the
school counseling program as part of the accountability com-
ponent. With regard to classroom curriculum, a review of rel-

evant data (needs assessments, school-wide data, surveys, etc.)
should be a precursor to planning and designing lessons
(ASCA, 2012). Aligning program goals with the appropriate
mind-sets and behaviors assists the school counselor in writing
lesson plan objectives (Ziomek-Daigle, 2015).
As a part of the program evaluation process, classroom cur-
riculum can incorporate short-term, formative assessments and/
or more long-term, summative assessments (Hatch, 2013). For-
mative assessment involves checking for learning in order to
modify instruction for student understanding prior to reaching
the end of the lesson, and summative assessment is used to
evaluate student learning at the end of a unit (Danielson,
2007). Data collection methods used for these often include
pre-/posttests, exit tickets, and so on, for gathering perception
data. Finally, broader outcome data such as grades, test scores,
attendance rates, and/or disciplinary records contextualize the

effectiveness of the classroom curriculum (ASCA, 2012).
Method
We conducted a content analysis of school counselor–
generated lesson plans using a 12-category rubric on a
4-point Likert-type scale. Coded data were further analyzed
using descriptive statistics. We collected lesson plans via
the ASCA Scene. This study used an extant database with
no identifying data.
Participants and Procedures
The research team coded the lesson plans using a 12-category
rubric adapted from the Making Connections lesson plan rubric
(Louisiana Department of Education, n.d.). Both deductive and
inductive procedures were utilized to generate and describe
categories. We generated elements of the rubric deductively
based on an examination of the school counseling literature
on curricular design (Goodnough et al., 2010; Tosado 2014;
Vernon, 2010). Then, the three coders met and discussed the
items and used inductive procedures to further refine the cate-

gories. Two reviewers then provided feedback on the rubric: a
school administrator with experience evaluating teacher lesson
plans at both the elementary and middle school levels and a
practicing school counselor with experience in developing and
implementing lesson plans.
We collected information about the learners from the lesson
plan and included information such as the ASCA domain in
which they would receive instruction (academic, social/emo-
tional, and career), the school level (elementary, middle, or
high school), and the specific grade level (K through 12). We
then used the rubric to evaluate the lesson plan based on the
quality and presence of the 12 lesson plan components. Com-
ponents included standards, learning objectives, materials,
introductory activity, learning activities, and closure. We also
evaluated the overall design of the lesson plan, including the
description of procedures, the alignment of activities to stan-
dards, the developmental appropriateness of the lesson and its
ease of use, accommodations, evaluation methods, and creativ-

ity and innovation. Criteria were rated using a 4-point Likert-
type scale (0 ¼ ineffective, 1 ¼ developing, 2 ¼ effective, 3 ¼
highly effective). Last, we examined the types of instructional
strategies used in the lesson. These strategies included activi-
ties such as guided practice, independent practice, modeling/
demonstration, cooperative learning, debate/dialogue, technol-
ogy, role-play, recitation, and bibliotherapy.
The coders for this study were a school counseling master’s
student, a teacher education master’s student (the first author),
and an assistant professor of school counseling. To determine
interrater reliability, a practicing school counselor with a back-
ground in teaching participated as a fourth coder to assist in the
agreement of coding. The first author trained the coders. The
researchers calculated interrater reliability based on the per-
centage of agreement of coding responses for each of the three
coders and the fourth coder on four lesson plans. Each coder
coded all the lesson plans and the percentage agreement
between coders was calculated. Once interrater reliability
reached 90%, all lesson plans were coded by the three coders

(an assistant professor and two master’s students). Coded data
were analyzed by SPSS using descriptive statistics (frequency,
percentage, mean, and standard deviation [SD]).
Results
The purpose of this study was to examine school counselors’
design of classroom curriculum lessons. We conducted a con-
tent analysis of multiple lesson plans in an effort to understand
(a) types of classroom lessons that are used in the profession,
(b) the quality of classroom lessons, (c) school counselors’
competence in the development of classroom guidance lessons,
and (d) types of instructional methods employed by school
counselors.
The research team found and collected a total of 139 lesson
plans from the ASCA Scene. Lesson plans were at all school
levels. Table 1 illustrates the frequency and percentage of les-
son plans (a) in each of the three domains, (b) at each level, and
(c) at each level within each domain. For example, Table 1
shows that among lesson plans at all levels, 86.3% (n ¼
120) were in the social/emotional domain, 7.2% were in the

academic domain (n ¼ 10), 4.3% were in the career domain (n
¼ 6), and 2.1% (n ¼ 3) were in more than one domain. The
percentage of lesson plans at each level were 1.4% (n ¼ 2)
preschool, 68.3% (n ¼ 95) elementary school, 6.5% (n ¼ 9)
middle school, 9.4% (n ¼ 13) high school, 2.1% (n ¼ 3) com-
bination of levels, and 12.2% (n ¼ 17) level unknown. The
rubric was used to evaluate the quality and presence of the
12 lesson plan components. Table 2 describes the lesson plan
component scores by percentage as well as the total score. The
results of each component and the total score ratings are dis-
cussed below.
Lesson Plan Components
Standards and learning objectives. The research team examined
and rated each lesson plan based on its stated standards base.
Ineffective lessons (28.1%, n ¼ 39) did not provide any stan-
dards. Lessons scored as developing (38.1%, n ¼ 53) incorpo-
rated too many standards for a singular lesson. Effective
lessons (32.4%, n ¼ 45) incorporated an appropriate number
of ASCA standards, and highly effective lessons (1.4%, n ¼ 2)
incorporated both ASCA and state standards. Lesson plan
objectives were rated based on the extent to which learning
objectives highlighted the specific conditions and standards
Lopez and Mason 5

of student learning and performance. More than half of the
lesson plans (55.4%, n ¼ 77) did not have learning objectives
and scored as ineffective. Lesson plans with objectives that
made no reference to what students will know and be able to
do as a result of the lesson were scored as developing (7.9%, n
¼ 11). Those with student-centered objectives that were stated
clearly and concisely were scored as effective (31.7%, n¼ 44).
Plans with objectives that were student centered and written to
include at least one higher order thinking skill were scored as
highly effective (5%, n ¼ 7).
Materials. The researchers examined the materials section of
each lesson plan and rated it for completeness. Lesson plans
identified as ineffective in this category did not list any mate-
rials (7.9%, n ¼ 11). Plans scored as developing (5.8%, n ¼ 8)
did not identify all necessary materials or their use was not
specified. Effective lesson plans (72.7%, n ¼ 101) included all
necessary materials and their use was specified in the activities,
and highly effective lesson plans (13.7%, n ¼ 19) incorporated
a variety of audio/visual materials that allowed students to
acquire information/skills via a variety of modalities.
Introduction, learning activities, and closure. The introduction
sec-
tion was rated based on whether it focused students’ attention

on the objectives and purpose of the lesson and linked their
previous knowledge on the topic. Of the 139 lesson plans, 29
were void of any introduction and assessed as ineffective
(20.9%). Twenty-two lesson plans had introductions that were
somewhat disconnected from the objectives/standards and dis-
tracted from the students’ learning; these scored as developing
(15.8%). Sixty-seven plans contained introductions that set the
stage for the lesson and connected to the objectives/standards
but lacked in motivational or bridging value and were recorded
as effective (48.2%). Last, 20 lesson plans (14.4%) were scored
as highly effective; these contained introductory activities that
were relevant to the objective and provided a creative and
motivating background in which to begin the lesson. The intro-
duction as written provided an opportunity for active student
participation and bridged what would be learned with previous
knowledge or personal experiences.
Learning activities were scored based on their alignment
with the learning objectives and whether or not the activities
built upon each other. Plans with learning activities that were

disconnected and not focused on the objectives were scored as
ineffective (4.3%, n ¼ 6). One quarter of the lesson plans
contained activities focused on the objective but disconnected
from each other; these were recorded as developing (22.3%,
n ¼ 31). Lesson plans earning the effective score (54.7%, n ¼
76) contained activities that aligned with the objective(s) and
were appropriately paced and built upon each other. These
plans included three of the following four activities: (a) intro-
duction of a new concept or skill, (b) demonstrations and exam-
ples, (c) guided and/or independent practice, and/or (d)
application of the information to students’ own lives. Lesson
plans that contained all four activities were categorized as
highly effective (18.7%, n ¼ 26).
The closing was rated on the presence of an activity sum-
marizing what was taught. More than one third of lesson plans
had no closing activity and were scored as ineffective (37.4%,
n ¼ 52). Those with poorly developed closing activities were
recorded as developing (28.1%, n ¼ 39). Lesson plans with
closing activities in which the recap of what was taught and
learned was done primarily by the counselor were categorized
as effective (25.2%, n ¼ 35). Highly effective ratings were
given to plans (9.4%, n ¼ 13) if the closing activities were
done primarily by the student.

Overall Design
Lesson description and alignment. The research team examined
and rated the lesson plan descriptions for the level of detail.
One lesson was missing a description of the procedures and
therefore scored ineffective (0.7%). Twelve lessons scored as
developing (12%) due to procedures that were unclear and
difficult to follow. Eighty-three lessons were rated effective
(59.7%) for lacking minor details, and 43 lessons scored as
highly effective (30.9%) for having procedures that were clear
and detailed.
Reviewers also assessed whether objectives and/or stan-
dards aligned with the major phases of the lesson plan.
Table 1. Frequency of Lesson Plans by Level and Domain.
School Level
All Domains Academic Career Social–Emotional Career/SE
Academic/SE
% n % n % n % n % n % n
All levels — — 7.2 10 4.3 6 86.3 120 0.7 1 1.4 2
Preschool 1.4 2 0 0 0.7 1 0.7 1 0 0 0 0
Elementary 68.3 95 0.7 1 1.4 2 64 89 0.7 1 1.4 2
Middle school 6.5 9 0 0 0 0 6.5 9 0 0 0 0
High school 9.4 13 4.3 6 2.2 3 2.9 4 0 0 0 0
ES/MS 0.7 1 0 0 0 0 0.7 1 0 0 0 0
MS/HS 0.7 1 0 0 0 0 0.7 1 0 0 0 0

ES/MS/HS 0.7 1 0 0 0 0 0.7 1 0 0 0 0
Unknown 12.2 17 2.2 3 0 0 10 14 0 0 0 0
Note. ES ¼ elementary school; MS ¼ middle school; HS ¼ high
school; SE ¼ social-emotional
Ineffective lessons (10.1%, n ¼ 14) had no objectives and/or
standards to make such a determination. Developing lessons
(18%, n ¼ 25) provided some but limited connection to objec-
tives and/or ASCA standards. Effective lessons (57.6%, n ¼
80) provided clear connections to objectives/ASCA standards
in some but not all major phases of the lesson plan. Highly
effective lessons (14.4%, n ¼ 20) were tightly focused on
objectives/ASCA/Common Core/state standards in all major
phases of the lesson plan.
Developmental appropriateness and accommodations. Lesson
plans were rated for developmental appropriateness, which
was defined in terms of a suitable time frame, amount of mate-
rial covered, and suitable topics and activities for the grade
level. Ineffective lessons (0.7%, n ¼ 1) were flawed in all of
the following ways: time frame was too demanding, amount of
material presented was too extensive and appeared to be a

series of lessons, and topic and activities were not suitable for
the grade level. Developing lessons (5%, n¼ 7) were flawed in
several of the aforementioned areas, and effective lessons
(15.8%, n ¼ 22) were flawed in only one. Highly effective
lessons (77.7%, n ¼ 108) contained a suitable time frame, the
amount of material presented was fitting, and the topic and
activities were applicable to the grade level.
Reviewers rated the presence of written directions of mod-
ifications of the lesson for diverse learners. Lesson plans that
did not have modifications for special needs students, learning
styles, English-language learners, and other considerations
were scored as ineffective (97.1%, n ¼ 135). One lesson plan
had vague modifications and was scored as developing (0.7%,
n ¼ 1). Lesson plans with some modifications were categor-
ized as effective (1.4%, n ¼ 2), and the one lesson plan that
included detailed modifications was scored as highly effective
(0.7%, n ¼ 1).
Evaluation. The evaluation portion of the lesson plan was rated
for the presence of formative and summative assessments that
provided evidence that students had achieved the lesson objec-
tives. Forty-eight lessons had no method of evaluation and
were rated ineffective (34.5%). Thirty-two lessons assessed
knowledge and behaviors that were inconsistent with the objec-

tives and were scored as developing (23%). Fifty-three lessons
were rated effective (38.1%); they included only summative
assessment that required students to apply knowledge or
demonstrate understanding; however, it provided limited evi-
dence that students had achieved lesson objective(s). Six les-
sons were scored as highly effective (4.3%) and included both
formative and summative assessments. The highly effective
evaluation also required students to apply knowledge or
demonstrate and provide clear evidence that students had
achieved lesson objective(s).
Creativity and innovation. Reviewers assessed the creativity and
innovation of the lesson plans. They rated as ineffective les-
son plans that were significantly flawed in their curricular
design (5%, n ¼ 7). Developing lesson plans needed further
development (20.9%, n ¼ 29) and effective lesson plans
(67.6%, n ¼ 94) followed conventional instructional practice.
Highly effective lesson plans (6.5%, n ¼ 9) caused major
change to instruction design by incorporating new instruc-
tional strategies or learning activities not seen in conventional
instructional practice.
Descriptions of Total Score Ratings

To determine cutoff ranges for total score ratings, the first
author met with a consultant with expertise in quantitative
analysis. An underlying aspect of the authors’ study was to
conceptualize the definition of a good lesson plan via the rub-
ric. Therefore, this conceptualization was the basis for final
cutoff scores. First, we conducted descriptive statistics on the
total scores of each lesson plan based on the 12-category rubric.
We found a normal distribution (M ¼ 17.94, SD ¼ 4.3) and
determined preliminary cutoff scores. Using the preliminary
cutoff scores as a guide, the first and second author met to
define each total score category and its score range (ineffective,
developing, effective, and highly effective). Adjustments were
made to preliminary cutoff scores to ensure that the final total
score ranges matched with the authors’ definition and scoring.
Last, for each of the categories, we randomly selected one
lesson plan from those scored in that category. The total scores
of each of these lesson plans were compared to the correspond-
ing category to see whether it matched the definition. For
example, a lesson plan that scored in the range of 0–11 was

randomly selected and compared to the corresponding ineffec-
tive category definition. Table 3 describes the four total score
categories and the numerical ranges. Based on these criteria,
7.9% (n ¼ 11) of lesson plans were categorized as ineffective,
64% (n¼ 89) as developing, and 28% (n¼ 39) as effective. No
lesson plans scored highly effective.
Ineffective. Lessons that fell into this category ranged from 0 to
11 in total score and were largely lacking in many of the com-
ponents of the rubric. When an individual component was pres-
ent, it was unclear or incomplete as written or was not
connected
to other components because those components were missing.
Developing. Developing lessons had total scores ranging from
12 to 20. These lessons typically had all components in the
rubric, but individual components were unclear or incomplete
as written or components were not connected to each other
(e.g., activities or evaluation was not connected to objectives
or standards).
Effective. Total scores of effective lessons ranged from 21 to
29.
These lessons included all components in the rubric and indi-

vidual components were generally clearly described and com-
plete. Components in these lesson plans were usually
connected to each other and traditional in design but had room
for improvement in one of several areas such as accommoda-
tions, evaluation, or creativity.
Lopez and Mason 7
Highly effective. Lesson plans rated with a total score of 30–36
were categorized as highly effective. These lesson plans were
clearly and substantively detailed. Components of the lessons
were connected to each other and sophisticated in engaging
students in areas such as materials, activities, and evaluation.
These lessons were highly student focused, creative, and had
objectives designed for higher order thinking and application of
skills addressed in the lesson.
Instructional Methods
We examined the lesson plans to identify the types of
instructional methods utilized by school counselors. Table
4 illustrates the frequency of instructional methods and the

percentage of lesson plans that used these instructional
methods. A single lesson plan could include multiple types
of instructional methods. The type of instructional method
and the percentage of lesson plans that included this method
were, in descending order, dialogue/discussion (75.6%, n ¼
105), bibliotherapy (62.6%, n ¼ 87), independent practice
(50.4%, n ¼ 70), guided practice (28.8%, n ¼ 40), lecture
(19.4%, n ¼ 27), cooperative learning (12.9%, n ¼ 18),
role-play (8.6%, n ¼ 12), technology (5.8%, n ¼ 8), model-
ing (3.6%, n ¼ 5), debate (2.9%, n ¼ 4), and performance
(.7%, n ¼ 1).
Table 4. Frequency of Instructional Methods.
Instructional Methods Frequency
Dialogue/discussion 105
Bibliotherapy 87
Independent practice 70
Guided practice 44
Lecture 27
Cooperative learning 18
Role playing 12
Technology 8
Modeling 5
Debate 4
Performance 1
Table 2. Lesson Plan Component Scores by Percentage.

Category
Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective
% n % n % n % n
Standards 28.1 39 38.1 53 32.4 45 1.4 2
Learning objectives 55.4 77 7.9 11 31.7 44 5 7
Materials 7.9 11 5.8 8 72.7 101 13.7 19
Introduction 20.9 29 15.8 22 48.2 67 14.4 20
Learning activities 4.3 6 22.3 31 54.7 76 18.7 26
Closure 37.4 52 28.1 39 25.2 35 9.4 13
Lesson description 0.7 1 8.6 12 59.7 83 30.9 43
Aligned activities 10.1 14 18 25 57.6 80 14.4 20
Developmentally appropriate 0.7 1 5 7 15.8 22 77.7 108
Accommodations 97.1 135 0.7 1 1.4 2 0.7 1
Evaluation 34.5 48 23 32 38.1 53 4.3 6
Creativity 5 7 20.9 29 67.6 94 6.5 9
Total score 7.9 11 64 89 28 39 0 0
Table 3. Lesson Plan Total Score Rating Guide.
Ineffective (0–11) Developing (12–20) Effective (21–29) Highly
Effective (30–36)
Lesson plans were largely lacking
in many of the components of
the rubric. When an individual
component was present, it was
unclear or incomplete as
written or was not connected
to other components because
those components were
missing.
Lesson plans typically had all

components in the rubric but
individual components were
unclear or incomplete as
written or components were
not connected to each other
(e.g., activities or evaluation not
connected to objectives or
standards).
Lesson plans had all components in
the rubric and individual
components were generally
clearly described and complete.
Components in these lesson
plans were usually connected to
each other and traditional in
design but had room for
improvement in one of several
areas such as accommodations,
evaluation, or creativity.
Lesson plans were clearly and
substantively detailed.
Components of the lessons
were connected to each other
and sophisticated in engaging
students in areas such as
materials, activities, and
evaluation. These lessons were
highly student focused, creative,
and had objectives designed for
higher order thinking and
application of skill addressed in
the lesson.

Discussion
The ASCA National Model emphasizes the implementation of
a comprehensive school counseling program promoting lead-
ership, advocacy, collaboration, and systemic change as themes
to enhance student achievement and success (ASCA, 2012).
One service delivery method for influencing student achieve-
ment and success is the core counseling curriculum. Data from
the present study indicate that the majority of lesson plans
submitted to the ASCA Scene website were developed for the
elementary school level. This is consistent with ASCA’s rec-
ommendation that school counselors at the elementary level
(compared to middle and high school levels) devote a greater
portion of their time to implementing curriculum (ASCA,
2012). The fact that the large majority of lessons were within
the social/emotional domain suggests that greater attention
must be given to helping students develop the attitudes, knowl-
edge, and skills within the academic and career domains. This

is particularly important if school counselors are to lead their
school in current educational initiatives such as Reach Higher
(Duncan, 2014) and Common Core (Achieve, Inc., National
Association of Secondary School Principals, & National Asso-
ciation of Elementary School Principals, 2012) that emphasize
the role of school counselors in academic success and college
and career readiness.
Findings from the current study indicate both strengths
and weaknesses in school counselors’ competence in lesson
design. We were encouraged to find that overall, school
counselors are effective in describing individual components
of a lesson plan, including describing lesson procedures,
designing developmentally appropriate lessons, listing
instructional materials, and developing creative lessons.
Furthermore, the majority of school counselors were able
to describe introducing the lesson, develop effective learn-
ing activities, and align learning activities to the standards
or objectives. Findings indicate that school counselors need

further training in incorporating standards and developing
learning objectives.
Overall, school counselors are effective in
describing individual components of a lesson plan,
including describing lesson procedures, designing
developmentally appropriate lessons, listing
instructional materials, and developing creative
lessons.
Results of this study also indicate the need for improve-
ment within particular components of a lesson plan, overall
lesson design, and instructional strategies. Areas in need of
improvement include developing closing activities and eval-
uating student learning. Given that standards and learning
objectives enable good assessment of student learning
(Danielson, 2007), weak evaluation outcomes are understand-
able for lesson plans created by school counselors who did not
have training as teachers. Poor learning objectives due to lack
of knowledge or experience with lesson plan construction

may also explain school counselors’ weakness in developing
closing activities. Without developing clear objectives, creat-
ing a closing that highlights the key points of the lesson may
be difficult.
Results of this study indicate the need for
improvement within particular components of a
lesson plan, overall lesson design, and instructional
strategies.
The ASCA Ethical Standards (2016) state that school
counselors must “Affirm the abilities of and advocate for the
learning needs of all students. School counselors support the
provision of appropriate accommodations and accessibility.”
The overwhelming majority of lessons reviewed did not have
accommodations. Given the importance of ensuring that the
core curriculum is accessible to all students, this is an area
with the greatest need for improvement from school
counselors.
Total scores revealed that only one third of lesson plans

examined were considered effective and that no lesson plans
were rated as highly effective. This is alarming considering the
amount of time school counselors are expected to engage in
delivery of the core curriculum. The most frequent instruc-
tional activities utilized by school counselors were discussions,
bibliotherapy, and independent practice. The large drop in fre-
quency of other instructional methods indicates that school
counselors would benefit from additional training on instruc-
tional activities. Results from both the instructional activities
and total scores support previous research (Anctil et al., 2012;
Knight, 2015) that denote classroom activities as the most
important topic for continuing education.
Implications for School Counselors
and School Counselor Educators
As counselors struggle to define their role in schools (Amatea
& Clark, 2005; Fitch, Newby, Ballestero, & Marshall, 2001;
Reiner, Colbert, & Perusse, 2009), the need is greater for
continuous improvement of counseling skills and knowledge

of interventions through professional development. Profes-
sional development is a viable means for enhancing the skill
set of counselor leaders, particularly through continuing edu-
cation (Wingfield, Reese, & West-Olatunji, 2010). Inclusion
in teacher professional development trainings on lesson
design, curriculum development, and instructional strategies
both at the school and district level might strengthen counse-
lors’ skill set. School counselors who have previous training
and experience as teachers also may be ideal resources to
provide professional development for their colleagues on the
design and construction of effective lesson plans. By partici-
pating in trainings to improve their practice, school counse-
lors would be demonstrating structural leadership (ASCA,
2012; Bolman & Deal, 2008; Dollarhide, 2003). Finally,
Lopez and Mason 9
school counselor training programs should examine courses to
determine whether they are meeting the training needs of

school counselors, particularly those who lack a background
in education.
Limitations and Recommendations
for Future Research
This study examined the content of existing lesson plans
located on the ASCA Scene website. One limitation was that
these lessons may have included multiple submissions from the
same counselor. Future research could request lesson plans
directly from school counselors to control for multiple
submissions.
A future study could also focus specifically on lesson plans
with the ASCA Mindsets & Behaviors standards. The current
study examined the skills of practicing school counselors; how-
ever, researchers may wish to examine the lesson planning
skills of preservice school counselors. Last, because lesson
plans overwhelmingly lacked accommodations, additional
research should consider focusing on the ASCA core curricu-
lum with respect to diverse learners.
Conclusion

Herr, Heitzmann, and Rayman (2006) state that school coun-
selor leaders must be lifelong learners, immersed in the current
literature and research, and, at the same time, use professional
development to build “a team of school counselors who under-
stand the goals and practices that comprise their school coun-
seling program” (p. 85). School counselors should engage in
self-examination to determine areas of strength and growth
in curricular design. School counselors can then participate in
structural leadership through continuing professional develop-
ment to attain technical mastery of the core curriculum and
implementation of an effective school counseling program
(Dollarhide, 2003). By committing themselves to such leader-
ship practices, school counselors can build viable school coun-
seling programs.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge Ms. Vanessa Diaz, graduate student in
the
School Counseling Program at CSU Long Beach, and Mr. Todd
Wal-

lenius, teacher and counselor in Kathmandu, Nepal, for their
assis-
tance with coding and data entry. The authors also acknowledge
Mr.
David Tucker, school counselor in Chicago, IL, for his
contributions
to the literature search and development of the literature review.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to
the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Achieve, Inc., National Association of Secondary School
Principals,
& National Association of Elementary School Principals.
(2012).
Implementing the common core state standards: The role of the

school counselor. Retrieved from
https://www.achieve.org/publica
tions/implementing-common-core-state-standards-role-school-
counselor-action-brief
Amatea, E. S., & Clark, M. A. (2005). Changing schools,
changing
counselors: A qualitative study of school administrators’
concep-
tions of the school counselor role. Professional School
Counseling,
9, 16–27. doi:10.5330/prsc.9.1.w6357vn62n5328vp
American School Counselor Association. (n.d.). State
certification
requirements. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/
school-counselors-members/careers-roles/state-certification-
requirements
American School Counselor Association. (2012). ASCA
National
Model: A framework for school counseling programs (3rd ed.)
(pp 166–176). Alexandria, VA: Author.
American School Counselor Association. (2014a). ASCA
mindsets &

behaviors for student success: K-12 college- and career-
readiness
standards for every student. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved
from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/
MindsetsBehaviors.pdf
American School Counselor Association. (2014b). The school
coun-
selor and multitiered systems of support. ASCA Position State-
ments. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/
media/asca/PositionStatements/PS_MultitieredSupportSystem.p
df
American School Counselor Association. (2016). ASCA ethical
stan-
dards for school counselors. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved
from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/
EthicalStandards2016.pdf
Anctil, T. M., Smith, C. K., Schenck, P., & Dahir, C. (2012).
Profes-
sional school counselors’ career development practices and con-
tinuing education needs. The Career Development Quarterly, 60,

109–121. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2012.00009.x
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations:
Artistry,
choice, and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Clark, M. A., & Amatea, E. (2004). Teacher perceptions and
expec-
tations of school counselor contributions: Implications for
program
planning and training. Professional School Counseling, 8,
132–140. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42732615
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related
Educational
Programs. (2016). 2016 CACREP standards. Retrieved from
http://www.cacrep.org/for-programs/2016-cacrep-standards/
Criswell, R. (2005). School counselors with and without
teaching
experience: Attitudes of elementary, middle, and high school
teachers (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations and
The-
ses Global (Order No. 3151903).
Dahir, C. A., Burnham, J. J., & Stone, C., (2009). Listen to the

voices:
School counselors and comprehensive school counseling pro-
grams. Professional School Counseling, 12, 182–192. doi:
10.5330/psc.n.2010-12.182
Dahir, C. A., & Tyson, L. (2014). The ASCA national standards
and
the ASCA National Model. In B. T. Erford (Ed.), Professional
https://www.achieve.org/publications/implementing-common-
core-state-standards-role-school-counselor-action-brief
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-
members/careers-roles/state-certification-requirements
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/Mindset
sBehaviors.pdf
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/Mindset
sBehaviors.pdf
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/PositionState
ments/PS_MultitieredSupportSystem.pdf
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/PositionState
ments/PS_MultitieredSupportSystem.pdf
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/Ethical

Standards2016.pdf
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/Ethical
Standards2016.pdf
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42732615
http://www.cacrep.org/for-programs/2016-cacrep-standards/
school counseling: A handbook of theories, programs, and prac-
tices (3rd ed, pp. 166–176). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A
framework
for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervi-
sion and Curriculum Development.
Desmond, K. J., West, J. D., & Bubenzer, D. L. (2007).
Enriching the
profession of school counselling by mentoring novice school
counsellors without teaching experience. Guidance &
Counseling,
21, 174–183.
DeVoss, J. A., & Andrews, M. (2006). School counselors as
educa-
tional leaders. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Dollarhide, C. T. (2003). School counselors as program leaders:

Applying leadership contexts to school counseling. Professional
School Counseling, 5, 304–308. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.
org/stable/42732447
Dollarhide, C. T., & Saginak, K. A. (2017). Comprehensive
school
counseling programs: K-12 delivery systems in action (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Higher Ed.
Duncan, A. (2014, June 30). Key policy letters from the
education
secretary and deputy secretary. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.
gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/140630.html
Fitch, T., Newby, E., Ballestero, V., & Marshall, J. L. (2001).
Coun-
selor preparation: Future school administrators’ perceptions of
the
school counselor’s role. Counselor Education and Supervision,
41,
89–99. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/openview/
77e89f0b390533aeb9b3f4c831d1d55d/1?pq-origsite¼gscholar&
cbl¼25206
Goodnough, G. E., Perusse, R., & Erford, B. T. (2010).

Developmen-
tal classroom guidance. In B. T. Erford (Ed.), Transforming the
school counseling profession (3rd ed., pp. 154–177). Upper
Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Hatch, T. (2013). The use of data in school counseling:
Hatching
results for students, programs, and the profession. Thousand
Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Herr, E. L., Heitzmann, D. E., & Rayman, J. R. (2006). The
profes-
sional counselor as administrator: Perspectives on leadership
and
management of counseling services across settings. Mahwah,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
Johnson, A. P. (2000). It’s time for Madeline Hunter to go: A
new look
at lesson plan design. Action in Teacher Education, 22, 72–78.
doi:
10.1080/01626620.2000.10462994

Knight, J. L. (2015). Preparing elementary school counselors to
pro-
mote career development: Recommendations for school
counselor
education programs. Journal of Career Development, 42, 75–85.
doi:10.1177/0894845314533745
Lee, R. S. (1993). Effects of classroom guidance on student
achieve-
ment. Elementary School Guidance & Counseling, 27, 163–171.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42869065
Lindsey, R. B., Robins, K. N., & Terrell, R. D. (2009). Cultural
proficiency: A manual for school leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Louisiana Department of Education. (n.d.). Making connections
com-
prehensive unit plan. Retrieved from
http://www.mcneese.edu/f/c/
107de2c7/spa_sec_planning.doc
Martin, I., Carey, J., & DeCoster, K. (2009). A national study of
the
current status of state school counseling models. Professional

School Counseling, 12, 378–386. doi:10.5330/psc.n.2010-
12.378
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School
leader-
ship that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA:
Asso-
ciation for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Mason, E. C. M. (2010). Leadership practices of school
counselors
and counseling program implementation. National Association
of
Secondary School Principals (NASSP) Bulletin, 94, 274–285.
doi:10.1177/0192636510395012
Mason, E. C. M., & McMahon, H. G (2009). Leadership
practices of
school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 13, 107–
115.
doi:10.5330/psc.n.2010-13.107
Mau, W. J. (2008). Career development intervention schools. In
H. L. K. Coleman & C. Yeh (Eds.), Handbook of school
counsel-
ing (pp. 497–515). New York, NY: Routledge.

McIver, D., Fitzsimmons, S., & Flanagan, D. (2016).
Instructional
design as knowledge management: A knowledge-in-practice
approach to choosing instructional methods. Journal of Manage-
ment Education, 40, 47–75. doi:10.1177/1052562915587583
Merlin, C., & Knoblich, A. J. (2016). Needs assessment and
unit/
lesson design. In J. Z. Daigle (Ed.), Classroom guidance for
pre-
vention, accountability, and outcomes (pp. 118–152). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mullen, P. R., & Lambie, G. W. (2016). The contribution of
school
counselors’ self-efficacy to their programmatic service delivery.
Psychology in the Schools, 53, 306–320. doi:10.1002/pits.21899
Myrick, R. D. (1997). Developmental guidance and counseling:
A
practical approach (3rd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Educational
Media.
Reiner, S. M., Colbert, R. D., & Perusse, R. (2009). Teacher
percep-

tions of the professional school counselor role: A national
study.
Professional School Counseling, 12, 324–332. doi:10.5330/
psc.n.2010-12.324
Richard, T. L. (2001). Results-based comprehensive guidance
and
counseling programs: A framework for planning and evaluation.
Professional School Counseling, 4, 289–299. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q¼EJ634444&id¼EJ634444
Ryan, T., Kaffenberger, C. J., & Carroll, A. G. (2011).
Response to
intervention: An opportunity for school counselor leadership.
Pro-
fessional School Counseling, 14, 211–221. doi:10.5330/
psc.n.2011-14.211
Saginak, K. A., & Dollarhide, C. T. (2006). Leadership with
admin-
istration: Securing administrative support for transforming your
program. Journal of School Counseling, 4. Retrieved from
http://
jsc.montana.edu/articles/v4n10.pdf
Sink, C. A. (2005) Comprehensive school counseling programs

and
academic achievement—A rejoinder to Brown and Trusty.
Professional School Counseling, 9, 9–12. doi:10.5330/
prsc.9.1.m2g9176x846618r1
Sink, C. A., & Stroh, H. R. (2003). Raising achievement test
scores of
early elementary school students through comprehensive school
counseling programs. Professional School Counseling, 5, 350.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42732452
Lopez and Mason 11
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/140630.html
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/140630.html
http://search.proquest.com/openview/77e89f0b390533aeb9b3f4c
831d1d55d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=25206
http://www.mcneese.edu/f/c/107de2c7/spa_sec_planning.doc
http://www.mcneese.edu/f/c/107de2c7/spa_sec_planning.doc

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=EJ634444&id=EJ634444
http://jsc.montana.edu/articles/v4n10.pdf
http://jsc.montana.edu/articles/v4n10.pdf
Stone, C. B., & Dahir, C. A. (2006). The transformed school
counse-
lor. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Tollerud, T. R., & Nejedlo, R. J. (2004). Designing a
developmental
counseling curriculum. In A. Vernon (Ed.), Counseling Children
and Adolescents (pp. 391–423). Denver, CO: Love Publishing
Company.
Tosado, L. (2014) Developing lesson plans. In J. DeLucia-
Waack, M.
Mercurio, S. Korta, K. Maertin, F. Colvin, E. Martin, . . . C.
Giam-
brone (Eds.), School counselors share their favorite classroom
gui-
dance activities: Guide to planning, conducting, and processing
(pp.
57–63). Alexandria, VA: Association for Specialists in Group
Work.

Vernon, A. (2010). Counseling children and adolescents (4th
ed.).
Denver, CO: Love.
Villares, E., Lemberger, M., Brigman, G., & Webb, L. (2011).
Student
success skills: An evidence-based school counseling program
grounded in humanistic theory. Journal of Humanistic
Counseling,
1, 42–55. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1939.2011.tb00105.x
Whiston, S. C., & Quinby, R. F. (2009). Review of school
counseling
outcome research. Psychology in the Schools, 46, 267–272.
doi:10.1002/pits.20372
Wingfield, R. J., Reese, R. F., & West-Olatunji, C. A. (2010).
Coun-
selors as leaders in schools. Florida Journal of Educational
Admin-
istration & Policy, 4, 114–130. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.
gov/fulltext/EJ911435.pdf
Womack, S. T., Hannah, S. L., & Bell, C. D. (2012). Factor
analysis of

intern effectiveness. Administrative Issues Journal: Education,
Practice & Research, 2, 147–157. doi:10.5929/2011.2.1.5
Young, A. (2013, July–August). Building-level leadership.
ASCA
School Counselor, 52, 35–40.
Young, A., & Miller Kneale, M. (2012). Building school
counselor
leadership capacity [Webinar]. American School Counselor
Association.
Zalaquett, C. P. (2005). Principals’ perceptions of elementary
school counselors’ role and functions. Professional School
Counseling, 8, 451–457. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
stable/42732488
Ziomek-Daigle, J. (2015). School counseling classroom
guidance:
Prevention, accountability, and outcomes. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Author Biographies
Caroline J. Lopez, PhD, is an assistant professor with the

Department of Advanced Studies in Education and Counseling,
California State University, Long Beach, CA.
Erin C. M. Mason, PhD, is an assistant professor with the
Department of Counseling and Psychological Services at Geor-
gia State University, Atlanta, GA.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ911435.pdf
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ911435.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42732488
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42732488
<<
/ASCII85EncodePages false
/AllowTransparency false
/AutoPositionEPSFiles true
/AutoRotatePages /None
/Binding /Left
/CalGrayProfile (Gray Gamma 2.2)
/CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1)
/CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated 050SWOP051 v2)
/sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1)
/CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning
/CompatibilityLevel 1.4
/CompressObjects /Off
/CompressPages true
/ConvertImagesToIndexed true
/PassThroughJPEGImages false
/CreateJobTicket false
/DefaultRenderingIntent /Default
/DetectBlends true
/DetectCurves 0.1000

/ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged
/DoThumbnails false
/EmbedAllFonts true
/EmbedOpenType false
/ParseICCProfilesInComments true
/EmbedJobOptions true
/DSCReportingLevel 0
/EmitDSCWarnings false
/EndPage -1
/ImageMemory 1048576
/LockDistillerParams true
/MaxSubsetPct 100
/Optimize true
/OPM 1
/ParseDSCComments true
/ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true
/PreserveCopyPage true
/PreserveDICMYKValues true
/PreserveEPSInfo true
/PreserveFlatness false
/PreserveHalftoneInfo false
/PreserveOPIComments false
/PreserveOverprintSettings true
/StartPage 1
/SubsetFonts true
/TransferFunctionInfo /Apply
/UCRandBGInfo /Remove
/UsePrologue false
/ColorSettingsFile ()
/AlwaysEmbed [ true
]
/NeverEmbed [ true
]
/AntiAliasColorImages false
/CropColorImages false
/ColorImageMinResolution 266

/ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleColorImages true
/ColorImageDownsampleType /Average
/ColorImageResolution 175
/ColorImageDepth -1
/ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1
/ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286
/EncodeColorImages true
/ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode
/AutoFilterColorImages true
/ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
/ColorACSImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.40
/HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1]
>>
/ColorImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.76
>>
/JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict <<
/TileWidth 256
/TileHeight 256
/Quality 30
>>
/JPEG2000ColorImageDict <<
/TileWidth 256
/TileHeight 256
/Quality 30
>>
/AntiAliasGrayImages false
/CropGrayImages false
/GrayImageMinResolution 266
/GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleGrayImages true
/GrayImageDownsampleType /Average
/GrayImageResolution 175

/GrayImageDepth -1
/GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2
/GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286
/EncodeGrayImages true
/GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode
/AutoFilterGrayImages true
/GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
/GrayACSImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.40
>>
/GrayImageDict <<
/QFactor 0.76
>>
/JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict <<
/TileWidth 256
/TileHeight 256
/Quality 30
>>
/JPEG2000GrayImageDict <<
/TileWidth 256
/TileHeight 256
/Quality 30
>>
/AntiAliasMonoImages false
/CropMonoImages false
/MonoImageMinResolution 900
/MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleMonoImages true
/MonoImageDownsampleType /Average
/MonoImageResolution 175
/MonoImageDepth -1
/MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50286
/EncodeMonoImages true
/MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode

/MonoImageDict <<
/K -1
>>
/AllowPSXObjects false
/CheckCompliance [
/None
]
/PDFX1aCheck false
/PDFX3Check false
/PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
/PDFXNoTrimBoxError true
/PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false
/PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated 050SWOP051
v2)
/PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier (CGATS TR 001)
/PDFXOutputCondition ()
/PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org)
/PDFXTrapped /Unknown
/CreateJDFFile false
/Description <<
/ENU
<FEFF00550073006500200074006800650073006500200053006
1006700650020007300740061006e006400610072006400200073

0065007400740069006e0067007300200066006f0072002000630
0720065006100740069006e006700200077006500620020005000
440046002000660069006c00650073002e0020005400680065007
30065002000730065007400740069006e0067007300200063006f
006e006600690067007500720065006400200066006f007200200
04100630072006f006200610074002000760037002e0030002e00
20004300720065006100740065006400200062007900200054007
2006f00790020004f007400730020006100740020005300610067
00650020005500530020006f006e002000310031002f003100300
02f0032003000300036002e000d000d0032003000300050005000
49002f003600300030005000500049002f004a005000450047002
0004d0065006400690075006d002f004300430049005400540020
00470072006f0075007000200034>
>>
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(Common)
(1.0)
]
/OtherNamespaces [
<<
/AsReaderSpreads false
/CropImagesToFrames true
/ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue
/FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false
/IncludeGuidesGrids false
/IncludeNonPrinting false
/IncludeSlug false
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(InDesign)
(4.0)
]
/OmitPlacedBitmaps false
/OmitPlacedEPS false
/OmitPlacedPDF false

/SimulateOverprint /Legacy
>>
<<
/AllowImageBreaks true
/AllowTableBreaks true
/ExpandPage false
/HonorBaseURL true
/HonorRolloverEffect false
/IgnoreHTMLPageBreaks false
/IncludeHeaderFooter false
/MarginOffset [
0
0
0
0
]
/MetadataAuthor ()
/MetadataKeywords ()
/MetadataSubject ()
/MetadataTitle ()
/MetricPageSize [
0
0
]
/MetricUnit /inch
/MobileCompatible 0
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(GoLive)
(8.0)
]
/OpenZoomToHTMLFontSize false
/PageOrientation /Portrait
/RemoveBackground false
/ShrinkContent true
/TreatColorsAs /MainMonitorColors

/UseEmbeddedProfiles false
/UseHTMLTitleAsMetadata true
>>
<<
/AddBleedMarks false
/AddColorBars false
/AddCropMarks false
/AddPageInfo false
/AddRegMarks false
/BleedOffset [
9
9
9
9
]
/ConvertColors /ConvertToRGB
/DestinationProfileName (sRGB IEC61966-2.1)
/DestinationProfileSelector /UseName
/Downsample16BitImages true
/FlattenerPreset <<
/ClipComplexRegions true
/ConvertStrokesToOutlines false
/ConvertTextToOutlines false
/GradientResolution 300
/LineArtTextResolution 1200
/PresetName ([High Resolution])
/PresetSelector /HighResolution
/RasterVectorBalance 1
>>
/FormElements true
/GenerateStructure false
/IncludeBookmarks false
/IncludeHyperlinks false
/IncludeInteractive false
/IncludeLayers false
/IncludeProfiles true

/MarksOffset 9
/MarksWeight 0.125000
/MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings
/Namespace [
(Adobe)
(CreativeSuite)
(2.0)
]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK
/PageMarksFile /RomanDefault
/PreserveEditing true
/UntaggedCMYKHandling /UseDocumentProfile
/UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile
/UseDocumentBleed false
>>
]
/SyntheticBoldness 1.000000
>> setdistillerparams
<<
/HWResolution [288 288]
/PageSize [612.000 792.000]
>> setpagedevice

1. What does 44 indicate。The number of pulses in a meter。The.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 1. What does 44 indicate。The number of pulses in a meter。The.docx

Similar to 1. What does 44 indicate。The number of pulses in a meter。The.docx (20)

More from jeremylockett77

More from jeremylockett77 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

1. What does 44 indicate。The number of pulses in a meter。The.docx