Society of Counseling Psyc hology Section on College and University Counseling Centers

SCUCC Fall 2011 Newsletter Newsletter Volume 6, Issue 1

From the SCUCC Chair... Counseling Centers has a history of supporting counseling psychologists working in Counseling Centers. Membership at one point was around one hundred and twenty five members and considered a viable section. Recently, our numbers have diminished to less than 50 paying members.

Inside this issue: From the SCUCC Chair

1

From the SCUCC Past-Chair

1

Violence & Threat Assessment

4

Membership Update

5

Leadership Roster

5

Providing Feedback

6

Upcoming Conferences

9

Membership

10

Fall 2011

Jan Collins-Eaglin, PhD This summer, the execuCounseling Center Director Michigan State University tive committee assessed the ______________________ membership to ascertain why membership has fallen The Division 17 Section on and discover ways to meet Counseling and University members’ needs and moti-

vate membership growth. To that end, we distributed an online survey. The response rate (N = 63) was larger than the official membership. The survey results had the following themes: The

majority of respondents were directors (52%) followed by staff psychologists (21.8%). Majority

of respondents joined SCUCC for networking opportunities with their colleagues, wanted a national connection with other (Continued Page 2)

From the SCUCC Past Chair...

Information

Aaron Krasnow, Ph.D. Dean of Students Arizona State University, Polytechnic Campus

I'm thankful to have served in the role of Chairperson of SCUCC and am excited about Dr. Jan Collins-Eaglin now Chairing our section. Her leadership, in formal and in-formal ways, has had already had a substantive impact on the section. I look forward to supporting the planned work that she and many others will do. In this article I wish to highlight a known, but rare-

ly emphasized positive aspect of work in Counseling Centers, namely the incredible learning communities in which Counseling Centers are embedded. As staff of College or University Counseling Services, we necessarily are surrounded by world class teachers, researchers, artists, and scientists, among innumerable others. (Continued Page 3)

Page 2

Continued from the SCUCC Chair ... counseling center professionals, to have a place where the person can receive support on issues, and wanted a home within Div. 17. SCUCC

has the potential to focus on challenges particular to counseling center work. Most CEU workshops are tailored for private practitioners. There is a request to have CEU workshops that focus on student mental health and counseling center issues. The

section can become an advocate for applied research, training, and intervention within the Division. Continue

and expand the newsletters to learn from each other. Address

organizational issues and development in institutional settings. Recommended

Professional Devel-

opment topics: Organizational

development that supports optimal working conditions (45%) Communicating

innovative counseling center practices and programs (40%)

Suicide

prevention services/ programming (75%) Threat

assessment teams (68%)

Evidence-based

treatment best practices for student mental health (60%) Social

media and counseling center issues (70%) Ethics

(45%)

In response to the survey findings, the executive committee has developed three action items for the year. They are to address the cost of dues, enhance networking opportunities, and offer a webinar with CEUs for counseling center staff. We want more counseling center staff to join the section. You do not have to be a counseling psychologist, but any professional mental health staff member that works in a counseling center. This includes clinical psychologists, LPC’s and social workers. The executive committee is going to work with APA to institute online dues

Have Something to Say? We’d love to hear your voice in our next newsletter. All submissions with information relevant to the needs of University and College Counseling Centers are encouraged. The deadline for submissions for the Fall Newsletter is April 15, 2012. Articles should be approximately 500700 words in length.

For more information contact: Tiffany O’Shaughnessy, Ph.D. SCUCC Newsletter Editor [email protected]

payment and advertise that you can join Division 17, pay the dues for the division and section without joining the larger APA body. We are exploring ways to promote networking online. Tiffany O’Shaughnessy developed a Facebook site to promote members communicating with each other. We are also thinking of ways to restructure our time at the APA conference. One suggestion includes having a joint reception with APAGS/APPIC in the evening prior to the business meeting to foster student engagement. If you have any ideas, please let us know on the listserv or Facebook page. The third action is to sponsor a webinar for Counseling Centers for CEU credits. We have not settled on a definite topic, but Ethics is a consideration. We are looking for speakers who are willing to offer the webinar. The time is tentatively set for February, 2012. ([email protected])

Volume 6, Issue 1

Page 3

Continued: From the Past-Chair I believe we underemphasize this in our day-to-day operations and neglect the positive impact of our learning communities on our quality of services, staff recruitment and retention, and staff well-being and quality of life. I’ll comment briefly on each: Quality of Services: As a discipline, we spend a lot of time talking just to each other about ways to improve the quality of services. From Counseling Center surveys, to research on depression and suicide in college students, to improved ways of managing after-hours crises, for the most part we have looked inward, as a discipline, to improve. But why not look outward to our learning communities? If your institution has a business program, have you ever asked if a professor in supplychain management would look at your systems? If your institution has an engineering program, has an engineering student ever helped you arrange your waiting room (or an interior design student, or anthropology major, or anyone really)? Students and faculty are always looking for collaborative projects for theses, Capstones, and publications. Why not invite them to help us? Staff Recruitment and Retention: When you were hired at your Counseling Center, were you asked if you wanted to attend a lecture during your interview day?

Were you shown a list of the world famous scholars that you would be joining at your institution? Were you asked if there was an area of artistry that you were passionate about and then put in touch with someone in that field? I know the answer for most of us is no. But again, why not? It strikes me that this could be a competitive advantage for some Counseling Centers in recruitment; “Come to The College of X, we have the world’s preeminent Orchestral (or whatever) program and the Chair of the department wants to have lunch with you.” And wouldn’t that staff member, who chose your institution for reasons in addition to location and salary, be more likely to stay at your institution? Staff Well-being and Quality of Life: It goes without saying that our work as Counseling Center staff is difficult. Long hours, intense crises and risk-management, and often a below-market salary are all reasons people burn-out or leave the field. Counseling centers work extremely hard internally to help ameliorate the affects of those realities, using tried and true strategies like flex-time, retreats, professional development support, and extended vacations. But, for the most part, many of us still lack what we might have had in graduate school (and what might have sustained us through even leaner times); namely the intellectual stimulation that comes from thinking

hard about important topics, debating them with our colleagues, and then not needing to do much else. Most psychologists in counseling centers chose the clinical practice path over research/teaching for important reasons. But, for most of us, the desire to be part of an ongoing and invigorating intellectual pursuit remains. This dawned on me recently as I attended a lecture by Paul Davies, one of perhaps the most preeminent physicists of our time and the Director of the BEYOND center at Arizona State University. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time and slipped into the auditorium as Dr. Davies explained to the audience about the possibility of life on worlds other than Earth. I was awestruck by his skill at explaining the most complicated of scientific thought in the simplest of ways. Not only did I learn a great deal, but I was reinvigorated as a professional (and as a person)! I hadn’t felt that way in a long time and was electrified and ready to tackle old problems in new ways. Watching and learning from Dr. Davies reminded me that my professional environment was much larger than my office or my departments. It is, in fact, unlimited. ([email protected])

Page 4

Violence and Threat Assessments on University and College Campuses: Definitions and Clarity

“There is a lack of clarity regarding what a threat or violence risk assessment entails.”

Corey M. Arranz, Psy.D. Georgia State University Counseling and Testing Center _____________________ Since the tragic events of April 16, 2007 at Virginia Technical Institute, and subsequent violent events on other campuses, university communities and administrators have become increasingly concerned about violence risk among their student population. Many universities have sought support and services from their campus counseling centers, and counseling centers have been increasingly feeling pressures to serve this need. Many counseling centers have been asked to perform assessments of violence risk for students who have come to the attention of the university. However, most counseling center psychologists have little-to-no training, knowledge, or experience in conducting these types of assessments. For those who do choose, or who need to respond to the pressure, to conduct violence risk assessments, it is important to have a better

understanding of this skill. Although discussion of violence assessment on university and college campuses is better suited to a book than a brief article, I provide a few points which bear upon this work below. There is a lack of clarity regarding what a threat or violence risk assessment entails. The terms “threat assessment” and “violence risk assessment” are often erroneously used synonymously, leaving counseling center psychologists at somewhat of a loss to find information to guide their practice. “Threat assessments” are behaviorallybased evaluations typically conducted by a multidisciplinary team. The factors considered are what the individual has done (e.g., stalking, making verbal or written threats, accumulating weapons, etc.), with the end goal of determining whether he or she poses a threat to another person. This is the most common type of violence assessment and is led primarily by police, judicial, and student affairs personnel. Although

a mental health consultant is often part of the team, the role of the psychologist (or the counseling center) is rather small because the focus is more on movement along the Pathway to Violence which consists of a grievance, ideation, research and planning, preparation, breach, and attack (Calhoun & Weston, 2003), rather than psychological factors. In contrast, a “violence risk assessment” typically refers to a psychological evaluation by a mental health professional. This type of assessment considers the psychological features which can contribute to violent behavior and results in a determination of level of risk for engaging in violent behavior. However, despite the perception derived from recent violent tragedies, violent behavior is such a rare occurrence that it has been difficult to create a set of risk factors specific to violence.

(Continued on page 8)

Page 5

We’ve started a Community page on Facebook. Stop by, “Like Us” and Start Sharing and Connecting with other SCUCC Members http://tinyurl.com/scucc

Membership: It’s that time of year Hello fellow SCUCCers. As the treasurer of the SCUCC, I’ve got some good news and some bad news. The good news is that our SCUCC listserv has 189 enrollees. The bad news is that we only received 30 membership applications and renewals this past year. I propose that we work together to narrow that gap. For my part, I’ve been exploring options to allow members to apply/ renew (and pay) online. We should have more information about this in about a month, and as soon as I know more you’ll be the first to know. Now, for you part. It’s simple - I just need you to renew your membership. Whether you’ve been loyal about maintaining your mem-

bership (if so, thanks!) or you can’t remember the last time you completed a membership application, the membership process is very easy and costs haven’t changed for years (professionals = $10; students are FREE!). Here’s how to renew/apply: 1) Go to the SCUCC webpage: http://www.div17.org/SCUCC, 2) Click on the “Membership” tab and then the “Membership Application” link, 3) Print the PDF of the application, fill out your information, enclose a check (if not a student), and send. It’s as easy as 1-2-3! For your convenience, the last page of this newsletter also has a blank application.

Let’s bring our membership to 100+ this year. It would be great if more of us took advantage of the diversity of experiences and perspectives on our list-serve, so please contribute by emailing the list-serve at [email protected]. If you have questions about membership or the list-serve, don’t hesitate to email me at [email protected]. Enjoy your upcoming breaks! Chris Daood Marquette University Counseling Center

SCUCC Leadership Roster Jan Collins-Eaglin—Chair

Vacant—Chair-Elect

Aaron Krasnow—Past-Chair

Chris Daood—Treasurer

Tiffany O’Shaughnessy—Communications Chair and Newsletter Editor

Sheri Clark—Research Committee

Larry Marks—Webmaster

Page 6

Providing Feedback in Supervision John C. Wade Counseling and Psychological Services University of Kansas _______________________

“...enhance receptivity to feedback, especially when it may be potentially uncomfortable or difficult to hear…”

Although everyone wants to learn and grow, as human beings with inherent sensitivities and defenses, trainees may at times have trouble hearing and accepting feedback even when it is constructively and diplomatically presented. The principles of Motivational Interviewing can be applied to enhance receptivity to feedback, especially when it may be potentially uncomfortable or difficult to hear, making the process more productive and more comfortable for both supervisor and supervisee. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a directive, yet client centered counseling style for eliciting behavior change by helping clients explore and resolve the ambivalence about wanting to change but also wanting to continue the behavior (Rollnick & Miller, 1995). It can be especially useful when discussing sensitive issues with clients who may be experiencing varying levels of openness or receptivity (e.g., Miller, 2004; Miller & Rollnick 2002), and is often incor-

porated when working with clinical problems notable for the presence of ambivalence, such as alcohol abuse or smoking cessation. The basic goals of motivational interviewing are to decrease resistance and enhance motivation for change, which are also very important to the process of feedback. Noting that many of the factors associated with good supervision (e.g., empathy, respect, normalizing, encouraging the trainee to take an active role) naturally overlap with the core principles of Motivational Interviewing, Sobell et al. (2008) created a motivational procedure for facilitating feedback during supervision. The primary principles of using an MI approach to providing feedback are to: (1) express empathy; (2) develop the discrepancy between the current behavior and important goals or values; (3) “roll” with resistance, and (4) support self-efficacy and optimism. The goal of MI based supervision is to construct conversations that increase receptivity by being non-confrontational, nonjudgmental, and empathic. Supervisors encourage trainees to be full collaborators in the feedback discussion process. From an

MI perspective, it can be very useful for the supervisor to help the supervisee “give voice” to his or her awareness of the benefit of making a change. The following are examples of questions supervisors could ask working from Motivational Interviewing approach, illustrating core MI principles (Sobell et al., 2008, p. 152): Empathy/Reflective Listening: “I hear your frustration that your clients don’t seem to be buying into your suggestions.” “It seems that you are feeling confused about where to go with this client.” “It seems really hard to want to listen intently but also share your insights before you forget them.” Develop discrepancy: “Tell me how you are feeling about your work with this client.” “Where are you with the idea of incorporating silence?” “What do you make of your clients tendency not to go into much detail with their responses?” (Continued on Page 7)

Page 7

Providing Feedback in Supervision Continued... Rolling with Resistance: Reflection – simply acknowledge by reflecting back Amplified reflection – overstate a bit. “I can see that she is likely to make a week of terrible decisions if you hold back some of your observations.” Double-sided reflection – “On the one hand you see the value of being client centered. On the other hand, it is difficult to trust your client to make good decisions.” Enhance Confidence: “What gives you some confidence that you can do this next week?”

could help you succeed in making this change?” Adapted from: Wade, J.C. & Jones, J.E. (Anticipated release Fall, 2012). Strength-Based Supervision: Applying the Principles of Positive Psychology to Clinical Training. New York: Springer Publishing Company. References

Rollnick, W., & Miller, W.R. (1995). What is motivational interviewing? Behavioural & Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23, 325-334. Sobell, L.C., Manor, H.L., Sobell, M.B., & Dum, M. (2008). Selfcritiques of audiotaped therapy sessions: A motivational procedure for facilitating feedback during supervision. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 2, 151-155.

Miller, W.R., & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change (2nd edition). New York: Guilford Press.

“What is there about you that

Stay Tuned: SCUCC Will be Sponsoring a CE Webinar during the Spring 2012 Semester More Details to Follow via the SCUCC ListServ

Page 8

Violence and Threat Assessments continued…

“Concern about violence on university campuses is much higher than the incidence of violent behavior, sometimes resulting in overidentifi cation of concerning students. .”

For example, although people who behave violently may have recently felt mistreated by someone else, very few people who feel mistreated engage in violent behaviors. As such, it is difficult to assess or predict violence without risking a high rate of false positives. It is helpful to bear in mind that violence can be conceptualized in two primary ways: affective and predatory (Meloy, 2007). Affective violence refers to an individual who becomes emotionallytriggered to engage in violent behavior; this is the “blind rage” type of violence, where anger overwhelms inhibition. This appears to be the most common type of violence on university campuses. Predatory violence refers to an individual who engages in a violent act with a premeditated goal such as “teaching him/ her a lesson,” improving the world/campus by removing someone, or acquiring some personal gain (e.g., convincing a former partner to resume a relationship, intimidating a professor to change a grade). This type of violence is rare and difficult to “catch” due to its often carefully pre-planned

and private nature. It is also the type of violence about which universities are most concerned, and which has stimulated interest in assessing violence risk. It is also important that counseling center psychologists respond to risk rather than campus anxiety. Concern about violence on university campuses is much higher than the incidence of violent behavior, sometimes resulting in overidentification of concerning students. While it is important to be comprehensive and vigilant, severe violence risk at the level which prompts concern is so rare that we should also seek to avoid treating the haystack as if it were a pile of needles. Given the complexity involved in assessing risk of violent behavior, it is my position that, while psychologists can provide a valuable contribution through violence risk assessments as part of a multidisciplinary process, this should not be the only, or even the most prominent, component of a university’s consideration of a student’s risk of violence. Those psychologists that do become involved in assessing violence should

pursue the level of training necessary to competently, and helpfully, contribute to a university’s efforts to prevent a future violent tragedy. References -Calhoun, F.S. & Weston, S. (2003). Contemporary threat management: A practical guide for identifying, assessing, and managing individuals of violent intent. San Diego: Specialized Training Services. -Meloy, J.R. (2007, June). Violence risk and threat assessment. Atlanta, GA.

Volume 6, Issue 1

Page 9

Upcoming Conferences American Group Psychotherapy Association March 5-12, 2012 – New York, NY www.agpa.org

American Counseling Association March 21-25, 2012 – San Francisco, CA www.counseling.org/convention

Association for Women in Psychology Conference March 8-11, 2012, Palm Springs, CA www.awpsych.org

American College Personnel Convention March 24-28, 2012 – Louisville, KY www.myacpa.org

NASPA March 10-14, 2012 – Phoenix, AZ http://www.naspa.org/conf

American Psychological Association August 2-5, 2012 – Orlando, FL www.apa.org/convention

SCUCC Business Meeting, APA Convention, Washington, DC August, 2011

Membership Application Section on College and University Counseling Centers A Section of the Society of Counseling Psychology—Division 17American Psychological Association

Name: ____________________________________________________________________________________ Name of College/University: ___________________________________________________________________ Highest Degree Awarded: _____________________________________________________________________ Work Setting: _________________________________ Position: _____________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Gender: ( ) Male ( ) Female ( ) Transgendered APA Membership #:: _________________________________ Indicate Type of Membership: ( ) Section Member - Associate Member, Member, or Fellow of Division 17 ( ) Professional Affiliate - Affiliates of the Division, or Fellows or Members of APA who are not members of the Division but who have an interest in the purposes of the Section ( ) Student Affiliate - Any student belonging to APAGS or Division 17 SAG (Membership Fee Waived) Phone Number: ________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________ ( ) New Membership

( ) Renewal

E-mail: ____________________________________________________________________________________ May we put your information on our webpage?

( ) Yes ( ) No

Would you like to be on the listserv?

( ) Yes ( ) No ( ) Already on Listserv

Signature: ____________________________________ Date: _______________________________________ Please list any ideas you have for future SCUCC Projects

Please Send the $10 Membership Dues and Completed Application To: Chris Daood Marquette University Counseling Center Holthusen Hall #204 P.O. Box 1881 Milwaukee, WI 53201 Checks Payable To: Division 17 SCUCC EIN for Division 17 is 52-1564001