inn.

: #3:}
diff.-
h

xx 9-
.
:5}?!
5.)). ‘

. 5...;

til;
ha;

1‘.

 

w

WWW

LR

!'.9'

. ‘2?

.9‘

.1} 4.3.8:, .‘i- .muu...mw“...mmm§.rr . ‘ .
,..f.. . . ‘ . ,. .. .wwmhhi... ‘ .. ‘
r . . . I t. nu... 1... 1 . v
‘. 12.1. . ‘ ‘ . . . .v..J.E5W . db‘)‘
. H1} «4.3.31.

 

 

.LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

CONSULTATION COMPETENCIES IN REHABILITATION
COUNSELOR EDUCATION: A MIXED METHODS
INVESTIGATION

presented by

Stephen Anthony Zanskas

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

Counseling, Educational
Psychology, and Special
Education

Ph. D. degree in

 

 

(:2qu

Major Professor’s Signature
AJQJI I) ‘2 0 0 7

Date

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DAIEDUE

DATEDUE

DATE DUE

 

APR 2 0 2010

 

'99

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:IC|RC/DateDue.indd-p.1

 

 

 

CONSULTATION COMPETENCIES IN REHABILITATION COUNSELOR
EDUCATION: A MIXED METHODS INVESTIGATION
By

Stephen Anthony Zanskas

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education

2007

ABSTRACT
CONSULTATION COMPETENCIES IN REHABILITATION COUNSELOR
EDUCATION: A MIXED METHODS INVESTIGATION
By ‘

Stephen Anthony Zanskas

The purpose of this mixed methods study was to identify which consultation
competencies rehabilitation counselor educators perceived as important for rehabilitation
counseling practice, their perceived level of proﬁciency in teaching these competencies,
and to explore strategies for incorporating these knowledge and skills areas into the
rehabilitation counseling curriculum. In addition, this study addressed whether the
educators’ perceptions of importance and proﬁciency differed according to demographic
characteristics. Initially, 352 individuals with the rank of assistant, associate, or professor
rank identiﬁed as members of the National Council on Rehabilitation Education (N CRE)
or faculty of NCRE member institutions were identiﬁed as potential participants. Of the
original 352 individual e-mail invitations sent to NCRE faculty members throughout the
United States, 301 were successfully delivered. Another 15 reported that they were no
longer employed as rehabilitation counseling educators, declined to participate or would
be out of the office for an extended time period. One individual was unable to access the
electronic survey and another was determined deceased. Of the total population of 284
potential participants, 83 participated yielding an overall survey response rate of 29.22%.

Empirical data was gathered utilizing the Consultation Competency Inventory (CCI) a

web based survey developed for this investigation. Qualitative data was obtained in the
text responses of 42 survey participants to open ended survey questions and through
interviews with seven rehabilitation counselor educators. Five a priori domains of
importance and instructional proﬁciency were identiﬁed: (a) Assessment; (b) Business
and Case Management; (c) Consultation Process and Application Skills; (d) Interpersonal
Relationship Skills, and (e) Problem Solving. Overall, the survey participants ranked the
ﬁve a priori domains of consultation competencies as important or very important to
rehabilitation counseling practice. The rehabilitation counselor educators also ranked
themselves as proﬁcient across each of the ﬁve competency domains. No signiﬁcant
demographic differences were identiﬁed for the a priori importance or proﬁciency
domains. A moderately strong positive correlation was demonstrated reﬂecting a
relationship between educator’s perception of the importance of the consultation
competencies and self-reported instructional and pedagogical proﬁciency. The
implications for rehabilitation counselor practice, education and future research are

discussed.

To Georgia, Scott and Michelle, in appreciation of their patience and support.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation would not have been possible without the guidance and assistance of my
committee, Dr. Michael Leahy, Dr. John Koscuilek, Dr. Kimberly Maier, Dr. Timothy
Tansey, and Dr. Chandra Donnell. Dr. Leahy, as my advisor and dissertation committee
chairperson deserves particular recognition. Dr. Leahy’s support, guidance, and
mentoring were instrumental in my initial application to the rehabilitation counselor
education program and completion of my dissertation. I would also like to acknowledge
Yan Zheng for her methodological assistance and the NCRE research committee for

authorizing the use of their membership database.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1
Statement and Signiﬁcance of the Problem .......................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................ 8
Deﬁnition of Terms ........................................................................................... 11
Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................. 12
CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................. 15
LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 15
Demographic Changes in Rehabilitation Counseling .......................................... 15

The Concept of Consultation .............................................................................. 17
Consultation Competencies 1n Related Fields ..................................................... 20
Practical Experience .......................................................................................... 25
Private Sector Rehabilitation and Disability Management .................................. 27
Competencies in Rehabilitation Counseling ................................................... 34
Perceptions of Rehabilitation Educators ............................................................. 39
Potential Barriers to Inclusion ............................................................................ 41
CHAPTER III ............................................................................................................... 43
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 43
Participants ........................................................................................................ 43
Instrumentation .................................................................................................. 44
Demographic Questionnaire ................................................................... 46

Procedures .............................................................................................. 46

Design .................................................................................................... 47

Data Collection ...................................................................................... 50

Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 52
Quantitative Data ................................................................................... 52

Qualitative Data ..................................................................................... 55

Data Integration ...................................................................................... 56

CHAPTER IV ............................................................................................................... 58
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 58
Response Rate ................................................................................................... 58
Characteristics of the Sample ............................................................................. 60
Consultation Knowledge and Skills .................................................................... 66
Perceived Importance ............................................................................. 67

Perceived Proﬁciency ............................................................................. 74

vi

Differences Across Competency Groupings ....................................................... 94

Demographic Differences Importance and Proﬁciency ....................................... 97
Demographic Differences and Importance .............................................. 97
Demographic Variables and Proﬁciency ............................................... 100
Relationship Between Perceptions of Importance and Proﬁciency ........ 103
Qualitative Data Analysis ................................................................................ 104
CHAPTER V .............................................................................................................. 1 12
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. l 12
Perceived Importance ....................................................................................... 113
Perceived Proﬁciency ...................................................................................... 119
Obstacles to Incorporation ............................................................................... 124
Strategies and Current Methods of Incorporation ............................................. 126
Preparation ...................................................................................................... 127
Limitations ...................................................................................................... 130
Implications ..................................................................................................... 1 32
Implications for the Profession ............................................................. 132
Implications for Rehabilitation Education ............................................. 132
Implications for Research ..................................................................... 134
Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 1 35
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................ 138
Appendix A: Consultation Competencies Inventory ......................................... 139
Appendix B: A Priori Competency Domains .................................................... 154
Appendix C: Quantitative Survey Transmittal Letter ........................................ 157
Appendix D: Qualitative Transmittal Letter ..................................................... 159
Appendix E: Qualitative Interview Consent Form ............................................ 161
Appendix F: Qualitative Demographic Questionnaire ...................................... 163
Appendix G: Qualitative Interview Questions .................................................. 164
Appendix H: Descriptive Statistics Importance Items Means and Standard
Deviations ....................................................................................................... 166
Appendix I: Descriptive Statistics Proﬁciency Items Means and Stande
Deviations ....................................................................................................... 168
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 170

vii

LIST OF TABLES

 

 

 

 

Table I - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample ................................................ 63
Table 2 - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample ................................................ 64
Table 3 - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample ................................................ 65
Table 4 - Importance Domain: Assessment ....................................................................................... 69
Table 5 - Importance Domain: Business and Case Management ..................................................... 70
Table 6 - Importance Domain: Consultant Process and Application ............................................... 71
Table 7 - Importance Domain: Interpersonal Skills .......................................................................... 72
Table 8 - Importance Domain: Problem Solving Skills .................................................................... 73
Table 9 - Proﬁciency Domain: Assessment ....................... - .................................... 78
Table 10 - Proﬁciency Domain: Business and Case Management ................................................... 79
Table 11 - Proﬁciency Domain: Consultation Process and Application .......................................... 80
Table 12 - Proﬁciency Domain: Interpersonal Skills ....................................... - ............. 81
Table 13 - Proﬁciency Domain: Problem Solving Skills .................................................................. 82
Table 14 - Importance and Proﬁciency Scale Means and Standard Deviations .............................. 83
Table 15 - Overall Importance and Proﬁciency Reliability ............................ .83
Table 16 - Reliability CCI Importance and Proﬁciency Domains ................................................... 84
Table 17 - Assessment Importance Interitem Reliability .................................................................. 85
Table 18 - Business and Case Management Importance Interitem Reliability ................................ 86
Table 19 - Consultation Process & Application Skills Importance Interitem Reliability .......... ' ..... 87
Table 20 - Interpersonal Relationship Skills Importance Interitem Reliability ............... 88
Table 21 - Problem Solving Importance Interitem Reliability ......................................................... 89
Table 22 - Proﬁciency in Teaching Assessment Interitem Reliability ............................................. 90
Table 23 - Interpersonal Relationship Skills Importance Interitem Reliability ............................... 91
Table 24 - Proﬁciency Teaching Consultation Process Interitem Reliability ................................. 92

viii

Table 26 - Proﬁciency Teaching Problem Solving Interitem Reliability 94

 

 

Table 27 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Age and Overall Importance 98
Table 28 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Years as an Educator and Importance ................... 99
Table 29 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Years as a Paid Consultant and Importance .......... 99

Table 30 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Master’s Degree Credit Hours and Importance.. 100
Table 31 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Age and Perceived Instructional Proﬁciency ...... 102

Table 32 - One Way Analysis of Variance Years of Experience as an Educator and Proﬁciency

 

 

 

102
Table 33 - One Way Analysis of Variance Years as a Paid Consultant and Proﬁciency ............. 103
Table 34 - One Way Analysis of Variance Credit Hours Required and Proﬁciency .................... 103
Table 35 - Correlation Overall Importance and Proﬁciency 104
Table 36 - Qualitative Themes 107
Table 37 - Participant’s Content Contribution to the Total Theme Development ........................ 108
Table 38 - Importance and Proﬁciency Item Means A Priori Competency Domains .................. 113

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure l : Concurrent Nested Design .................................................................................................. 49

Chapter I
Introduction

Consultation in the human services evolved from clinical models in the ﬁelds of
medicine, mental health, behavioral, and organizational psychology (Hansen, Himes, &
Meier, 1990; Lynch, Habeck, & Sebastian, 1997). Consultation, as a service, has
consistently been empirically identiﬁed as one of the primary knowledge areas required
by practicing rehabilitation counselors (Chan, Leahy, Saunders, Tarvydas, Ferrin, & Lee,
2003; Leahy, Chan, & Saunders, 2003: Leahy, Shapson, & Wright, 1987; Linkowski,
Thoreson, Diamond, Leahy, & Szymanski, 1993; Szymanski, Leahy, & Linkowski,
1993). The types of consultation services rehabilitation counselors typically provide
include: assessment, problem solving, information synthesis, and plan development.
These consultation services also represent the core skills provided by rehabilitation
counselors (Lynch et al., 1997).

Consultation lacks a universally accepted deﬁnition in the ﬁelds of counseling
and psychology (Estrada-Hemandez & Saunders, 2005; Schein, 1999; Zins, 1993).
The deﬁnition of consultation provided by the CRCC reﬂects a process model of
consultation. The Commission for Rehabilitation Counselors (CRCC) has deﬁned
consultation in the Scope of Practice for rehabilitation counselors as "the application of
scientiﬁc principles and procedures in counseling and human development to provide
assistance in understanding and solving problems that the consultee may have in relation
to a third party, be it individual, group, or organization" (CRCC, 2000, p.2).

Rehabilitation counselors need adequate preparation for the consultation activities

they will be expected to perform in their future practice. A review of the literature reﬂects

that practicing certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors perceive consultation as a required job
function and knowledge area (Estrada-Hemandez & Saunders, 2005; Leahy, et al., 1987;
Linkowski, et al., 1993; Szymanski, Leahy, & Linkowski, 1993; Chan, et al., 2003;
Leahy, et al., 2003). Brown (1993) expressed that the process of training consultants
differed little from the process of training counselors. However, rehabilitation counselor
educators have reported that they did not feel adequately prepared to provide instruction
in consultation-related activities (Ebener, Berven, & Wright, 1993).

Rehabilitation counselors have been affected by changes in counseling practice
settings and service delivery systems over the past decade (Leahy, Chan, & Saunders,
2003). Societal trends, legislative mandates or changes, emerging knowledge and skill
requirements, managed health care, the licensure movement, accreditation changes,
outsourcing, and economic trends have contributed to a turbulent employment
environment (Cummings, 1995; Hershenson & McKenna, 1998: Leahy, et al., 2003;
Shaw, Leahy, Chan, & Catalano, 2006). Employment options for rehabilitation
counselors are expanding in this dynamic environment (Benschoff & Souheaver, 1991;
Desmond, 1985; Garvin, 1985; Koch & Rumrill, 1997; Lynch & Herbert 1984).
Rehabilitation counselors are increasingly employed in the private sector as forensic or
vocational experts, within disability management programs, and in medical or other
settings requiring consultation skills (Blackwell, Field, Johnson, Kelsay, & Neulicht,
2005; Estrada-Hemandez & Saunders, 2005; Leahy, Chan & Saunders, 2003; Scully,
1996; Shahnassarian, 2002; Thomas, 1999).

As the employment of rehabilitation counselors in service delivery settings

requiring consultation skills continues to increase, traditional state-federal public

rehabilitation settings are experiencing manpower shortages. AS early as 1995, Jakubiak
observed that rehabilitation counselor education programs could not keep up with the
demand for qualiﬁed counselors. Chan (2003) projected numerous job openings within
the state-federal rehabilitation programs that were attributed to retirement, turnover and
the increased hiring of rehabilitation counselors by insurance companies, case
management companies, and mental health providers. Chan (2003) also concluded that
the state agency's personnel needs could not be met through the current rehabilitation
counselor education programs. Despite favorable occupational projections, a recent
Delphi study of leaders in the ﬁeld of rehabilitation cited declining RSA training funds
and difﬁculty recruiting masters and doctoral students into rehabilitation counselor
education programs among the most highly ranked education and training issues for the
ﬁeld (Shaw, et al., 2006). The authors noted that although many state vocational
rehabilitation counseling positions are available their salaries are lower and their pay
increases have not kept pace with those in the private sector.

Consultation has been described as an effective method of service delivery in
school psychology and other settings that involve many clients, where both time and
service management are essential (Lepage, Kratochwill, & Elliott, 2004). Implementation
of a consultation approach has been a pragmatic response in mental health, public health,
and school psychology settings that realized the number of clients that could beneﬁt from
services exceeded the number of individuals who could be treated individually (Albee,
1968; Caplan & Caplan 1993, Curtis & Zin, 1981). The convergence of societal trends
has contributed to a practice environment conducive to rehabilitation counselor educators

incorporating consultation skill development into their program curricula.

Statement and Significance of the Problem

Historically, consultation has been identiﬁed as an important rehabilitation
counseling job function and knowledge requirement (Leahy, Shapson, & Wright, 1987;
Linkowski, Thoreson, Diamond, Leahy, & Szymanski; Szymanski, Leahy, & Linkowski,
1993). Further, recent research regarding job and knowledge requirements and training
needs of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors (CRC’s) in the 21 st century indicates
consultation is among the most frequently performed rehabilitation counseling tasks
(Chan, et al., 2003; Leahy, Chan, & Saunders, 2003). Rehabilitation counseling
employment settings have experienced considerable diversiﬁcation during the past 20
years. Changes in service provision have accompanied this diversiﬁcation of practice
settings resulting in the emergence of new practitioner knowledge and skill requirements
(Leahy, et al., 2003). These changes in the rehabilitation counselor’s role have added to
the knowledge and skill requirements for practice (Jacques, 1959; Wright, 1980; & Leahy
2002).

The development of new employment opportunities is often based upon an
individual counselor’s personal abilities and skills rather than the recognition of
rehabilitation counseling as a profession. Habeck (1997) described the process of
rehabilitation counselors obtaining employment in new settings as a type of
“pathfmding,” where professionals discover new settings to apply their skills. Jenkins and
Strauser (1999) argued that the marketability of rehabilitation counselors would
eventually decline if the profession remained focused upon serving a single population.
In response to the rehabilitation profession’s dynamic practice environment, Jenkins and

Strauser (1999) expressed the need for rehabilitation counselors to horizontally expand

their interaction with businesses and organizations, broadening the application of, and
incorporating new areas of knowledge into their training and consultation services. The
literature review section of this study will demonstrate the trend toward diverse
employment options for rehabilitation counselors requiring the development of
consultation skills for effective practice.

Speciﬁc research regarding the education and training opportunities for graduate
rehabilitation counseling students interested in developing consultation skills is
essentially nonexistent. However, the call for the revision of rehabilitation counselor
program curriculums to address the needs of private sector and disability management
services is extensive. As early as 1979, researchers indicated the shift in employment
from public sector to less traditional employment settings (F einberg & McFarlane, 1979;
McMahon, 1979; Sales, 1979). During the mid 1980’s a number of authors suggested that
rehabilitation counseling education programs were not adequately preparing graduates for
private sector employment (Crystal, 1987; Habeck, & Munrowd, 1987; Klein, Relliek, &
Kelz, I987; Lynch & Martin, 1982; Matkin & Riggar, 1986; McMahon & Matkin, 1983).
Rather than developing new courses, Matkin (1987) recommended integrating
information regarding business management and insurance rehabilitation into existing
courses and developing ﬁeld placements in these settings to provide applied practice
experience. Modiﬁcation of the rehabilitation counselor education curriculum continued
to be described as necessary to prepare rehabilitation counselors for employment in
private sector rehabilitation throughout the 1990’s (Kilbury, Benshoff, & Riggar, 1990;
Rasch, 1992; Rosenthal & Olshesky, 1999). Conceptually, the employment of

rehabilitation counselors in disability management settings requires that they expand their

scope of practice and training beyond the traditional individual or clinical services to
include education about the environmental, organizational and systemic factors of
rehabilitation in business and industry (Gottlieb, Vandergoot, & Lutsky, 1991; Habeck,
Kress, Scully, & Kirchner, 1994; Shrey, 1994; and Tate, Habeck, & Galvin, 1986).

Training needs identiﬁed for competent practice by CRC’s during the 21St century
were investigated by Chan, Leahy, Saunders, Tarvydas, Ferrin, and Lee (2003). Results
of Chan et al.’s (2003) study of CRC’s in the public, non-proﬁt and private sectors
revealed that the knowledge factor which included career counseling, assessment, and
consultation contained more critical training needs than any other identiﬁed factor.
Results of their analysis revealed 23 knowledge areas in three primary practice settings
(public, nonproﬁt, and proprietary). The authors noted knowledge about some of the
emerging training needs such as health care and disability systems were not likely
covered in graduate rehabilitation counselor curriculums when the respondents received
their training and that it was unlikely that they were emphasized in the majority of current
rehabilitation counselor education programs.

Consistent with rehabilitation counselors employed in the public sectors, Chan, et
al., (2003), noted career counseling, assessment, and consultation as areas which met the
criteria for critical training needs for counselors employed in the private sector.
Rehabilitation counselors in proprietary settings expressed the perception that they had
limited preparation in the areas of accommodations, employer practices, job acquisition
and retention, follow-up/post employment services, work conditioning, and the use of the
intemet resources for rehabilitation counseling. Unique to the private sector was the

identiﬁcation of critical training needs within the health care and disability systems

knowledge domains. Speciﬁc items included expert testimony, workers compensation
laws and practices, and employer-based disability prevention and management services.
Multicultural counseling, ethical decision-making, ﬁnancial resources as well as case and
caseload management were identiﬁed as critical training needs.

Private sector rehabilitation professionals are not the only segment of our
profession implementing a consultative approach to service provision. Advocates of
consumerism and social justice approaches have also advocated consulting roles for the
rehabilitation counseling professional (Davidson, Waldo, & Adams, 2006; Home &
Mathews, 2006; Toporek, Gerstein, Fouad, Roysircar, & Israel, 2006; Vash, 1992).
Social justice proponents have also expressed the need for training programs to focus on
building and sustaining community partnerships as well as teaching students consultation
and organizational change skills (Toporek, Gerstein, Fouad, Roysircar, & Israel, 2006).

Rather than focus upon knowledge and skill requirements required for speciﬁc
practice settings, it would appear advantageous for preservice education programs to
prepare rehabilitation counseling graduate students with fundamental skills, such as
consultation competencies, that transcend service settings. Rehabilitation counselor
educators have reported in the past that they did not feel adequately prepared to provide
instruction in consultation-related activities (Ebener & Berven, 1993). Despite the
historical importance of consultation in rehabilitation counseling, there has been minimal
research about the topic in our profession and negligible formal education or training
available to prepare rehabilitation counselors to provide consultation services (Brown,
1993; Estrada-Hernandez & Saunders, 2005).

Societal trends, the emergence of diverse practice settings, increasing demand for

service along with an insufﬁcient number of practicing rehabilitation counselors to meet
the demand for service suggests the value of incorporating consultation competencies
into the curriculum of rehabilitation counselor education programs. In our dynamic
practice environment, it is essential for the rehabilitation counseling profession to
investigate as well as understand the current state of the art in the education and training
of rehabilitation counselors to fulﬁll consultation roles, identify strategies to incorporate
consultation competencies into rehabilitation counselor curriculums and the obstacles to
their implementation.
Purpose of the Study

Although the consulting competencies, related job functions, knowledge areas
and training needs of practicing certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors have been empirically
documented, the existing body of research has not addressed the development of
consultation competencies at the master's degree level. Knowledge of the process of
consultation and the development of consulting skills remains a critical training need for
practicing rehabilitation counselors. Pre-service education addressing consultation as a
professional competency would prepare rehabilitation counselors for their future practice.
Despite the evident need for consultation training at the master's degree level for
rehabilitation counselors, no studies have addressed their development. Only one study
can be identiﬁed in the rehabilitation counseling literature addressing faculty perceptions
of the importance of and faculty’s perceived level of preparation for educating
rehabilitation counseling graduate students about the process of consultation (Ebener &
Berven, 1993). The existing research has primarily consisted of opinion pieces regarding

the value and importance of consultation for practicing counselors, or addresses

consultation from the perspectives of other disciplines.

A mixed methods design will be used for this study. The intent of this design is
three-fold. The modiﬁed RSI-R will be used to identify which consultation competencies
rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceive to be important to rehabilitation counseling
practice as well as their perceived level of proﬁciency for teaching the respective
competencies. Finally, interviews with subject experts will be used to explore the barriers
to and the best methods for integrating the consultation competencies into the
rehabilitation counseling curriculum.

Whether current graduate rehabilitation counselor training programs have failed
to integrate consultation skill development into the curriculum in an identiﬁable manner
to their students, or simply are not providing adequate educational opportunities for the
development of consultation skills has not been previously addressed. In order to begin to
address this gap in the literature, a descriptive ex post facto research design will be used
to identify which consultation competencies rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceive
to be important to rehabilitation counseling practice, their perceived level of proﬁciency
for teaching the respective competencies, and the relationship between the importance
attributed to consultation skills and the educators teaching proﬁciency rating.
Concurrently, qualitative interview data will be gathered from subject experts to identify
the barriers to and methods of integrating consultation competencies into the
rehabilitation counselor curriculum. The research questions to be addressed in this
proposed study include:

1. According to rehabilitation counselor educators, how important are consultation

competencies for effective rehabilitation counselor practice?

2. Does the level of importance differ across components of the competencies?

3. Are there differences in the level of importance in the components of the
competencies relative to speciﬁc demographic characteristics (ie. Age, gender, years of
experience as a rehabilitation counselor educator, years as a paid consultant, and the
established credit hour requirement for completion of a master’s degree at the faculty’s
respective rehabilitation counselor education program)?

4. How do rehabilitation counselor educators perceive their own instructional and
pedagogical proﬁciency to teach consultation competencies for rehabilitation counseling
practice?

5. Are there differences in the level of proﬁciency in the components of the
competencies relative to speciﬁc demographic characteristics (ie. Age, gender, years of
experience as a rehabilitation counselor educator, years as a paid consultant, and the
established credit hour requirement for completion of a master’s degree at the faculty’s
respective rehabilitation counselor education program)?

6. How do the perceptions of rehabilitation counselor educators’ own instructional and
pedagogical proﬁciency to teach consultation competencies differ across components of
the competencies?

7. What is the relationship between educators’ perceptions of the importance and their
proﬁciency in teaching consulting competencies?

Qualitative Questions

1. How do rehabilitation counselor educators describe consultation skills in relation to
rehabilitation counselor practice?

2. How can consultation competencies be incorporated into the rehabilitation counselor

10

education curriculum?

3. What barriers or obstacles do rehabilitation counselor educators perceive to the
incorporation of consultation competencies into their curriculum?

Deﬁnition of Terms

Consultation: The Commission for Rehabilitation Counselor Certiﬁcation (CRCC) has
deﬁned consultation in the Scope of Practice for rehabilitation counselors as "the
application of scientiﬁc principles and procedures in counseling and human development
to provide assistance in understanding and solving problems that the consultee may have
in relation to a third party, be it individual, group, or organization" (CRCC, 2000, p.2).
wbilitation Counselor: A practitioner with a master’s degree who assists persons with
physical, mental, developmental, cognitive, and emotional disabilities to achieve their
personal, career, and independent living goals in the most integrated setting possible
through the application of the counseling process. Techniques and modalities used by
rehabilitation counselors may include, but are not limited to: (a) assessment and
appraisal; (b) diagnosis and treatment planning; (c) career or vocational counseling; ((1)
individual or group counseling; (6) case management, referral, and service coordination;
(f) program evaluation and research; (g) interventions to remove attitudinal, employment,
or environmental barriers; (h) consultation services among multiple parties, regulatory
bodies, or about access to technology; and (i) job analysis, job development, or job
placement services (Scope of Practice for Rehabilitation Counseling, 2005).

Consultee: An individual, group or organization who invokes the consultant’s assistance
in a problem that is believed to be within the consultant’s area of competence (Caplan

and Caplan, 1993).

ll

Client; The focus of the consultee’s professional operation.
Competencies: The speciﬁc knowledge and skills required of rehabilitation counselors to
provide effective services to the consultee in relation to a third party, be it an individual,
group, or organization.
Mixed Methods: A research method that focuses on collection, analyzing, and integration
of both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study (Creswell, 2003).
Concurrent Strategy: A mixed methods research strategy identiﬁed by its use of one data
collection phase, during which both qualitative and quantitative data are collected
simultaneously (Creswell, 2003; Hansen, Creswell, Plano-Clark, Petska, & Creswell,
2005)
Concurrent Nested Strategy; A nested approach has a predominant method that guides the
project and an embedded research method. For the purposes of this investigation, the
qualitative research method is embedded within the quantitative method. The analysis of
the two methods are mixed during the analysis phase of the investigation. This research
model enables the researcher to beneﬁt from the advantages of both quantitative and
qualitative data and gain broader perspectives as a result of using different types of data
obtained from different levels within a single study (Creswell, 2003; Hansen, Creswell,
Plano-Clark, Petska, & Creswell, 2005).
Assumptions and Limitations

A primary assumption underlying this study is related to the validity of relying
upon self-report measures to assess rehabilitation counselor educators perception of the
importance of consultation competencies to rehabilitation practice, the adequacy of their

own education or training, experience, and program curriculums for preparing

12

rehabilitation counselors to provide consulting skills in their clinical practice upon
graduation. Self-report surveys represent a single sample taken at the time the participant
considers their opinions and perceptions (Leedy and Ormond, 2005). Self-report
measures can be impacted by the context, recent events, or the desire of the participant to
appear favorable to the researcher. Regardless of the potential limitations, self-report
survey research has been used frequently to deﬁne competencies that are either not
directly observed, or are observed through multiple behaviors (Boyatzis, 1982; Scully,
1996). Rehabilitation counselor educators, as university faculty, are however believed to
possess the requisite skill, ability, judgment, and research experience to accurately assess
professional competencies related to consultation.

It is assumed that the modiﬁed Rehabilitation Skills Inventory-Revised (RSI-R)
accurately reﬂects the consultation competencies related to rehabilitation counseling
practice; however, outcome studies were not used to verify the instrument’s accuracy for
this purpose. The Rehabilitation Skills Inventory-Revised is an instrument designed to be
a standardized questionnaire of the competencies required of rehabilitation counselors
and considers consultation from a rehabilitation counseling perspective. The consultation
items used in this investigation were modiﬁed items drawn from the RSI-R. The items
drawn from the RSI-R and the consultation practice portion of the questionnaire have not
been validated as being involved in effective consultation, were inferred from the
literature, and have not been directly connected to consultation outcomes.

Another potential limitation of this investigation is related to the non-probability
sampling method employed for the quantitative web based survey of rehabilitation

counselor educators portion of this mixed methods research design. However, Bimbaum

l3

(2005) has expressed that the use of the World Wide Web allows the researcher to
efﬁciently recruit specialized samples of people with rare characteristics, allows for
standardization of procedures, and makes studies easy to replicate. As the results of the
present investigation are intended for generalization to rehabilitation counselor educators,
a purposive sample appears appropriate.

Electronic surveys can be a highly effective method of data collection with
university faculty members. As participants, university faculty are comfortable with
computers, familiar with using the intemet, and have an interest in research (Leedy and
Ormond, 2005). Methodological problems of Web based studies include higher rates of
drop out and repeated participation. Despite these limitations, Bimbaum (2005) analyzed
a number of studies that compared data obtained in Web versus lab and found that these
two methods usually reach the same conclusions.

Although a concurrent nested mixed methods research design has many strengths,
there are limitations inherent with the use of this approach. Data collected will require
transformation to allow integration during the analysis phase of the investigation.
Creswell (2003) indicated that little has been written to guide the researcher through the
data transformation process or how the researcher should resolve discrepancies that may
occur between the two types of data. The embedded nature of the qualitative data in this
study also implies an unequal priority between the quantitative and qualitative methods
resulting in unequal evidence that can impact integration and interpretation of the ﬁnal
results (Creswell, 2003; Hansen, Creswell, Plano-Clark, Petska, & Creswell, 2005;

Bryman, 2006; Bryman, 2007).

14

Chapter 11
Literature Review

Consultation, as a service, has been empirically identiﬁed as one of the primary
knowledge areas required by practicing rehabilitation counselors (Chan, Leahy, Saunders,
Tarvydas, Ferrin, & Lee, 2003; Leahy, Chan, & Saunders, 2003: Leahy, Shapson, &
Wright, 1987; Linkowski, Thoreson, Diamond, Leahy, & Szymanski, 1993; Szymanski,
Leahy, & Linkowski, 1993). Despite the importance of consultation, rehabilitation
counselors have expressed they do not feel adequately prepared for providing
consultation services (Chan et al., 2003). Similarly, rehabilitation counselor educators
have reported they were only moderately prepared to provide instruction in consultation-
related activities (Ebener, Berven, & Wright, 1993).

Minimal theoretical or empirically based information has been available about
consultation in the rehabilitation counseling literature. As a result, little is known about
the preparation of rehabilitation counselors for consultation practice, the level of
importance rehabilitation counselor educators attribute to consultation skill development
or their ability to teach the requisite competencies. While there is limited information
available about consultation in the rehabilitation counseling literature, an extensive body
of literature exists in the allied helping professions. The areas of counseling, consulting
psychology, industrial/organizational psychology, school psychology and disability
management were reviewed in order to provide a context for this study.

Demographic Changes in Rehabilitation Counseling
Since 1973 the employment market for new rehabilitation professionals

graduating from rehabilitation counselor education programs shifted from the public

15

sector to less traditional employment settings (Feinberg & McFarlane, 1979). According
to a recent manpower study, the data on the chronological age of the current workforce
indicates that about 15% of state vocational rehabilitation counselors will retire within the
next ﬁve years (Chan, 2003). The expected retirement rate of ﬁeld supervisors was
expected to be even higher. Chan’s (2003) analyses also suggest that another 25% of the
counselors will be leave state vocational rehabilitation agency employment for reasons
other than retirement. Many counselors reportedly leave state vocational rehabilitation
agency employment to obtain a higher salary. Other reasons cited for voluntarily leaving
state vocational rehabilitation agency employment included the counselors’ desire to have
more autonomy in making decisions and the desire to spend more time with their clients.
Chan’s (2003) preliminary projections indicated that state rehabilitation agencies could
expect to replace about 3,800 counselors and about 850 supervisors within the next ﬁve
years. However, university masters programs for rehabilitation counselors are also facing
succession and replacement problems. Chan (2003) projected that universities could be
expected to produce about 5,000 new graduates by 2007. However, given cm'rent
recruitment rates, only about 1,500 graduates would be employed by state VR agencies.
The anticipated pool of new hires is signiﬁcantly below the expected replacement needs
of state VR agencies.

Demographic information provided by the Commission on Rehabilitation
Counselor Certiﬁcation (CRCC) provides additional support for the contention that the
supply of new rehabilitation counselors is inadequate to meet the demand for qualiﬁed
rehabilitation professionals. As of November 22, 2006, there were 15,615 Certiﬁed

Rehabilitation Counselors (CRC’s). Less than 6% of the CRC’s were age 30 or younger

16

while over 51% were age 50 years of age or older. Only approximately 27% of the total
CRC’s were employed in the state-federal vocational rehabilitation system (personal
communication from Cindy A. Chapman, November 28, 2006). Review of the facts and
ﬁgures regarding the demographic composition of the rehabilitation counseling
profession suggests our profession is in the midst of a developing national labor shortage.
The incorporation of consultation strategies in rehabilitation counseling may become
necessary in order to maximize the use of existing skilled professionals. Similar to
fundamental counseling or communication skills, consultation as a process spans across
counselor practice settings and would appear to have broad appeal.
The Concept of Consultation

Consultation in human services is an outgrth of the clinical models of medicine
and mental health, behavioral psychology, and organizational studies (Lynch, et al.,
1997). Understanding and articulating one's deﬁnition of consultation is essential for
successful consultation to occur. Research ﬁndings indicate that the deﬁnition of
consultation depends upon a consultant’s work setting, educational backgrounds, goals
and conceptual models (Kurpius & Fuqua. 1993). Consultation has been deﬁned as an
indirect means of solving problems between a consultant and the help seeker or the
consultee (Zins, 1993). Consultation is generally regarded as a triadic, work related, issue
focused, voluntary, and non-judgmental activity (Kurpius & Fuqua,1993). Consultation
in rehabilitation is frequently interdisciplinary and counselors often serve as part of an
interdisciplinary team (Lynch et al., 1997).

The current study uses the deﬁnition of consultation contained in the CRCC

Scope of Practice Statement. The Commission for Rehabilitation Counselor (CRCC)

l7

deﬁned consultation in the Scope of Practice for rehabilitation counselors as "the
application of scientiﬁc principles and procedures in counseling and human development
to provide assistance in understanding and solving problems that the consultee may have
in relation to a third party, be it individual, group, or organization" (CRCC, 2000, p.2).

There are many models of consultation (Blake & Mouton, 1976). Within these
models, consultation can be described as either formal or informal. Formal consultation
requires the development of a contract. Informal consultation is most often represented as
taking place among peers or between a consultant and a senior colleague (Kurpius &
Fuqua, 1993). Another distinguishing characteristic between consultants is their
employer. Although the process of consulting is essentially the same regardless of the
employer, a consultant that works speciﬁcally for an employer is considered an internal
consultant. External consultants are individuals hired by a consultee and usually have
either a contract or fee for service payment arrangement. Whether one is employed as an
internal consultant or retained as an external consultant conveys distinct role advantages.
External consultants are readily perceived as experts. However, external consultants often
lack the relevant background information internal consultants possess regarding problems
by virtue of their employment by an organization (Kurpius & Fuqua, 1993; Lynch et al.,
1997)

Fundamentally, consultation paradigms can be divided into two
conceptualizations, expert and process models of consultation. A consultant has
responsibility for the design, implementation and the success of the intervention during
expert consultation. Examples of the expert model of consultation include the fee for

expertise and traditional doctor-patient relationships (Rockwood, 1993). In contrast,

18

process consultation, involves the consultant working with the consultee to design and
implement change and the responsibility for success is share (Kurpius & Fuqua, 1993;
Schein, 1999). Process consultation allows for a shift between the expert and process
models as required by the problem encountered (Schein, 1999).

Hodges and Cooper (1983) described three basic models of consultation.
Educational consultation was described as associated with a problem that is related to a
lack of skill or knowledge. Interventions in educational consultation are focused upon
modeling skills or imparting information. Individual consultation involves problems
primarily attributed to attitudes, motivation, intra-psychic conﬂicts or the personal style
of the consultee. Interventions in individual consulting focus upon eliminating defensive
processes, resolving theme interferences, or facilitating personal growth System process
models where the problem is primarily due to characteristics of an organization or
community to which that client or consultee belong. Intervention is focused around
changing channels of communication, power, and support.

Although a description of the many models of consultation is beyond the scope of
the present study, the actual process of consultation has been described as including six
generic stages (Kurpius, F uqua, & Rozecki, 1993):

1. Pre-entry. Self-assessment by the consultant to evaluate personal competencies
related to the needed services.

2. Entry. Problem exploration and contract development.

3. Information gathering, problem identiﬁcation and goal setting.

4. Solution searching and intervention selection.

5. Evaluation of the success of the intervention and possible redeﬁnition of the problem.

19

6. Termination. Which may include debrieﬁng and reﬂection about the process.

A review of the literature has demonstrated that a consultant’s deﬁnitions of
consultation vary depending upon their work setting, educational backgrounds, goals and
conceptual models. Attempting to identify common consulting competencies will reﬂect
similar levels of complexity and contextual differences (Estrada-Hernandez & Saunders,
2005; Kurpius & Fuqua. 1993; Shein, 1999).

Consultation Competencies in Related Fields

The need to identify consultation competencies was identiﬁed as early as 1920
when the APA’s Division 13 of Consulting Psychology received the assignment to
specify the competencies and knowledge bases associated with consulting psychology
and to assure that division members had met the prerequisites for recognition as
consulting psychologists (O’Roark, 1999). Although the process of consultation can be
deﬁned, the approach taken to deﬁne what constitutes a competency appears to vary by
discipline. As will be apparent in this review of the literature, practitioner perspectives of
consultation competencies suggest consultation competencies are developed over time
through practice rather than speciﬁc training.

Heckler (1998) subjectively described his perceptions of the characteristics of an
effective consulting management psychologist as he encouraged others to mentor new
professionals entering the ﬁeld. Heckler cited being pragmatic, able to think on one’s
feet, salesmanship, versatility, and personal attractiveness as essential qualities of the
management psychologist.

Consulting has also been described as an art rather than a science (Merrell &

Weigel, 1998). Based upon their applied consulting experiences, Merrell and Weigel

20

(1998) indicated successful consultants were generalists, solution focused, pragmatic, and
insightful. Regardless of one’s specialty consultants may engage in preventative,
developmental or remedial services. In applied practice, the consultant's character,
experience, values, intuition, and relationship building skills appear more important than
the application of scientiﬁc facts and theories. According to Merrell and Weigel, the art
of consultation is not readily trained. It emerges as consultants develop their craft,
requires an apprenticeship, mentoring, and a commitment to lifelong learning and
development.

Consultation has become a major function of school psychologists (Knoff, Hines,
& Kromrey, 1995). Extending earlier work the authors developed the Consultation
Effectiveness Scale (CBS). The ﬁnal version of the CES was developed through the study
of 225 school psychologists. A factor analysis yielded four ﬁnal scales reﬂecting the
characteristics of effective consultants: Interpersonal Skills, Problem-Solving Skills,
Consultation Process and Application, and Ethical and Professional Practice Skills (Knoff
et al., 1995). The CBS was described as providing insight into the characteristics of
school psychologists who were also effective consultants. Additional review of the
competencies identiﬁed in the CES to inform the present investigation of rehabilitation
counselor competencies is warranted

Interpersonal Skills, with 24 items, emphasized showing respect for the consultee,
being trustworthy, approachable, encouraging, pleasant and having a positive attitude.
Problem-solving skills, with 14 items described behaviors and skills consultants use to
identify and analyze problems. Items receiving the highest rating in the problem-solving

factor included: skillful, good facilitator, active listener, effective at establishing a

21

rapport, good at problem-solving, and astute observer/perceptive. Consultation Process
and Application, with 11 items, was the third cluster identiﬁed. Items on this scale
essentially reﬂect the consultant’s ability to get involved, evaluate and focus ideas, be
active, follow through and identify clear goals. Ethical and Professional Practice Skills,
with 7 items, was the ﬁnal factor identiﬁed. Representative characteristics for this factor
included practicing in an ethical manner, being trustworthy, maintaining conﬁdentiality,
remaining emotionally stable, and possessing a clear sense of professional identity (Knoff
etaL,l995)

F roehle (1978) outlined an entire curriculum based upon ﬁeld placement, didactic,
and laboratory skill development for the systematic training for consultants through
competency-based education. Formal training in consultation received increased attention
in the counseling psychology literature when consultation became an important part of
the psychologist’s role (Alpert & Meyers, 1983; Fox, 1994; F roehle, Fuqua, Gibson,
Kurpius, & Robinson, 1989; Hellcamp & Morgan, 1989; Lowman, 1998; Lowman, 2002;
Matarazza, 1987; Zins, Kratochwill, & Elliott, 1993). Proﬁciency in consultation requires
not only specialty knowledge and skills but also competency in the consultation process,
a skill that transcends all specialty areas or employment settings in psychology. Specialty
area skills or expertise alone do not imply proﬁciency as a consultant ((Hellcamp, Zins,
Ferguson, & Hodge, 1998; Robinson-Kurpius, Fuqua, Gibson, Kurpius, & F roehle,
1995).

Lynch et al., (1997) represents one of the few authors to have speciﬁcally
addressed consultation as a professional practice in rehabilitation. In their review of the

literature the authors described consultation skills as involving the core rehabilitation

22

counseling skills of evaluation or assessment, problem solving, information synthesis,
and plan development. Within the context of the role and function studies in
rehabilitation counseling, Lynch et al., (1997) identiﬁed comprehensive assessment, case
management and vocational planning, research methodology, program evaluation, and
outcome analysis as valuable reimbursable consultative services. Business and industry,
disability management, legal, or school settings were described as potential consultation
opportunities for rehabilitation counselors. Lynch et al., (1997) expressed the need for
improved training opportunities for both new and experienced rehabilitation counselors
emphasizing the adoption of an ecological or systems perspective and an understanding
of organizational systems and their development.

A national survey of graduate programs in psychology regarding their training
practices in consultation reﬂected that courses, practicum experiences or workshops on
consulting were not typically offered (Hellcamp, Zins, Ferguson, & Hodge, 1998). A
content analysis of doctoral-level training programs in consulting psychology reﬂects that
the profession was cross-disciplinary (Garman, Zlatoper, & Whiston, 1998). Despite the
extensive research regarding the training of consultants in consulting and counseling
psychology, until recently there were no programs designed speciﬁcally for the
preparation of consulting psychologists (Fuqua & Newman, 2002). Graduate education,
through an emphasis on the development of counseling and case management skills,
appears to have failed to incorporate the development of consultation competencies into
the curriculum.

Although psychologists have engaged in consulting since the early 19005, it was

only recently that their profession began to clearly express a conceptual ﬁamework for

23

consulting activities (Cooper, 2002a). In 2002, the APA’s Education and Training
Committee, Society of Consulting Psychology, introduced principles for education and
training at the doctoral and post-doctoral level in consulting psychology. The principles
were organized around core competencies and three broad domains of expertise:
individual, group, and organizational. The primary individual level core competencies
included: career and vocational assessment, assessment for employee selection or
development, job analysis, coaching, and intervention for job and career related
problems. The consulting competencies for the group-level domain included: assessment
of group behavior, assessment and team development, creating group level teams in
organizations, inter- group assessment and intervention, and identity group management
within an organizational context. Organizational or systemic level core competencies
were represented primarily by: organizational diagnosis or assessment; attitude, climate,
and satisfaction surveys; evaluation of corporate management philosophy, culture, and
systemic stressors, workﬂow and project planning activities, identiﬁcation of aggregate
performance measures, organizational-level interventions, and change management of
organizational systems. Evaluating the document from an educator’s perspective, Fuqua
and Newman (2002) noted the emphasis on competencies rather than curriculum, an
emphasis on research and evaluation, non-exclusivity among the divisions of psychology
and the scientist-practitioner model as strengths of the proposed educational principles.
Following a review of the recommended principles for education and training of
psychological consultants, Cummings (2002) expressed concern about faculty being
inadequately prepared to teach each of the 11 consulting competencies. Cummings

(2002) suggested that individual programs might have faculty with ample experience and

24

expertise in training, coaching, and individual counseling interventions while having
minimal skills in educational, group, or organizational interventions.

The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology had identiﬁed 25
competencies based upon knowledge, skills, and abilities (Campbell, 2002). Campbell
indicated that as an approach, the industrial and organizational psychologist approach
differed ﬁ'om the recommendations for the education and training competencies of
consulting psychologists. Rather than listing representative activities consulting
psychologists could be expected to perform at the individual, group, and organization
levels, Campbell recommended that the principles of education and training for
consulting psychologists be supplemented by competencies that focus on the underlying
knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform this work competently. According to
Campbell, the knowledge, skills, and abilities could include, but were not limited to, such
things as research methods, statistical analyses, analysis of work, criterion theory and
development, psychometric theory and personnel selection, legal issues, work motivation,
and organizational theory.

Practical Experience

Caplan, Caplan, & Erchul (1994) emphasized the importance of education and
training to acquire consultation’s unique body of knowledge, concepts, and skills. Using
a systems approach, F roehle (1978) outlined a consultation training approach that
incorporated didactic, laboratory, and ﬁeld placement components. Within each of these
components he identiﬁed consultation competencies; 19 knowledge competencies, 13
behavioral skills, and nine judgment competencies. In addition to developing a model

curriculum with core competencies, Froehle (1978) established criteria for acceptable

25

performance. Although the training process was outlined, there was not any empirical
evidence of the currieulum’s effectiveness (Brown, 1985).

Applied training opportunities for new consultants are limited. Atella and Figgatt
(1998) expressed that clinicians are engaged in consulting without adequate knowledge
and training in consulting. In addition to the lack of formal educational programs in
consulting psychology, there are even fewer opportunities for apprenticeships,
internships, or practicums (Atella & Figgatt, 1998; Carey, 1995).

Discussing collaborative consultation for mental health professionals within a
school system Cochrane and Saylers (2006) recommended an introductory collaborative
consultation course be incorporated into the second semester of a students’ graduate
program or the last year of a students’ undergraduate program along with planned
experiences during practicum and internship to develop a foundation for the development
inter-professional relationships. The author’s cautioned faculty about the need for
students to develop a professional identity prior to their introduction to the concept of
inter-professional collaborative consultation.

Adequate supervision for individuals entering consulting practice is considered
paramount in importance. Many of the educators who provide consultant training have
had little if any formal training in consultation practices themselves (Pryzwansky, 1985;
Stoltenberg, 1993). The primary objective of training in consultation currently is the
development of scientist-practitioners who are able to function as service providers,
trainers, program designers, program evaluators, administrators, consultants, and
researchers in business and organizational settings to meet the unique challenge of a more

diverse workforce (Gerstein & Shullman, 1992). What further magniﬁes this deﬁcit in the

26

education and training of organizational consultants is that the majority of the faculty
who train future consultants do not actually engage in consultative activity, nor do they
identify themselves as experts in this area (Gerstein & Shullman, 1992). Consequently,
trainees' role models are not actually consultants but academicians, who typically require
a much different skill set for professional success (Steward, 1996).

The demand for diversity-related consultation has increased with increasing racial
or ethnic representation within the workforce. Discussing the impact of increased demand
for multicultural consulting competencies, Steward (1996) also identiﬁed factors that
could explain why professionals engage in general organizational consultation with
limited competency. Steward observed that most academic programs offer limited
consultant training. The lack of available education and training regarding consultation
may contribute to the graduate’ s perception that they have mastered what was required to
function as consultants regardless of the issue addressed. Professional consulting
activities in general are considered lucrative and can be intrinsically rewarding for those
committed to large-scale social change.

Private Sector Rehabilitation and Disability Management

The education and training needs of rehabilitation counselors in the private sector
has been a topic of research since the sector emerged in the 1970’s (Feinberg &
McFarlane, 1979; McMahon, 1979; Sales, 1979). Empirical research regarding private
sector rehabilitation began with Lynch and Matkin’s (1982) survey of private sector
knowledge and skill areas. A 41-item instrument was developed and administered to a
sample of 147 members of the National Association of Rehabilitation Providers in the

Private Sector (NARPPS). Results of Lynch and Matkin’s 1982 survey reﬂected training

27

needs related to transferable skills analysis, workers compensation legislation, job
analysis and job modiﬁcation, insurance industry practices, labor market analysis,
disability beneﬁt programs, business practices, vocational testimony, and ﬁnancial
planning strategies. Lynch and Matkin (1982) noted similarities between private sector
knowledge and skills areas and pre-service counselor preparation however they also
suggested changes to the traditional rehabilitation counselor curriculum.

Matkin (1983) conducted a national study of rehabilitation specialists within the
insurance industry, private rehabilitation companies, self-insured employers and private
practitioners. The sample consisted of 850 members of NARPPS
and their employees. A 132-item survey was developed based upon the literature and
competency studies of tasks performed by private rehabilitation specialists. Five major
work roles were identiﬁed through factor analysis: planning and coordinating client
services, business and office management, job development and placement, diagnostic
assessment, and other professional activities. As a result of this study, Matkin provided
recommendations for rehabilitation education, credentialing, and cooperation between
public and private rehabilitation.

Matkin and Riggar (1984) conducted two national surveys to address both the
growth of private sector rehabilitation and whether graduate level training had responded
to the needs of private sector rehabilitation counselors. Members of NARPPS and NCRE
were surveyed concurrently. Participant responses reﬂected increased employment
opportunities in the private sector and that graduate programs had responded to the
changing work settings through the involvement of private rehabilitation professionals

and course development.

28

In an attempt to further delineate the private sector rehabilitation provider’s role
and functions, Matkin (1987) reviewed the results of a two-year study conducted by the
Board for Rehabilitation Certiﬁcation. Four knowledge areas were identiﬁed for private
sector practitioners: (a) rules, regulations, policies, and procedures of disability
management systems; (b) service applications within disability compensation systems;
(c) forensic rehabilitation; and ((1) cost containment and resource allocation. Based upon
his review of the results from this study, Matkin (1987) recommended the incorporation
of practicum and internship sites in private sector settings.

Habeck and Munrowd (198 7) distinguished between employer based and private
rehabilitation. The author's made the distinction that in private rehabilitation, an external
consultant is retained to provide the service required. Employer based rehabilitation was
described as a process implemented by organizations to promote the retention and
productivity of employees of injured or ill employees, preventing job loss. Competencies
for practice in an employer based setting were noted to fall within clinical and direct
skills, administrative skills, and organizational skills. Despite the attempt to draw a
distinction between the two approaches, Habeck and Munrowd (1987) acknowledged that
the majority of disability management programs were actually provided by contractual
vendors of rehabilitation services.

According to Habeck and Munrowd (1987), rehabilitation counselors practicing in
employer based environments needed to develop skills conducting needs assessment,
policy analysis, data analysis, communication, program development management,
budgeting, marketing, supervision, time management and job analysis. Necessary

knowledge requirements included the fundamentals of organizational behavior and

29

development, federal/state legislation, insurance and beneﬁt systems, corporate and union
agreements, community resources, labor market trends, prevention and wellness
approaches, and collective bargaining principles were identiﬁed as necessary related
knowledge areas for a rehabilitation counselor entering employer based practice. Habeck
and Munrowd (1987) expressed the challenge for rehabilitation counselor educators
would be to determine how these identiﬁed competency areas could be addressed within
existing curricula. The authors expressed their opinion that these types of courses may be
more effectively taught by business or labor relations faculty.

In another conceptual article, Crystal (1987) described the evolution of the Business
and Industry Rehabilitation course at the University of Kentucky. Crystal (1987)
indicated that rehabilitation counselor educators had three courses of action to consider
regarding modiﬁcations of curriculum content: (a) decide that the current curriculum
meets the need; (b) determine existing course structures can meet the need with
modiﬁcation of structure and content; or (c) decide a new course is required to address
the curricular needs. The faculty at the University of Kentucky decided to add an elective
course regarding business and industry rehabilitation to the curriculum including the
following topics: philosophy of business and industry; review of systems in private
rehabilitation; an overview of the types of disabilities occurring within these systems;
assessment, planning, and process issues; residual and transferable skills analysis; use of
computerized job matching systems; consultation with employers and job placement;
working with all of the parties involved in the system; expert testimony; and ethical and
legal issues. The course was open to individuals interested in private or public

rehabilitation, as the content was perceived as universal to the ﬁeld.

30

Conceptually the employment of rehabilitation counselors providing disability
management services requires the rehabilitation counselor to broaden their scope of
practice beyond the traditional individual or clinical services to include environmental,
organizational and systemic factors (Gottlieb, Vandergoot, & Lutsky, 1991; Habeck,
Kress, Scully, & Kirchner, 1994; Shrey, 1994; and Tate, Habeck, & Galvin, 1986).
Modiﬁcation of the rehabilitation counselor education curriculum was also described as
necessary to prepare rehabilitation counselors for employment in private sector
rehabilitation (Kilbury, Benshoff, & Riggar, 1990; Rasch, 1992; Rosenthal & Olshesky,
1999). Kilbury, et al., (1990) recommended that the rehabilitation counseling curriculum
be expanded to include information about neuropsychological assessment, stress
management, disability management, supported employment, business administration,
personnel management, and program evaluation.

Employers of insurance rehabilitation specialists were surveyed and interviewed
in order to obtain their perspective about the desired skill development and educational
outcomes for graduates of graduate rehabilitation counselor education programs
(Gilbride, Connolly, & Stensrud, 1990). A 28-item survey was sent to the major ﬁrms
engaged in insurance rehabilitation in the State of Iowa. The employers identiﬁed job
placement and job development techniques, job analysis and modiﬁcation, transferable
skills analysis and case management as the most important knowledge areas graduates
could possess. Time management, decision-making, and writing ability were identiﬁed as
the most important case handling skills. Organizational skills and the ability to work
independently were considered the most important interpersonal skills for a person

employed in the private sector.

31

Rasch (1992) identiﬁed core courses existing within rehabilitation counselor
education (RCE) programs and provided a description of the instructional content areas
that would make them relevant for practice in the private sector. Courses and
instructional areas identiﬁed included: foundations, counseling, evaluation, medical,
psychosocial, and vocational aspects of disability. In describing the content areas, Rasch
(1992) felt it was critical that public and private rehabilitation be compared with respect
to their history and development, characteristics of their clientele, funding sources, and
service delivery process.

Rosenthal and Olshesky (1999) reviewed studies regarding disability management
and vocational rehabilitation and interviewed three practitioners to address the
opportunities for rehabilitation counseling in disability management. The author’s
observed that although the terminology and concepts associated with disability
management were present in the rehabilitation literature for more than 15 years,
rehabilitation counseling professionals were not recognized as the ﬁrst choice by
employers to provide disability management services. They urged CORE accredited
program curricula to respond proactively to the emerging needs and roles of the
rehabilitation counseling profession. Rosenthal and Olshesky (1999) suggested that this
might require addition of courses, infusing disability management content into current
courses, and offering internship sites in disability management.

According to Habeck (1996), disability management could be distinguished from
private-sector rehabilitation practice. Disability management was characterized by direct
access to the workplace and by intervention at the onset of work-related injury or illness,

was generally employenbased, and proactive. The clinical orientation of traditional

32

private-sector rehabilitation emphasized the provision of services to individual workers
after work-related injury or illness, after it appeared that a disability prevented a return to
work.

Habeck and Kirchner (1999) conceptualized two levels of disability management.
Level I (DIVD was deﬁned as administrative, managerial, and had an organizational focus.
Level II (dm) was described as human-service oriented, involving the direct provision of
services to individual clients. Related to this two stage conceptualization of disability
management, the Certiﬁcation of Disability Management Specialists Commission
(CDMSC) conducted its ﬁrst role and function study to create an empirical basis for a
certiﬁcation exam and to describe the practice of disability managers in 1999 (Currier,
Chan, Berven, Habeck, & Taylor 2001). A Delphi study approach was used to identify
the important job functions and knowledge domains in disability management.
Examination of the functions and knowledge domains common to Level I and Level 11
indicates a clear differentiation between traditional private-sector rehabilitation
interventions and the context of the disability management model. Identiﬁed knowledge
domains included disability case management, psychosocial intervention, vocational
aspects of disability, managed care and disability management concepts, and business
knowledge related to disability management.

Another role and function study was conducted on behalf of the CDMSC in 2004
employing a survey of 1500 participants and subject experts. The study was used to
determine whether the domains of practice had changed and establish an empirical basis
for a disability management specialist certiﬁcation exam. The panel of experts identiﬁed

three domains during this investigation: disability case management, disability prevention

33

and workplace intervention, and program development, management, and evaluation. The
ﬁndings of Rosenthal, Hursh, Lui, Isom, and Sasson (2007) suggested that the individual
and organizational practices previously identiﬁed in disability management had
“blended”. Employers appear to expect disability managers to understand absence
management, presenteeism, integrated beneﬁts, productivity enhancement and health and
wellness. Rosenthal et al. (2007) also noted an increased expectation of outcome and
evidenced based practice in order to demonstrate accountability.

Private sector rehabilitation and disability management settings represent
expanding employment settings for rehabilitation counselors. Review of the literature
reﬂects that these sectors are as dynamic as the general profession of rehabilitation
counseling. Private sector rehabilitation emerged ﬁ'om workers compensation and
insurance based rehabilitation. Disability management evolved from employer need and
insurance based rehabilitation as direct service providers to disability managers
responsible for the administration of comprehensive organizational disability
management programs. Recently, disability management seems to have entered a new
cycle of blended disability management services with greater emphasis on accountability,
individual and organizational responsibilities and general beneﬁt expertise. The need for
curriculum change is a recurrent theme throughout the review of the literature concerning
the development of the private sector and disability management in rehabilitation.
Competencies in Rehabilitation Counseling

The practice of rehabilitation counseling has been empirically deﬁned through
extensive research using job analysis, role and function studies, identiﬁcation of

professional competencies, and critical incident methods (Berven, 1979; Emener &

34

Rubin, 1980; Harrison & Lee, 1979; Jacques, 1959; Leahy et al., 1987; Leahy et al.,
1993; Leahy et al., 2003; Muthard & Salamone, 1969; Rubin, Matkin, Ashley, Beardsley,
May, & Onstott, 1984; Wright & Fraser, 1975). Consultation has historically been
identiﬁed as an important rehabilitation counseling job function and knowledge
requirement (Leahy, Shapson, & Wright, 1987; Linkowski, Thoreson, Diamond, Leahy,
& Szymanski; Szymanski, Leahy, & Linkowski, 1993). Recent research regarding the job
functions, knowledge requirements, and training needs of certiﬁed rehabilitation
counselors (CRC’s) in the 21"century indicates consultation continues to be among the
most frequently performed rehabilitation counseling tasks (Chan, et al., 2003; Leahy, et
al., 2003).

Jacques (1959) used a critical incidents approach with a national sample of 404
rehabilitation counselors and supervisors to study rehabilitation counselor competencies.
Six sub-domains of rehabilitation counseling were identiﬁed through this process: (a)
creating a therapeutic climate; (b) structured arranging and deﬁning limits, (c)
information gathering, (d) evaluating, (e) providing information, and (f) interacting.
Review of these counseling sub-domains reveals similarities to the consultation
competencies identiﬁed in this study.

Rehabilitation counselors in the public and non-proﬁt rehabilitation settings were
surveyed using the Rehabilitation Counselor Task Inventory in order to develop an
understanding of their work role (Muthard & Salamone, 1969). Eight major job roles
were identiﬁed through this research: (a) affective counseling, (b) eligibility and case
ﬁnding, (c) group procedures, (d) placement, (e) vocational counseling, (t) test

administration, and (g) test interpretation. The study also demonstrated that

35

approximately one-third of a rehabilitation counselor’s time was devoted to counseling
and 25% of their time involved case reporting or other clerical functions.

Fraser and Clowers (1978) surveyed 78 rehabilitation counselors in order to
assess the nature and difficulty of their job functions. Rehabilitation counselor educators
and rehabilitation counselors developed a 15-item survey through the review and
categorization of rehabilitation counselor job tasks. Counselors were asked to rate both
the amount of time required to perform a function and the level of difficulty they
assigned to each task. Counseling, planning, and case recording and reporting were
identiﬁed as requiring the majority of a counselor’s time.

Role and function studies have been used extensively to delineate training needs
for rehabilitation counselors, establishing certiﬁcation criteria, and curricultun
development. The Rehabilitation Training Needs Questionnaire was used to identify the
training needs of state rehabilitation counselors (Berven, 1979). A sample of 680
regional rehabilitation counselors, supervisors and 70 national trainers were surveyed in
order to identify their pre-service training needs (Berven, 1979). Identiﬁed training needs
included: (a) psychological information, (b) case management, (c) medical information,
((1) resource utilization (e) job placement (f) counseling, and (g) special rehabilitation
problems.

Differences in the relative importance of work tasks began to appear in Emener
and Rubin’s 1980 study of rehabilitation counselors, administrators, and educators. A
subsequent survey of CRC’s across work settings by Rubin et al. (1984) revealed
signiﬁcant differences in the CRC’s perceived importance of work tasks based upon the

counselor’s employment setting.

36

Leahy et al. (1987) studied rehabilitation counselors, job placement and
development specialists and vocational evaluators across public, non-proﬁt, and private
rehabilitation agencies using the Rehabilitation Skills Inventory. A sample of 3614
participants was selected for this study, which had a 37.1% response rate. The results of
this study demonstrated that the three rehabilitation specializations shared common core
competencies although differences existed in the level of importance attributed to
competencies by employment setting. A cluster analysis revealed 10 core rehabilitation
functions: (a) vocational counseling, (b) assessment planning and interpretation, (c)
personal adjustment counseling, ((1) case management, (e) job placement, (f) group and
behavioral techniques, (g) professional and community development, (h) consultation, (i)
job analysis, and (j) assessment administration.

The perceived human resource and training needs for certiﬁed rehabilitation
counselors were examined as part of the Council on Rehabilitation Education (CORE)
and CRCC ongoing effort to validate knowledge requirements for accreditation and
certiﬁcation (Szymanski et al., 1993). A sample of 1535 CRC’s reported training needs in
vocational services, medical and psychosocial aspects of disability, case management and
services, social cultural and environmental issues. The human resource development
needs varied across job level, employment setting, and job title. Counselors in both the
public and private for proﬁt rehabilitation settings reported the highest level of training
needs in the areas of Vocational Services, Case Management and Services.

Leahy et al. (2003) in a national study of 1400 Certiﬁed Rehabilitation
Counselor’s across service delivery systems identiﬁed seven major job functions and six

primary knowledge domains required of rehabilitation counselors. The primary job

37

ftmctions included: (a) vocational counseling and consultation; (b) counseling
interventions; (c) community-based rehabilitation; ((1) case management; (e) applied
research; (0 assessment; and (g) advocacy. Knowledge domains rehabilitation counselors
identiﬁed while performing their role included: (a) career counseling; (b) assessment and
consultation services; (c) rehabilitation services and resources; ((1) case and caseload
management; (e) healthcare and disability systems; and (f) medical, functional, and
environmental implications of disability. The recent study by Leahy et al. (2003)
revealed numerous emerging knowledge and task domains for rehabilitation counselors,
which require consideration to determine whether the knowledge areas should be
included in the curriculum of pre-service educational programs. The authors commented
that the number of new knowledge and task areas to consider for potential inclusion in
the rehabilitation counselor curricula made the ﬁndings unique.

Chan et al. (2003) addressed the training needs of rehabilitation counselors for
contemporary practice. Results of their analysis revealed 23 knowledge areas across the
public, nonproﬁt, and proprietary rehabilitation settings. Consistent with rehabilitation
counselors in the public sector, private sector rehabilitation counselors noted critical
training needs in the areas of career counseling, assessment, and consultation.
Rehabilitation counselors in the private sector also expressed their perception that they
had limited preparation in the areas of accommodations, employer practices, job
acquisition and retention, follow-up or post employment services, work conditioning, and
the use of the intemet resources for rehabilitation counseling. Unique to the private sector
were the identiﬁcation of critical training needs within the knowledge domains of

healthcare and disability systems. Speciﬁc items in these domains included expert

38

testimony, workers compensation laws and practices, and employer-based disability
prevention and management services. Multicultural counseling, ethical decision—making,
ﬁnancial resources as well as case and caseload management were identiﬁed as critical
training needs.

Comprehensive assessment, case management and vocational planning, research
methodology, program evaluation, and outcome analysis have been described as valuable
rehabilitation consultation skills (Lynch et al., 1997). This conceptualization has
implications for the inclusion of case management, research, and assessment skills within
a broader construct of consultation.

Perceptions of Rehabilitation Educators

Emener, Rasch and Spector (1983) indicated that the ability of faculty to prepare
students is based upon their own level of knowledge and mastery of the required
competencies. Citing the dynamic rehabilitation environment and expanding research
database, Emener et al., (1983) expressed that it was increasingly difficult for
rehabilitation counselor educators to remain informed about the rehabilitation counseling
profession. Rehabilitation educator’ perceptions of their knowledge and training needs
were surveyed by Emener et al., (1983). The survey population consisted of all 459
members of the NCRE with 235 participants or a 51.2% response rate. Overall, the
educators rated their knowledge adequacy high across 12 instructional areas and their
need for in-service training as low. Two areas that would appear to be strongly related to
vocational service delivery, occupational information and job analysis as well as job
development and job placement were not included among the highest educator

knowledge ratings. Emener et al., (1983) indicated that despite a low response rate,

39

similar studies were warranted.

Wright and Ebener (1987) studied the demographic characteristics of 305
rehabilitation counselor educators. A total of 166 surveys were returned for a 55%
response rate. The participants reported devoting an average of 6.3% of their time to
private practice, consulting or employment outside of their educational setting. The
frequency with which rehabilitation counselor educators described themselves as having
developed specialized experience in functions associated with consultation included:
forensic rehabilitation (28.3%), disability determination, (24.7%), and insurance
compensation (11.4%) respectively. Similarly, rehabilitation counselor education faculty
identiﬁed setting speciﬁc expertise with the following frequency: rehabilitation medical
settings (26.5%), private for-proﬁt rehabilitation ﬁrms ( 19.3%), and rehabilitation in
industry (16.3%). Wright and Ebener also administered the Rehabilitation Skills
Inventory (RSI) in order to address the importance Of particular competencies in the
educators’ program curriculum and their perceived ability to teach each of the
competencies.

Ebener, Berven, and Wright (1993) analyzed data from a 1987 study of the self-
perceived abilities of rehabilitation counselor educators to teach competencies across 10
areas for rehabilitation practice. Consultation, as a competency domain, included the
areas of consultation, expert opinion, and marketing, was rated the lowest of the 10
competency areas studied. Using an adapted version of the RSI, rehabilitation counselor
educators rated their ability to teach consulting competencies as moderate to fair on a 5

point Likert-type scale. Noting the limitations of self-ratings Ebener et al., (1993)

40

indicated other measures of teaching proﬁciency would be difficult to identify or
implement.
Potential Barriers to Inclusion

A study of rehabilitation counselor educators’ current attitudes, beliefs,
consultation related practices, pedagogical methods and the barriers to their
implementation are important for several reasons. Brown (1993) suggested that counselor
education programs often lack adequate resources to offer the comprehensive preparation
required by counselors to in a variety of roles. The development of basic counseling skills
required by accrediting organizations has been cited as leaving little time for the
incorporation of additional coursework about consultation (Brown, 1993). Reasons
suggested for rehabilitation counselor education programs’ lack of consultation related
course work include the lack of time, ﬁnancial or personnel resources (Estrada-
Hemandez & Saunders, 2005).

Attitudes may also present a barrier to the addition of consultation competencies
to the curricula for counselor education. Counselor educators have been described as
subscribing to colloquial deﬁnitions of consultation as simply giving advice and that
anyone can become a consultant without training (Brown, 1993). Others appear to have
opposed the inclusion of consultation skills in rehabilitation counselor curriculum as a
matter of political principle, suggesting these broader competencies are within the realm
of private practice rather than the traditional vocational rehabilitation counselor’s human
service role (Patterson and Parker, 2003).

Attitudinal barriers, accreditation requirements, lack of time, ﬁnancial,

institutional and personal resource have all been offered as explanations for the difficulty

41

counselor educator’s may have incorporating consultation competencies or emerging
trends into current curriculums. Although speciﬁc coursework in consultation and ﬁeld
experience is preferable, rehabilitation counselor education programs experiencing
resource issues may infuse the application of consultation skills to rehabilitation settings

through existing courses (Estrada-Hernandez & Saunders, 2005).

42

Chapter III
Methodology

The purpose of this concurrent nested mixed methods study was to gather
quantitative data potentially useful for developing a better understanding of the
relationship between rehabilitation counselor educator’s knowledge of consultation as a
professional activity, their consultation practices and perceptions of consultation training.
The quantitative portion of this research study included both descriptive and ex post facto
design components. Qualitative interview data from rehabilitation counselor educators
who possess extensive experience in rehabilitation counselor education and/or expertise
providing rehabilitation consultation services were used to explore how consultation
skills can be integrated into rehabilitation counselor curricula and the barriers and
obstacles to their implementation.
Participants

A national sample of participants was drawn from the listing of accredited
member institutions, programs and the certiﬁed individual members obtained through the
National Council on Rehabilitation Education (N CRE) for the quantitative portion of this
study. Review of the 2005-2006 faculty and staff list for the member institutions and
programs of NCRE reﬂect a total of 782 faculty and staff. Eligible participants will be
deﬁned as faculty that have attained the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor,
or Professor who are currently involved in teaching or clinical supervision. As reﬂected
in the 2005-2006 NCRE Directory, 352 faculty members were identiﬁed using these

criteria.

43

A purposive sub-sample of seven rehabilitation counselor educators was selected
to participate in the qualitative portion of this investigation. Selection criteria included:
employment as a rehabilitation counselor educator for 10 or more years, consulting
experience; gender balance in the sample; participation in professional associations; and
history of publication. These selection criteria were instrumental in establishing a priori
assumptions regarding the participants’ ability to address consultation in rehabilitation
counseling from a clinical, disability management, educational and future perspective.
Participants for the qualitative interview component of this investigation were selected
from the alphabetical listing of all faculty and staff of NCRE members and NCRE
member institutions and programs. The seven participants were selected from ﬁve of the
10 NCRE regions in the United States.

Instrumentation

A modiﬁed version of the Rehabilitation Skills Inventory — Revised (RSI-R) was
used for the quantitative portion of this mixed methods investigation. The Consultation
Competency Inventory (CCI) questionnaire (Appendix A) developed for this study
represents a synthesis of items contained in the Rehabilitation Skills Inventory-Revised
(RSI-R) and items inferred through a review of the literature regarding consultation
(Leahy, et al., 2003).

The RSI-R is the most recent revision of the Rehabilitation Skills Inventory (RSI).
The RSI originally consisted of 114 competency items rated on two, ﬁve point Likert-
type scales (Leahy, Shapson, & Wright, 1987; Wright, Leahy, & Shapson, 1987). The
RSI was designed to assess the importance of job tasks and functions in relation to a

rehabilitation counselor’s practice setting. The RSI-R was created following a review of

44

the RSI, Leahy et al. (2003). Twelve of the original 114 items were eliminated as they
were related to another occupation or were now addressed in another inventory. Eighteen
additional items and a frequency scale were added to the RSI to create a 120-item
questionnaire with updated terminology and the ability to assess the frequency a
participant performed each task. Common factor analysis was used to identify the
principal job functions ﬁ'om the 120 job tasks performed by CRC’s. The RSI-R uses two
5-point (0-4) Likert type scales to assess both the importance of and the frequency each
of the 120 job tasks are performed (Leahy, et al., 2003).

The CCI, a 110 item web-based questionnaire containing consultation
competency statements related to rehabilitation counseling practice was developed based
on a review of the literature and items contained on the RSI-R. Items were developed
according to ﬁve a priori domains: Assessment (11 items); Business and Case
Management (9 items); Consultation Process and Application Skills (1 3items);
Interpersonal Relationship Skills (9 items); and Problem Solving (13 items). A complete
listing of the a priori domains and the individual items is provided in Appendix B. A pilot
study of the modiﬁed RSI-R was conducted with a panel of rehabilitation counselor
educators to obtain their feedback on the structured and unstructured items for clarity,
consistency, representation of consultation practice, and to eliminate redundancy
(Crawford, McCabe, & Pope, 2005).

The initial question in the quantitative portion of this study attempts to identify
rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceptions of the importance of consultation as a
professional activity. In order to address the ﬁrst question, participants were asked to rate

their perceptions about the relative importance of each of the 55 consultation

45‘

competencies for rehabilitation counselor practice using a 5-point Likert scale.
Participants were asked to rate the importance of each competency using the following 5-
point Likert scale (1= not important, 2 = somewhat important, 3 = important, 4 = very
important, and 5 = extremely important).

The second question in the quantitative portion of this investigation asked
rehabilitation counselor educators’ to rate their own ability to teach the same 55
consultation competencies. Modifying a scale used by Ebener et al. (1993) in their study
of the self-perceived abilities of rehabilitation educators to teach rehabilitation counselor
competencies, the present study asked participants to rate each speciﬁc area of
competence according to their self-perceived ability to teach that competency.
Speciﬁcally, participants were asked to rate each item in terms of “your own ability to
teach this particular competency,” on the following 5-point Likert Scale: (1= not
proﬁcient; 2 = somewhat proﬁcient; 3= proﬁcient; 4 = very proﬁcient; and 5 = extremely
proﬁcient).

Demographic Questionnaire

Characteristics of the participants were gathered through the use of a 15 item
demographic questionnaire (See Appendix A). This questionnaire requested information
regarding four broad demographic categories of the participants. Information requested
included: (a) identifying characteristics, (b) professional characteristics, (c)
characteristics of their graduate program’s consultation content, and (d) consultation
experience.

Procedures

46

Due to the relatively small population of rehabilitation counselor educators and the intent
to generalize the ﬁndings within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counselor education,
participation in the web-based survey represents a non-probability, convenience method
of sampling. Participants for the web-based survey portion of this study were solicited
through individually addressed e-mail to the faculty and staff listed on the alphabetical
list of all faculty and staff of NCRE member institutions and programs. Prospective
participants were sent an explanation of the study, an invitation to participate and a link
to the survey web site. A copy of the transmittal letters used to invite participation in the
survey or the qualitative interview has been included in Appendices C and D
respectively. A copy of the proposed study was submitted to and approved for
distribution by the Research Committee of the National Council on Rehabilitation
Educators.
Design

The intent of this mixed methods design was three-fold. The CCI was used to
identify which consultation competencies rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceive to
be important to rehabilitation counseling practice as well as their perceived level of
proﬁciency for teaching the respective competencies. Finally, interviews with subject
experts were used to explore the barriers to and the best methods for integrating the
consultation competencies into the rehabilitation counseling curriculum The concurrent
nested mixed methods design used in this investigation (see Figure 1) is one in which the
qualitative interview data provides a supportive role to the quantitative survey data
(Creswell, 2003; Creswell, Trout, & Barbuto, 2002). The design is considered useful

when the quantitative and qualitative data are used to answer different questions

47

(Creswell, F etters, & Ivankova, 2004; Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2006; Hansen, Creswell,
Plano-Clark, Petska, & Creswell, 2005; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998).

This study was approved by Michigan State University’s Social Institutional
Review Board and classiﬁed as within the Expedited 7 category (SIRB# 07-214).
Although initially anticipated to fall within the parameters of an exempt review
categories of survey interview, education research, and intemet based research, an
application using the expedited category was required as the study involved audio taping
the qualitative interviews of rehabilitation counselor educators. Advantages of web-based
research include participant anonymity, the efﬁciency of recruiting participants, the
ability to obtain heterogeneous samples, the ability to target potential participants, the

ability to standardize procedures and the ease of replication (Bimbaum, 2004).

48

Figure l: Concurrent Nested Design

 

 

 

Qua]

 

 

 

Quan

 

1

Analysis of Data

49

 

consent, potential for coercion to participate, and conﬁdentiality. The potential risks were
considered and addressed as follows.

This study did not have a sponsor and therefore minimized the risk of conflict of
interest. The targeted participants were not students or employees of this researcher,
reducing the risk for coerced participation. Participants were not compensated for their
participation. Participation in the study was voluntary and participants were able to
withdraw participation at any point in the study. As a descriptive study focusing upon the
perceptions of rehabilitation counselor educators, the proposal did not involve vulnerable
populations.

Informed consent was addressed through a written form incorporated within the
instructions accompanying the survey questionnaire (Appendix A) and a consent form
forwarded to the participants who agreed to participate in the qualitative portion of the
study (Appendix E). In an attempt to avoid a coercive tene, the consent forms were
written in the second person. Individuals were asked to indicate whether they agreed to
participate.

Data Collection

Quantitative and qualitative data collection began simultaneously in this
concurrent nested mixed methods design. Upon obtaining the dissertation committee’s
approval, the proposal was forwarded to the NCRE Research Committee and the
university’s Social Institutional Review Board seeking their approval. Following
approval by these bodies, an email solicitation/invitation containing an explanation of the
study and a link to the web-based survey site was be sent to each of the eligible faculty

identiﬁed on the NCRE member programs, institutions, and individual member list. A

50

second and third e-mail were sent to the faculty members over the course of three
consecutive weeks as a thank you letter to those who have participated and a repeat
request for others to participate. A ﬁnal thank you e-mail was sent to all participants with
a request for those who did not complete the survey to voluntarily disclose the reasons for
discontinuing the survey.

The present research design addressed potential participant concerns regarding
conﬁdentiality and anonymity. The quantitative portion of this concurrent nested mixed
method research design involved the use of a web based, automated survey instrument
through Survey Monkey. Although demographic information will be collected to enhance
the ability of the researcher to generalize the results, no personally identifying
information will be required. Demographic information obtained will be viewed in
aggregate and drawn from a population of rehabilitation counselor educators. Individual
survey results were maintained on Survey Monkey. Viewing the responses from the
questionnaire as an aggregate further protected the privacy of the responses. The only
direct contact participants in the quantitative survey component of this design could
potentially have with the researcher would be volitional and initiated by the participant to
address a question regarding the study or to request a summary of the aggregate ﬁndings
of this study.

Conﬁdentiality of the subject experts participating in the qualitative interview
component of this mixed methods investigation was also addressed. Each potential
participant was sent an individual e-mail invitation requesting their participation
accompanied by an electronic description of the study and informed consent form.

Individuals who agree to participate returned an e-mail acknowledgement of their consent

51

to participate, which will be maintained in a separate ﬁle. In the event a reply is not
received within three weeks, educators’ identiﬁed as potential participants in the
qualitative aspect of this study were reeontacted by telephone and e-mailed with
attachments containing a cover letter requesting their participation, a study description, a
demographic questionnaire, copy of the interview questions and an informed consent
form. Each participant was randomly assigned a numerical code. The participant codes
were maintained separately from the interview transcription. Interviews were conducted
orally by telephone or in person at the participant’s discretion. Interview transcription and
notes were maintained in a separate ﬁle and maintained in a locked cabinet. Qualitative
data has been maintained in password-protected computer ﬁles based upon the numerical
coding.

Telephone interviews were conducted individually with the subject experts using
an interview protocol containing three unstructured open-ended questions in order to
elicit the participants’ views and opinions regarding the barriers to and the best methods
for integrating consultation competencies into the rehabilitation counselor curriculum.
Interviews will be recorded using handwritten notes and transcribed. As an alternative,
two participants elected to participate through in person interviews. Documents collected
were numerically coded and maintained in a separate ﬁle from transcription in order to
maintain participant conﬁdentiality.

Data Analysis
Quantitative Data
Descriptive statistics were computed for the participant characteristics based upon

the demographic portions of the questionnaire. Age was used as a continuous variable.

52

Group means, medians, and standard deviations were computed and displayed in tables
for the continuous variables in the entire sample.

In an attempt to further describe this population of rehabilitation counselor
educators, frequencies and percentages were computed for the following categorical
variables: (a) gender, (b) publications regarding consultation in the past 1, 3, and 5 years,
(c) formal training in consultation, (d) format of consultation training, (e) consultation
related grants, (f) years of experience as a rehabilitation counselor educator, (g) degree
major, (h) certiﬁcation and/or licensing status, (i) whether the rehabilitation counselor
educator reads journals related to the topic of consultation, (i) the availability of an
elective emphasizing consultation knowledge and skill, (k) availability of a required
course emphasizing consultation knowledge and skill, (1) whether their practicum or
internship placements emphasize consultation knowledge or skill, and (m) program plans
to develop a course emphasizing consultation knowledge or skills, (n) years of experience
as a paid consultant, and (o) NCRE membership region.

Exploratory factor analysis was originally proposed as the statistical method to
obtain a factor solution for the CC1 items. However, the participant sample was not
sufﬁcient to meet the assumptions of exploratory factor analysis and the following data
analysis plan was implemented.

Research questions one and four were designed to address the rehabilitation
counselor educator’s perception of the importance of consultation competencies to
rehabilitation counseling practice and their self-perceived level of proﬁciency for
teaching the competencies. Descriptive statistics were computed for each consulting

competency item listed on the questionnaire, the ﬁve respective a priori importance and

53

proﬁciency domains, and the total sample scores. Descriptive statistics were computed
based upon the participant responses to the ﬁve point Likert-type scales of importance
and proﬁciency. Group means and standard deviations were calculated for each item and
displayed in a table format. Reliability coefficients were calculated using Cronbach’s
alpha to derive the internal consistency and the reliability of the items identiﬁed within
the respective a priori competency domains.

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to address the second and
sixth research questions. These questions were designed to determine whether the
participants perceived level of importance and proﬁciency differed across the ﬁve
respective a priori competency domains. Multivariate analysis of variance evaluates
whether subgroups, or combinations of subgroups constitute different populations in
terms of the dependent variable (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007; Williams & Monge, 2001).
The 55 importance and 55 proﬁciency items that were inferred through a review of the
literature were assigned to ﬁve a priori categories related to consultation (assessment,
business and case management, consultation process and application skills, interpersonal
relationship skills, and problem solving). Two sets of MANOVAs were conducted. The
ﬁrst MANOVA used the ﬁve a priori importance domains as independent variables and
overall importance was used as the dependent variable. The second MANOVA used the
ﬁve a priori proﬁciency domains as independent variables and overall proﬁciency as a
dependent variable. Post hoc Bonferroni procedures were conducted following each
MAN OVA.

In order to answer research questions two and ﬁve, independent-sample t tests and

one-way analysis of variance were conducted (Howell, 2002; Williams & Monge, 2001).

54

Independent-sample t tests were conducted to address the signiﬁcance of the differences
between the means of the dichotomous variables, gender and degree major, in terms of
the educators’ perceptions of the overall importance of the consultation competencies and
their self-perceived proﬁciency teaching the respective competencies. A series of one
way analysis of variance were conducted to address the signiﬁcance of the mean
differences between the participants demographic variables (age, years of experience as a
rehabilitation counselor educator, years of experience as a paid consultant, and the
number of credit hours required to obtain a master’s degree from the faculty’s respective
rehabilitation counseling education program) in terms of their perceived overall level of
importance and instructional proﬁciency.

Pearson’s product moment correlation was used to address whether there was a
relationship between the educators’ perceptions of the importance of the consultation
competencies and their proﬁciency in teaching the conSultation competencies. The level
of signiﬁcance, direction of the relationship, and magnitude were used to interpret the
statistic (Williams & Monge, 2001).

Qualitative Data

Demographic information was collected with the qualitative demographic
questionnaire (Appendix F). Each interview participant was provided summary in-
formation regarding consultation and a set of interview questions prior to their scheduled
interview (Appendix G). Interviews were audio taped and transcribed. Following the
transcription of the audio taped interviews the data was reviewed and coded by themes or
categories (Akinson & Delamont, 2005; Charmaz, 2006: Maxwell, 1996; Perakyla,

2005). Categories included the perspectives held by the participants, process issues,

55

relationship, and strategies. Material developed during the unstructured interview
process and open-ended survey questions were coded to identify developing themes
among the subject experts and survey participants. Themes were analyzed through each
individual case and across cases to develop a grounded theory (Ambert, Adler, Adler, &
Detzner, 1995; Charmaz, 2006; Hanley-Maxwell, C., Al Hano, L., & Skivington, M.,
2007).

The qualitative data analysis of this investigation will be aided with the use of a
computer assisted qualitative data analysis system (CAQDAS). The HyperResearch 2.7
program was among a number of systems analyzed by Lewins and Silver (2006).
According to Lewins and Silver (2006), this CAQDAS system is part of a very small
body of qualitative data analysis software available for Apple Computers. Advantages of
the system include simplicity, the case is the unit of analysis rather than a ﬁle, and the
system contains a hypothesis tester to facilitate the identiﬁcation of themes that can be
assigned to cases providing a method of classifying cases by higher order concepts.

Data Integration

Creswell and Plano Clark (2006) provide a number of guidelines for analyzing
data from concurrent nested mixed methods research. Initially, the quantitative data
analysis from the web-based survey and the qualitative interviews were conducted
separately. This phase of the data analysis involves descriptive and inferential analysis of
the quantitative data and coding, theme development, and identifying the interrelationship
of the themes during qualitative data analysis. After these independent analyses have
been conducted, the researcher merged the two datasets. Merging the primary

quantitative data with the qualitative data requires transformation of the data (Caracelli &

56

Greene, 1993). The interview transcripts were analyzed for codes or themes and the
occurrences of the codes or themes were counted. The frequency of the themes within the
sample and the percentage of total associated themes were calculated and presented in a
table. The similarities between the quantitative and qualitative data are also addressed in
the discussion section, allowing speciﬁc quotes or information about a theme to conﬁrm,
expand upon, or refute the quantitative data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2006; Jick, 1979;

Morgan, 1998; Morgan, 2007; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998).

57

Chapter IV
Results

This chapter provides an extensive review of the quantitative results of this mixed
methods investigation. Emergent qualitative themes, the relative contribution the two
groups of qualitative data have made to the formation of these themes and select
subthemes are also summarized in this chapter. Comparison of the quantitative and
qualitative results in the discussion rather than the results section is a frequently used
approach in mixed methods research (Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2006). This study has
employed this mixed methods approach in order to thoroughly integrate and synthesize
the ﬁndings.
Response Rate

Of the original 352 NCRE faculty members throughout the United States who
were sent individual e-mail invitations 81 (23%) could not be contacted (returned as
undeliverable), two (.28%) declined participation in the study, eight (2%) indicated they
were no longer employed as rehabilitation counselor educators, ﬁve (1.4%) were out of
the office, one (.28%) was unable to access the electronic survey and one (.28%) was
determined deceased. Invitations to participate were forwarded to NCRE faculty over the
course of three consecutive weeks beginning April 9, 2007. A list of the undeliverable e-
mail addresses for the NCRE members or member institutions were forwarded to the
secretary of the NCRE for her review and veriﬁcation of addresses. Following receipt of
the NCRE Secretary’s review of the undeliverable e-mail addresses, 35 addresses were
revised and an additional 35 individual e-mail invitations were forwarded. Five (14 %) of

the corrected 35 e-mail invitations were again returned as undeliverable. Of the

58

remaining faculty invited to participate in the electronic survey portion of this mixed
methods study (n=284) 83 participated for an overall response rate of 29.2%. Another
seven faculty members participated in the qualitative interview portion of this study.

Babbie (1990) expressed that a response rate of at least 50% is considered
adequate for survey analysis and reporting. However, current trends in survey research
reﬂect that refusal and nonresponse rates have doubled for all surveys regardless of type
in the past decade (Bimbaum, 2004; Tourangeau, 2004). Lacking an established
acceptable survey response rate, survey research is often published with less than 40%
response rates (Heppner, Kivlinghan, & Wampold, 1992).

Of the 83 participants, two completed two or less of the demographic items and
did not complete any of the importance or proﬁciency items. A total of six (7 %) did not
complete any of the proﬁciency items, and another 10 (12 %) did not complete either the
importance or proﬁciency items. In order to determine why 19% of the participants did
not complete the proﬁciency items, a ﬁnal thank you e-mail was sent to the sample of
NCRE faculty, thanking the participants for participating in the survey and requesting
voluntary feedback regarding reasons for dropping out of the survey. This request for
feedback resulted in 11 replies. Seven of the eleven participants who replied to this
request for information indicated that any lack of completion would have been
unintentional and they did not recall failing to complete the proﬁciency items. Two of the
participants indicated that they did not complete the proﬁciency items as they did not
consider themselves competent to answer. One participant expressed that he assumed the
items were skills acquired during a rehabilitation counseling education program. This

participant suggested that the survey should have addressed the actual skills involved in

59

consultation that would be ranked only within the type of consulting performed.
Although the percentage of participants who did not complete the proﬁciency items
appears high (19%), it appears consistent with recent web-based survey research. Porter
and Whitcomb (2003) studied the impact of contact type on a web survey with a sample
of 12,433 high school students. Survey click-through rates in Porter and Whitcomb’s
(2003) sample of 12,433 high school students, regardless of salutation or who signed the
invitation to participate ranged between 20.8% and 22.5%.
Characteristics of the Sample

The ﬁnal sample of this study consisted of 77 faculty who are members of NCRE
or employed by NCRE member institutions or programs. Tables 1 through 3 provide the
analysis of the participants’ demographic and professional characteristics as well as the
characteristics of their respective programs. The participant sample consisted of 44 males
(57.9%) and 32 females (42.1%). The participants’ age ranged from 30 to 70, with a
mean age of 51.12 years. The faculty (n=77) reported a wide range of experience as
rehabilitation counselor educators, with 22.1% indicating that they had ﬁve or less years
of experience, 26% had six to ten years, 19.5% had 11 to 20 years, and 32.5% had 21 or
more years of experience. With respect to their own formal training in consulting, 56.8%
(n=42) reported participating in workshops, 44.6% (n=33) participated in on—the-job
training, 33.8% (n=25) practicum or internship experience, and 31.1% (n=23) have taken
speciﬁc coursework.

In terms of credentials, 94.5% (n=68) of the participants reported that they held a
CRC, with 41.7% (n=30) holding a CRC along with another credential. Only 36 (43.4%)

of the possible respondents addressed the demographic question regarding their licensure

60

status, with 61.2% (n=22) of those responding indicating that they held a license as a
licensed professional counselor (LPC) and one (2.8%) indicating that they were licensed
as a mental health counselor (LMHC). Educationally, the faculty reported rehabilitation
counselor education (47.2%, n=34) as the predominant academic preparation for their
faculty position, followed by rehabilitation psychology (18.1%, n=13), other (18.1%,
n=13), counselor education (9.7%, n=7) and (4.2%, n=3) a doctorate in rehabilitation.

Approximately 90% (n=69, 89.6%) of the faculty responding indicated that they
have engaged in paid consulting activity. Responses to several demographic variables
suggest that consultation is a scholarly focus for a minority of faculty engaged in
rehabilitation counselor education. Approximately 20% (n=15, 20.3%) indicated that they
have authored publications regarding consultation, 38.7% (n=29) have written grants or
requests for proposals involving consultation, and 45.6% (n=36) read journals devoted to
consultation.

Rehabilitation counselor education programs apparently vary in the extent of
course content emphasizing consultation knowledge and skill preparation. Approximately
half of the respondents (n= 38, 49.4%) indicated “Not Applicable” when asked whether
their curriculum offered coursework for students emphasizing the development of
consultation knowledge and skill preparation. The primary methods of providing
consultation related knowledge and skill development were through a required course
(n=14, 18.2%) and through practicum or internship (n=13, 16.9%). Two of the
participants (2.6%) indicated that their programs were currently developing a course
emphasizing consultation content. Of the faculty with courses that have consultation

content in their rehabilitation counselor education programs, 41.6% (n=32) were taught

61

by full-time faculty in the rehabilitation counselor education program, 35.1% (n=27)
indicated the question was not applicable, and 18.2% (14) reported the courses were
taught by a combination of interdepartmental, adjunct, or rehabilitation counselor
education faculty.

The largest group of respondents indicated that their master’s degree
rehabilitation counselor education programs required 48 credit hours to complete degree
requirements (n=33, 42.9%). Another 22.1% (n=] 7) indicated that their programs
required 48 to 60 credit hours or 60 credit hours (n=17, 22.1%) respectively to graduate.
Geographic location of the participants was addressed through a demographic question
regarding the participant’s college or university NCRE membership region. The largest
groups of participants identiﬁed themselves as being from NCRE Region’s V (n=15,

22.7%), IV (n=12, 18.2%), and VI (n=9, 13.6%) respectively.

62

Table l - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample

 

 

Variable N Valid %
Gender
Male 44 57.9
Female 32 42.1
Professional Credential“
CRC 38 52.8
Other 4 5.6
CRC, NCC 12 16.7
CRC, NCC, Other 5 6.9
CRC, Other 12 16.7
CRC, NCC, CCM, Other 1 1.4
License(s)*
LPC 19 52.8
LMHC 1 2.8
Psychologist 7 19.4
Other 6 16.7
LPC, Psychologist 1 2.8
LPC, Other 2 5.6
Degree Major
Counselor Education 7 9.7
Psy D 2 2.8
Rehabilitation Counselor Education 34 47.2
Rehabilitation Psychology 13 l 8.1
Other 1 3 1 8. 1
Doctor of Rehabilitation 3 4.2
Years as an RCE
1 year or less 2 2.6
2-5 years 15 19.5
6-10 years 20 26.0
11-15 years 10 13.0
16-20 years 5 6.5
21-25 years 9 11.7
Over 26 years 16 20.8

 

*Participants could report more than one.

 

 

Table 2 - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample

 

 

Variable N Valid %
Years Paid Consultant
Less than 1 5 6.5
1-5 years 20 26.0
6-10 years 10 13.0
11-15 years 10 13.0
16-20 years 11 14.3
21 or more years 13 . 16.9
Not Applicable 8 10.4
Types of Formal Training“
Workshops 42 56.8
Practicum/Internship 25 33.8
Speciﬁc Coursework 23 31.1
OJT 33 44.6
Combination of Two or More 39 52.0
Not Applicable 16 21.6
Read Journals Devoted to the Topic
No 43 54.4
Yes 36 45.6
Grant Writing or RFP’s Involving Consultation
No 46 61.3
Yes 29 38.7
Publications in the Past
Year 3 4.1
3 Years 4 5.4
6-10 Years 2 2.7
11-15 Years 1 1.4
16-20 Years 4 5.4
20 + Years 1 1.4
Not Applicable 59 79.7

 

Note: The N’s do not sum to 77 due to missing data.

* Participants could report more than one form of formal training.

64

Table 3 - Demographic Characteristics of the Quantitative Sample

 

Variable N Valid %

 

NCRE Region
Region I 4 6.1
Region II 5 7.6
Region III 6 9.1
Region IV 12 18.2
Region V 15 22.7
Region VI 9 13.6
Region VH 6 9.1
Region VIII 2 3.0
Region IX 2 3.0
Region X 5 7.6
Credits Hours Required for Completion of a Master’s Degree
48 Credits 33 42.9
60 Credits 17 22.1
48 or 60 Credits 17 22.1
Between 49-59 4 5.2
Other 6 7.8
Program Curriculum Offerings"
Required Course 14 18.2
Required Course Interdepartmental 3 3.9
Elective 7 9.1
Practicum 13 16.9
Currently Developing 2 2.6
Not Applicable 38 49.4
Consultation Course Instructor“
FT Faculty RCE 32 41.6
FT Faculty Interdepartmental 2 2.6
Adjunct or PT Faculty 2 2.6
Combination of 2 or More 14 18.2
Not Applicable 27 35.1

 

Note: Ns do not sum to 77 due to missing data.

*Participants could report more than one type of curriculum offering or instructor.

65

 

Seven participants, four male and three female, participated in the qualitative
interview portion of this study. The participants were initially recruited through
individual e-mail invitations. Follow-up telephone calls were made to schedule interview
appointments at the participants’ convenience. The participants ranged in age from 45 to
5 8 and had a mean age of 53 years old. All of the interview participants are credentialed
as Certiﬁed Rehabilitation Counselors and one also reported being credentialed as a
Nationally Certiﬁed Counselor (N CC). Five of the seven participants reported holding a
professional license. Three of the participants indicated that they are Licensed
Professional Counselor’s (LPCs) and two reported that they are Licensed Mental Health
Counselor’s (LMHCS). Participants reported their doctoral degree majors as counselor
education (n =1), rehabilitation counseling education (n = 2), and rehabilitation
psychology (11 = 4). The qualitative interview participants have been employed as
rehabilitation counselor educators for a range of 11 to 31 years and a mean of 21.45
years. Participants reported having been engaged in paid consulting activities for a range
of 2 to 25 years and a mean of 16.43 years.

Consultation Knowledge and Skills

In order to address the ﬁrst research question and to identify the consultation
competencies that rehabilitation counselor educators perceive as important for future
practice by rehabilitation counselors the mean and standard deviation for each item on the
CC] was calculated. The items were then rank ordered within each a priori domain and a
mean score and standard deviation was computed for each domain. Conceptually, an a
priori criterion level of (2 3.00) as the mid-point on the CCI’s Likert-type scale was used

for group mean scores on an item to signify importance. The relative importance of the

66

consultation competencies will be discussed using this criterion. Domain and item means
and standard deviations are contained in Tables 4 through 8.
Perceived Importance

The ﬁrst importance domain, Assessment (Table 4), contains 11 items related to
conducting consultative assessments. Participating faculty rated 10 of the 11 items as
important (23.00). Faculty rated item six, employ computerized assessment techniques
(M=2.89) as somewhat important. The overall mean score (M=3.97) for this domain
suggests faculty perceive competency in assessment to be of moderate to very high
importance to the role of a practicing rehabilitation counselor engaged in consulting. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient calculated for the total sample was .87 indicating a
moderate to high level of internal consistency for the items in this domain.

The second importance domain, Business and Case Management Applications
(Table 5) contains nine items related to business operations and case management
applications and techniques. Faculty rated all items as having moderate or above levels of
importance (23.00). The overall mean score (M =3.82) for this domain indicates that
faculty perceived consultation competencies related to business and case management
applications to be of moderately high importance for the rehabilitation counselor working
in a consulting role. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total domain was .86,
indicating moderate internal consistency of the items included in this domain.

The third importance domain, Consultation Process Application and Skills (Table
6), includes 13 items related to the process and application of consulting competencies
within a rehabilitation setting. Faculty rated all items at least important (23.00). The

overall mean score (M = 3.69) for this domain indicates that the rehabilitation counselor

67

educators perceived consultation process and application competencies at least
moderately important for rehabilitation counselors practicing as consultants. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefﬁcient calculated for this domain was .86 indicating a moderate

internal consistency for the items included in this domain.

68

Table 4 - Importance Domain: Assessment

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Assessment Domain Item Means 3.97 .43
1. Interview to collect and verify accuracy of case information. 4.45 .73
2. Evaluate support systems. 4.14 .82
4. Identify transferable work skills by analyzing client’s work history, 4.25 .95
functional assets and limitations.
5. Select evaluation instruments and strategies according to their 4.11 1.01
appropriateness and usefulness to a particular client.
6. Employ computerized assessment techniques. 2.89 .93
7. Administer appropriate standardized tests. 3.76 1.01
8. Interpret tests and assessment results. 4.17 1.01
9. Integrate assessment data to describe assets, limitations, and 4.29 1.01
preferences for rehabilitation planning.
23. Analyze tasks of ajob. 3.78 .91
46. Conduct a review of the literature on a given topic, case, or problem. 3.66 1.02
52. Conduct labor market analysis. 3.76 .93

 

69

Table 5 - Importance Domain: Business and Case Management

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Business and Case Management Domain Items 3.82 .30
34. Provide information regarding your organization’s programs to 3.94 1.02
current and potential referral sources.
37. Understand insurance claims processing and professional 3.52 .91
responsibilities.
38. Refer to appropriate specialties and/or special services. 3.98 .89
39. Compile, document, and interpret information to maintain a current 4.14 .88
case record.
40. Write notes, summaries, and reports, so that others can read them. 4.22 .92
41. Negotiate ﬁnancial responsibilities with the referral sources. 3.40 1.03
42. Market rehabilitation services to businesses and organizations. 3.56 .97
45. Read professional literature related to business, labor markets, 3.71 .92
medicine, and rehabilitation.
54. Use effective time management skills. 4.15 .80

 

70

Table 6 - Importance Domain: Consultant Process and Application

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Consultant Process and Application Domain Items 3.69 .38
18. Use behavioral techniques. 3.19 .98
19. Consult using group methods. 3.16 .97
21. Conduct group activities or programs. 3.07 1.00
24. Recommend modiﬁcation of jobs. 3.87 .94
28. Respond to perspective employer biases. 4.12 .93
29. Negotiate with employers or labor union representatives to 3.49 1.01
reinstate/rehire an injured worker.
30. Provide prospective employers with appropriate information on client 3.94 1.02
work skills and abilities.
31. Provide consultation to employers regarding accessibility and issues 3.86 .91
related to ADA compliance.
32. Serve as a vocational expert to public agencies, law ﬁrms, and/or private 3.43 1.08
businesses.
33. Provide expert opinion or testimony regarding employability and 3.41 1.18
rehabilitation feasibility.
36. Consult with medical professionals regarding functional capacities, 3.97 .89
prognosis, and treatment plan for clients.
49. Educate your consultees regarding their rights under federal and state 4.03 .92
law.
51. Discuss return to work options with an employer. 3.93 .93

 

71

Table 7 - Importance Domain: Interpersonal Skills

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Interpersonal Skills Domain Items 4.17 .19
10. Develop relationships with unconditional positive regard. 4.26 .95
1 1. Clarify mutual expectations and the nature of the consulting 4.41 .75
relationship.
12. Identify one’s own biases and weaknesses, which may effect the 4.30 .79
development of healthy consulting relationship.
13. Adjust consulting approaches or styles according to the consultee’s 4.13 1.00
characteristics.
15. Employ group consulting techniques. 4.06 .87
20. Develop mutually agreed upon goals. 4.47 .76
35. Collaborate with other providers so that services are coordinated, 4.13 .85
appropriate and timely.
53. Use conﬂict resolution strategies. 3.91 .96
55. Develop rapport/network with physicians and other professionals. 3.99 .99

 

72

Table 8 - Importance Domain: Problem Solving Skills

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Problem Solving Skills Domain Items 4.11 .30
3. Determine appropriate services for consultees identiﬁed needs. 4.41 .82
14. Apply organizational systems theories to develop strategies for 3.67 .83
rehabilitation interventions.
16. Identify social, economic, and environmental factors that may present 4.39 .79
barriers to plan implementation.
17. Prepare rehabilitation plans with mutually agreed upon goals, 4.26 .99
interventions, and conclusion of services.
22. Monitor outcomes to determine need for additional services. 4.00 1.00
25. Apply knowledge of assistive technology in job accommodation. 3.97 .87
26. Use labor market or other occupational information from sources such 3.84 1.00
as the DOT, OOH, O*Net and other applications.
27. Understand the application of current legislation. 3.96 .90
43. Identify and comply with ethical and legal implications of client and 4.59 .79
consultee relationships.
44. Abide by ethical and legal considerations of case communication and 4.62 .79
recording (e.g., Conﬁdentiality).
47. Apply published research results to professional practice. 3.82 .92
48. Apply principles of rehabilitation legislation to every day practice. 3.87 .94
50. Identify and challenge stereotypical views toward persons with 4.16 1.00

disabilities.

 

73

The fourth importance domain, Interpersonal Relationship Skills (Table 7)
includes nine items related to the development and maintenance of interpersonal
relationships while consulting. Faculty rated all items to have at least moderate to very
high levels of importance (23.00). The overall means score (M=4.17) for this domain
reﬂects that participating faculty considered the rehabilitation counselor’s ability to
establish and maintain interpersonal relationships very important for rehabilitation
counselor’s practicing in a consulting role. The Cronbach’s alpha for the Interpersonal
Relationships Skills domain was .86 indicating a moderately high internal consistency for
items in this domain.

The ﬁfth importance domain, Problem Solving Skills (Table 8) consisted of 13
items that addressed various forms of problem solving a rehabilitation counselor may
engage in while practicing as a consultant. Faculty rated all items in the problem solving
domain to be of moderately to very high importance (2 3.00). The overall mean score (M
= 4.11) for this domain indicates that rehabilitation counselor educators perceive
competency in problem solving knowledge and skills to be very important for
rehabilitation counselors working in the role of a consultant. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient for the total sample was .89 indicating high moderate levels of internal
consistency for the items in this domain.

Perceived Proﬁciency

In order to address the third research question and determine the rehabilitation
educators’ perceptions of their own instructional and pedagogical proﬁciency to teach
consultation competencies, the means and standard deviations were calculated for each

item on the CC1 proﬁciency scale (Refer to Appendices H and I). The items were then

74

organized into the a priori domains, rank ordered within each domain, and a mean score
for each domain was calculated.

Conceptually, four a priori criterion levels were established for the aggregate
means for each item to reﬂect the perceived level of proﬁciency: Very high proﬁciency
(2 4.00), proﬁcient (M = 3.00 — 3.99), somewhat proﬁcient (M = 2.00 — 2.99), and not
proﬁcient (s 1.99). These criterion levels will be used to discuss the perceived
proﬁciency in each domain and item. Proﬁciency domain and item means and standard
deviations are provided in Tables 9 through 13.

The ﬁrst proﬁciency domain, Assessment (Table 9), contains 11 items.
Rehabilitation counselor educators indicated that they had a very high level of teaching
proﬁciency (2 4.00) related to instructing how to: Conduct a literature review regarding a
topic, interview to collect and verify the accuracy of information, evaluate support
systems, and integrate assessment data to describe assets, limitations, and preferences for
rehabilitation planning. Proﬁcient levels of teaching ability were reported for seven items
related to assessment in consultation (M = 3.00 - 3.99). The faculty reported feeling
somewhat proﬁcient teaching how to employ computerized assessment techniques (M =
2.99). The overall mean score (M = 3.83) for this domain suggests rehabilitation
counselor educators perceive themselves as highly proﬁcient in their ability to teach
consultation competencies for assessment.

Business and Case Management Applications (Table 10), the second proﬁciency
domain, contains nine items. Faculty perceived themselves as being very proﬁcient at
teaching how to write notes, summaries and reports so that others may read them and

how to compile, document, and interpret information to maintain a case record. Faculty

75

considered themselves somewhat proﬁcient (M = 2.00-2.99) addressing how to negotiate
ﬁnancial responsibilities with the referral source and understanding insurance claims
processing and professional responsibilities. The overall mean score (M = 3.55) for this
domain suggests that rehabilitation counselor educators consider themselves proﬁcient at
teaching business and case management knowledge and skills.

The third proﬁciency domain, Consultation Process and Application Skills (Table
11), contains thirteen items. Faculty perceived themselves as being very proﬁcient (M 2
4.00) at teaching students how to respond to employer biases and educating consultees
about their rights under federal and state law. Faculty considered themselves only
somewhat proﬁcient (M = 2.00-2.99) at teaching three of the items in this proﬁciency
domain. Items ranked by faculty as somewhat proﬁcient appear related to teaching
prospective counselors how to consult from an “expert” role and included: Negotiate with
employers or labor union representatives to reinstatelrehire an injured worker (M = 2.85),
serve as a vocational expert to public agencies, law ﬁrms, and/or private businesses (M =
2.80), and providing expert opinion or testimony regarding employability and
rehabilitation feasibility (M = 2.78). Although the overall mean score (M = 3.39) for this
domain represents the lowest overall mean for either the importance or proﬁciency
domains, it suggests that overall, rehabilitation counselor educators consider themselves
proﬁcient at teaching consultation process and application skills.

The fourth proﬁciency domain, Interpersonal Relationship Skills (Table 12)
includes nine items related to teaching students how to develop and maintain
interpersonal relationships while consulting. Faculty indicated that they were proﬁcient

(M = 3.00 — 3.99) to very proﬁcient (M 2 4.00) teaching interpersonal relationship

76

competency items. The overall mean score (M=3.93) for this domain reﬂects that faculty
perceive themselves as moderately to highly proﬁcient teaching interpersonal relationship
skills. The Cronbach’s alpha for the Interpersonal Relationships Skills domain was .90
indicating high internal consistency for items in this domain.

The ﬁfth proﬁciency domain, Problem Solving Skills (Table 13) consisted of 13
items that addressed the rehabilitation counselor educator’s proﬁciency in teaching the
various forms of problem solving a rehabilitation counselor may engage in while
practicing as a consultant. Faculty rated themselves as very proﬁcient (M 2 4.00) at
teaching four of the competency items in the problem solving domain and proﬁcient (M=
3.00 — 3.99) for teaching the remaining nine competency items. The overall mean score
(M = 3.90) for this domain indicates that rehabilitation counselor educators perceive
themselves as proﬁcient at teaching problem solving knowledge and skills. The
Cronbach’s alpha coefﬁcient for the total sample was .88 indicating high moderate levels
of internal consistency for the items in this domain.

Scale means were also calculated for the ﬁve a priori importance and ﬁve a priori
proﬁciency domains on the CC1 (Table 14). The overall scale item means for importance
items (M = 43.49) suggests that rehabilitation counselor educators perceive the ﬁve a
priori consultation competencies as very important to the role of a practicing
rehabilitation counselor. Rehabilitation counselor educators also perceived their
instructional and pedagogical proﬁciency as moderately high as reﬂected in the overall

item mean for the ﬁve a priori consultation competency domains (M = 40.61).

77

Table 9 - Proﬁciency Domain: Assessment

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Assessment Proﬁciency Domain Items 3.83 .36
1. Interview to collect and verify accuracy of case information. 4.16 .83
2. Evaluate support systems. 4.03 .97
4. Identify transferable work skills by analyzing client’s work history, 3.90 1.00
functional assets and limitations.
5. Select evaluation instruments and strategies according to their 3.87 1.07
appropriateness and usefulness to a particular client.
6. Employ computerized assessment techniques. 2.99 1.21
7. Administer appropriate standardized tests. 3.72 1.19
8. Interpret tests and assessment results. 3.87 1.09
9. Integrate data to describe assets, limitations, and preferences for 4.01 1.00
rehabilitation planning.
23. Analyze tasks of ajob. 3.89 1.07
46. Conduct a review of the literature on a given topic, case, or problem. 4.35 .80
52. Conduct labor market analysis. 3.76 1.27

 

78

Table 10 - Proﬁciency Domain: Business and Case Management

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Business and Case Management Domain Items 3.55 .61
34. Provide information regarding your organization’s programs to current 3.79 .92
and potential referral sources.
37. Understand insurance claims processing and professional 2.41 1.30
responsibilities.
38. Refer to appropriate specialties and/or special services. 3.80 .89
39. Compile, document, and interpret information to maintain a current case 4.06 .94
record.
40. Write notes, summaries, and reports so that other can read them. 4.18 .93
41. Negotiate ﬁnancial responsibilities with the referral source. 2.86 1.26
42. Market rehabilitation services to businesses and organizations. 3.20 1.20
45. Read professional literature related to business, labor markets, medicine, 3.95 .93
and rehabilitation.
54. Used effective time management skills. 3.80 .88

 

79

Table 11 - Proﬁciency Domain: Consultation Process and Application

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Consultant Process and Application Domain Items 3.39 .43
18. Use behavioral techniques. 3.50 1.19
19. Consult using group methods. 3.21 1.20
21. Conduct group activities or programs. 3.33 1.07
24. Recommend modiﬁcation of jobs. 3.74 1.13
28. Respond to perspective employer biases. 3.97 1.02
29. Negotiate with employers or labor union representatives to 2.85 1.13
reinstate/rehire an injured worker.
30. Provide prospective employers with appropriate information on client 4.02 .90
work skills and abilities.
31. Provide consultation to employers regarding accessibility and issues 3.50 1.07
related to ADA compliance.
32. Serve as a vocational expert to public agencies, law ﬁrms, and/or private 2.80 1.36
businesses.
33. Provide expert opinion or testimony regarding employability and 2.78 1.41
rehabilitation feasibility.
36. Consult with medical professionals regarding functional capacities, 3.79 1.03
prognosis, and treatment plan for clients.
49. Educate your consultees regarding their rights under federal and state 3.62 1.01
law.
51. Discuss return to work options with an employer. 3.30 1.12

 

80

Table 12 - Proﬁciency Domain: Interpersonal Skills

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Interpersonal Skills Domain Items 3.93 .71
10. Develop relationships with unconditional positive regard. 4.42 .78
1 1. Clarify mutual expectations and the nature of the consulting 4.14 .82
relationship.
12. Identify one’s own biases and weaknesses, which may effect the 4.17 .80
development of healthy consulting relationship.
13. Adjust consulting approaches or styles according to the consultee’s 3.80 .98
characteristics.
15. Employ group consulting techniques. 3.21 1.20
20. Develop mutually agreed upon goals. 4.29 .87
35. Collaborate with other providers so that services are coordinated, 3.85 .95
appropriate and timely.
53. Use conﬂict resolution strategies. 3.45 1.08
55. Develop rapport/network with physicians and other professionals. 4.05 .92

 

81

Table 13 - Proﬁciency Domain: Problem Solving Skills

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Problem Solving Skills Domain Items 3.90 .34
3. Determine appropriate services for consultees identiﬁed needs. 3.97 .85
14. Apply organizational systems theories to develop strategies for 3.33 1.10
rehabilitation interventions.
16. Identify social, economic, and environmental factors that may present 3.95 .95
barriers to plan implementation.
17. Prepare rehabilitation plans with mutually agreed upon goals, 4.00 .97
interventions, and conclusion of services.
22. Monitor outcomes to determine need for additional services. 3.91 .96
25. Apply knowledge of assistive technology in job accommodation. 3.33 1.17
26. Use labor market or other occupational information from sources such 3.74 1.07
as the DOT, OOH, 0*Net and other applications.
27. Understand the application of current legislation. 3.68 .96
43. Identify and comply with ethical and legal implications of client and 4.29 .84
consultee relationships.
44. Abide by ethical and legal considerations of case communication and 4.42 .77
recording (e.g., Conﬁdentiality).
47. Apply published research results to professional practice. 4.05 .93
48. Apply principles of rehabilitation legislation to every day practice. 3.07 1.02
50. Identify and challenge stereotypical views toward persons with 4.20 .97

disabilities.

 

82

Table 14 - Importance and Proﬁciency Scale Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

M SD
Importance Scale* 43.49 7.60
Proﬁciency Scale" 40.61 7.33

 

(248) n = 54, ** n =60

Cronbach’s index of internal consistency (a), the probability of Type I error, was
computed for each item contained in the CCI’s ﬁve a priori importance and proﬁciency
domains, the ﬁve a priori domains for importance and proﬁciency, the importance and
proﬁciency domains, and the overall instrument The internal consistency of the two
overall importance and proﬁciency scales is a = .7311 (Table 15). Cronbach’s alpha
ranged between .8566 for the importance of the a priori business and case management
domain and .8966 for problem solving (Table 16). Cronbach’s alpha for the proﬁciency
scales ranged between .8521 for the business and case management domain to .9092 for
the assessment domain. Review of the corrected item-total correlations and the
corresponding alpha if an item were to be deleted suggests minimal yield in terms of

improving interitem reliability through item deletion (Tables 17 — 26).

Table 15 - Overall Importance and Proﬁciency Reliability

 

 

Domain Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
Importance .5804
Proﬁciency .5804

 

Reliability Coefficients 2 items. N = 49

Alpha = .7311 Standardized item alpha = .7345

83

Table 16 - Reliability CCI Importance and Proﬁciency Domains

 

 

Domain or
Importance
Assessment .8744
Business and Case Management .8566
Consultation Process and Application .8621
Interpersonal Relationship .8579
Problem Solving .8966
Proﬁciency
Assessment .9092
Business and Case Management .8521
Consultation Process and Application .8761
Interpersonal Relationship .9023
Problem Solving .8762

 

84

Table 17 - Assessment Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
INTERVW .5619 .8651
EVALUATE .4766 .8701
IDENTIFY .7110 .8557
SELECT .7461 .8519
EMPLOY .4372 .8728
ADMIN .6565 .8580
INTERPRT .7726 .8496
INTEGRAT .6299 .8601
ANALYZE .6629 .8581
LITREV .3420 .8819
LMA .4607 .8727

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 11 items

Alpha = .8744 Standardized item alpha = .8782

85

Table 18 - Business and Case Management Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
PROVINFO .6250 .8370
INSCLMS .541 1 .8452
REFERRAL .6698 .8330
COMPILE .5913 .8406
WRITE .5750 .8420
NEGFINAN .4646 .8545
MARKET .5230 .8474
READ .6241 .8371
TIMEMGMT .6466 .8365

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 9 items

Alpha = .8566 Standardized item alpha = .8598

86

Table 19 - Consultation Process & Application Skills Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
BEHAVIOR .6405 .8455
GPMTHDS .4390 .8573
GPACTIV .5631 .8500
JOBMODS .5934 .8489
EMPLBIAS .6257 .8465
NEGOTIAT .5588 .8502
PRSPCTER .5350 .8517
ACCESSIB .6539 .8450
VOCEXPER .3298 .8659
EXPRTTES .3778 .8639
CNSLTMDS .4804 .8549
EDUCATE .5505 .851 1
RTW .6151 .8472

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 13 items

Alpha = .8621 Standardized item alpha = .8679

87

Table 20 - Interpersonal Relationship Skills Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
DEVELOP .5544 .8460
CLARIFY .5421 .8468
IDENTIFY .6192 .8398
ADJUST .6453 .8368
MPLOY .6459 .8367
DVLPGOLS .5635 .8450
COLLABOR .6440 .8368
CONFLICT .4197 .8606
RAPPORT .6486 .8361

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 9 items

Alpha = .8579 Standardized item alpha = .8609

88

Table 21 - Problem Solving Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
DETERMN .5145 .8926
APPLY .6688 .8858
BARRIERS .6784 .8855
PLANS .5968 .8891
MONITOR .6167 .8880
ASSISTEC .5972 .8891
LMI .6545 .8861
APPLYADA .5810 .8897
ETHLEGAL .6071 .8888
ABIDEEL .4664 .8946
APPLYPUB .6213 .8878
APLYPRIN .6885 .8844
CHALSTER .4996 .8946

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 13 items

Alpha = .8966 Standardized item alpha = .8977

89

Table 22 - Proﬁciency in Teaching Assessment Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
INTVCOL .6158 .9035
EVALSUPP .5498 .9062
TRANSKIL .6995 .8988
SELEVAL .7049 .8983
COMASSES .6335 .9027
ADMNASSE .8088 .8919
INTTEST .7769 .8942
INTASSES .8167 .8926
JOBANALY .6049 .9037
REVWLIT .3997 .9121
CONDUCT .6169 .9042

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 11 items

Alpha = .9092 Standardized item alpha = .9089

90

Table 23 - Interpersonal Relationship Skills Importance Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
ORGINFO .5844 .8359
INSURANC .6116 .8337
SPFERRAL .7238 .8241
DOCUMENT .5268 .8410
CASENOTE .5895 .8354
FINRESPO .5566 .8403
MKTSERV .5823 .8364
PROLIT .4789 .8453
TIMEMGT .5782 .8369

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 9 items

Alpha = .8521 Standardized item alpha = .8589

91

Table 24 - Proﬁciency Teaching Consultation Process Interitem Reliability

 

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
BEHTECH .5145 .8679
CSLTGP .3479 .8790
CDTGPACT .6208 .8636
JOBMODIF .6002 .8645
ERBIAS .4895 .8704
NEGEMPLR .4957 .8701
ERINFORM .6483 .8636
ACCESS .5400 .8678
VB .5917 .8653
XPRTTEST .5903 .8656
MEDCNSLT .6591 .8619
TCHRGHTS .5 1 06 .8693
DSRTW .6382 .8625
Reliability Coefﬁcients 13 items

Alpha = .8761 Standardized item alpha = .8800

92

Table 25 - Proﬁciency Teaching Interpersonal Skills Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
RELATION .6888 .8913
CLAREXPE .7184 .8889
BIAS .6993 .8905
CSLTAPPR .8154 .8801
CSLTGP .5772 .9028
MUTGOALS .6682 .8919
PROVCOLA .6274 .8948
CNFLCTRE .7147 .8885
NETWORK .6372 .8940

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 9 items

Alpha = .9023 Standardized item alpha = .9076

93

Table 26 - Proﬁciency Teaching Problem Solving Interitem Reliability

 

 

Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Alpha if Item Deleted
SERVNEED .7781 .8562
ORGSYSTM .5827 .8658
PBLMEXPL .3208 .8784
PLANIMPL .6105 .8641
MNTROUT .7032 .8590
OCCINFO .3637 .8786
LEGASPCT .5518 .8673
LEGALIMP .5844 .8660
ABIDELEG .5704 .8671
APLYRESC .6324 .8630
PRINALPLI .6778 .8600
STEREOTY .5758 .8659
TECASIST .3639 .8799

 

Reliability Coefﬁcients 13 items

Alpha = .8762 Standardized item alpha = .8810

Diﬂerences Across Competency Groupings
In order to determine whether the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceptions
of importance and their proﬁciency in teaching consultation competencies differs across

the ﬁve a priori components of the importance and proﬁciency domains on the CC1, two

94

series of multivariate analysis of variance (MAN OVA) were conducted. The ﬁve a priori
importance and proﬁciency competency groupings included: Assessment, business and
case management skills, consultation process and application skills, interpersonal
relationship skills and problem solving skill competency groupings were set as the
dependent variables. Both the overall importance and proﬁciency domains were used as
the independent variables.

An alpha level of .05 was used. Post hoc univariate AN OVA’S were completed
when the results reﬂected signiﬁcant multivariate F statistics. Post hoc Bonferonni
contrasts were conducted for the ﬁve dependent variables contained in the importance
and proﬁciency domains. Type I error for each pair wise comparison was addressed by
dividing alpha by the ﬁve competency components for each domain (alpha = .05/5 = .01)
(Howell, 2002). The MANOVAS were computed using the General Linear Model
multivariate procedure with Type IV method of sums of squares (GLM Multivariate
SPSS 11 for Mac OS X). The Type IV sums of squares method is designed for any
balanced or unbalanced models with empty cells and equally distributes the parameters of
F throughout the higher order effects in a design (SPSS, 2002).

Overall, there were signiﬁcant differences in the rehabilitation counselor
educators’ mean ratings of the perceived level of importance. Among the ﬁve groupings
of consultation competencies, rehabilitation counselor educators’ ranked problem solving
as the most important (M = 53.10), followed by consultation process and application
skills (M = 48.527), assessment (M = 43.029), interpersonal relationship skills (M =
37.797), and business and case management competencies (M = 35.053). A signiﬁcant

multivariate Wilks’ lambda F (10, 94) = .144, p < .001 was obtained for overall

95

importance. The partial r] 2 of .620 indicates that overall importance, by itself, accounted
for 62% of the overall variance. All of the multiple post hoc Bonferroni comparisons of
the mean differences between the rehabilitation counselor educators’ rankings of relative
importance (important, very important, and extremely important) within each of the ﬁve a
priori competency clusters were found to be signiﬁcant at p < .01. The results indicate
that rehabilitation counselor educators did perceive differing levels of importance among
the ﬁve a priori consulting competencies for the role of a practicing rehabilitation
counselor.

Overall, there were signiﬁcant differences in the rehabilitation counselor
educators’ mean ratings of their perceived proﬁciency teaching the consultation
competencies. Among the ﬁve a priori groupings of consultation competencies,
rehabilitation counselor educators’ ranked their teaching proﬁciency as follows: problem
solving skills as the most proﬁcient (M = 46.299), followed by consultation process and
application skills (M = 40.209), assessment (M = 39.774), interpersonal relationship skills
(M = 32.706), and business and case management competencies (M = 29.835). A
signiﬁcant multivariate Wilks’ lambda F (15, 143.951) = .116, p < .01 was obtained for
overall proﬁciency. The partial n 2 of .513 indicates that overall proﬁciency by itself,
accounted for 51.3% of the overall variance. The multiple post hoc Bonferroni
comparisons of the mean differences between the rehabilitation counselor educators’
somewhat proﬁcient — proﬁcient and extremely proﬁcient rankings of relative proﬁciency
within each of the ﬁve a priori competency clusters were found to be signiﬁcant at p <
.01. The results indicate that rehabilitation counselor educators perceive differing levels

of proﬁciency among the ﬁve a priori consulting competencies for the role of a practicing

96

rehabilitation counselor.
Demographic Dijfkrences Importance and Proﬁciency
Demographic Differences and Importance

The third research question addresses whether demographic variables inﬂuence
the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of the importance of the a priori
groupings of the consultation competencies on the CCI. An independent-samples t test
was conducted to assess gender’s inﬂuence on the faculty’ 3 perception of the importance
of consultation competencies. Although the mean for males (M = 218.87, SD = 32.148, N
= 30) was greater than that of females (M = 215.63, SD = 24.707, N = 24) the difference
was not statistically signiﬁcant at the .05 level. The t-test for gender differences on the
mean values for overall importance on the CC1 is not signiﬁcant at the .05 level, two-
tailed t(52) = .407, p = .686. The 95% conﬁdence interval for the difference between
male and female rehabilitation counselor educators runs from -12.746 to 19.929.

Due to the relatively small and unbalanced sample size of participants with other
degree majors when compared to the number of survey participants who indicated that
they had a major in rehabilitation counselor education, the degree major variable was
transformed to create a dichotomous variable that contained two groups, rehabilitation
counselor education and all other degree majors. An independent-samples t test was
conducted to assess the inﬂuence of degree major on the faculty’s perception of the
importance of consultation competencies. The difference between the total mean rankings
of importance for rehabilitation counselor educators (M = 217.52, SD = 29.954, N = 25)
and that of other degree majors (M = 217.340, SD = 28.421, N = 29) was not signiﬁcant

at the .05 level, two-tailed t(52) = .022, p = .983. The 95% conﬁdence interval for the

97

difference between the group means for rehabilitation counselor educators and other

degree majors was -15.782 to 16.133.

A series of four, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVAS) were conducted to

determine whether a rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of the importance of

consultation competencies differed due to age, years of experience as a rehabilitation

counselor educator, years of experience as a paid consultant, or the number of credit

hours required for completion of a master’s degree at the faculty’s respective

rehabilitation counselor education program. An alpha of .05 was established for the tests

of signiﬁcance. As reﬂected in Tables 27 through 30, none of the four ANOVAs showed

that the effect of the dependent variables were signiﬁcant.

Table 27 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Age and Overall Importance

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 440.654 3 146.885 .177 .912
Within 40676.025 49 830. 1 23

Total 41116.679 52

 

98

Table 28 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Years as an Educator and Importance

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 831.688 4 207.922 .242 .913
Within 41308.614 48 860.596

Total 42140.302 52

 

Table 29 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Years as a Paid Consultant and Importance

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 6719.328 6 b 11 19.888 1.406 .232
Within 37431.876 47 796.423

Total 44151.204 53

 

99

Table 30 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Master’s Degree Credit Hours and Importance

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 3261.292 3 1087.097 1.370 .263
Within 38879.010 49 793.449

Total 42140.302 52

 

Demographic Variables and Proﬁciency

The ﬁfth research question addresses whether demographic variables influence
the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of their instructional and pedagogical
proﬁciency in teaching consultation competencies contained in the ﬁve a priori groupings
on the CCI. An independent-samples t test was conducted to assess gender’s inﬂuence on
the faculty’s perception of their own teaching proﬁciency. Although the mean for males
(M = 205.24, SD = 40.119, N = 34) was slightly greater than that of females (M = 200.36,
SD = 28.736, N = 25) the difference was not statistically signiﬁcant at the .05 level. The
t-test for gender differences on the mean values for overall proﬁciency on the CC1 is not
signiﬁcant at the .05 level, two-tailed t(57) = .517, p = .607. The 95% conﬁdence
interval for the difference between male and female rehabilitation counselor educators
was -13.996 to 23.747.

An independent-samples t test was also conducted to assess the inﬂuence of
degree major on the faculty’s perception of their instructional and pedagogical
proﬁciency in teaching the ﬁve a priori groupings of consultation competencies contained

on the CCI. The difference between the total mean rankings of teaching proﬁciency for

100

rehabilitation counselor educators (M = 207.88, SD = 28.260, N = 25) and that of other
degree majors (M = 199.57, SD = 39.544, N = 35) was not signiﬁcant at the .05 level,
two-tailed t(57) = .517, p = .607. The 95% conﬁdence interval for the difference between
the group means for rehabilitation counselor educators and other degree majors was -
13.996 to 23.747.

Another series of four, one-way analysis of variance (AN OVAs) were conducted
to determine whether a rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of their proﬁciency
teaching consultation competencies differed due to age, years of experience as a
rehabilitation counselor educator, years of experience as a paid consultant, or the number
of credit hours required for completion of a master’s degree at the faculty’s respective
rehabilitation counselor education program. An alpha of .05 was established for the tests
of signiﬁcance. As reﬂected in Tables 31 through 34, the four AN OVAS conducted for
age, years of teaching experience, years of experience as a paid consultant, or the number
of credit hours required to complete a master’s degree at the faculty’s rehabilitation
counselor education program failed to demonstrate a signiﬁcant effect on the faculty’s

perception of their proﬁciency teaching consultation competencies.

101

Table 31 - One Way Analysis of Variance for Age and Perceived Instructional Proﬁciency

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 3312.857 3 1104.286 .854 .471
Within 69856.247 54 1293.634

Total 73169.103 57

 

Table 32 - One Way Analysis of Variance Years of Experience as an Educator and Proﬁciency

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 6675.905 4 1 1668.976 1.432 .236
Within 61750.250 53 1 165.099

Total 68426.155 57

 

102

Table 33 - One Way Analysis of Variance Years as a Paid Consultant and Proﬁciency

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 6866.690 6 1 144.448 .912 .493
Within 66473244 53 1254.212

Total 73339.933 59

 

Table 34 - One Way Analysis of Variance Credit Hours Required and Proﬁciency

 

 

Source SS df MS F p
Between 4013.353 3 1337.784 1.122 .349
Within 64412.803 54 1192.830

Total 68426.155 57

 

Relationship Between Perceptions of Importance and Proﬁciency
In order to address the seventh research question, a Pearson’s product moment
correlation was computed to address the relationship between the educators’ perceptions
of importance and their proﬁciency in teaching consulting competencies (Table 35). The
educators’ perception of the importance of the consultation competencies was used as the
constant and teaching proﬁciency as the dependent variable. The correlation between the
educators’ perceptions of importance was signiﬁcantly and positively related to their own

proﬁciency in teaching consultation competencies, r(n = 49) = .58, p < .01. The

103

correlation has a medium effect size, r2 = .336 (Cohen, 1988). A 95% conﬁdence interval

for r extends from .386 to .926.

Table 35 - Correlation Overall Importance and Proﬁciency

 

Overall Importance Overall Proﬁciency

 

Overall Importance Pearson Correlation 1 .580*

Sig. (2-tailed) . .000

N 54 49

Overall Proﬁciency Pearson Correlation .580* 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 49 60

 

*Correlation is signiﬁcant at the .01 level (2-tailed).
Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered concurrently during this study in
order to develop a comprehensive perspective of consultation in rehabilitation counselor
education and rehabilitation counseling practice. The three qualitative research questions
were designed to address how rehabilitation counselor educators described consultation
skills in relation to rehabilitation counselor practice, how consultation competencies
could be incorporated into the rehabilitation counselor education curriculum, and to
identify the perceived barriers or obstacles to their incorporation. These research

questions were addressed through a combination of subject expert interviews and open

104

ended text responses on the CC1.

Seven qualitative interviews were conducted between April 9, 2007 and May 15,
2007. Participants in the qualitative interviews were asked to address four questions in
order to obtain their perspective of compensation competencies and their role in
rehabilitation counseling practice and education. The four interview questions included:
How would you generally describe consultation skills in relation to rehabilitation
counselor practice?; What consultation competencies do you feel are most important for
rehabilitation counseling practice?; How would you describe your experience
incorporating consultation competencies into the RC curriculum?; and How would you
characterize what we know about consultation in terms of evidenced based practice?
Follow-up questions were asked in order to explore the participant’s perceptions of
consultation as a rehabilitation counseling practice and rehabilitation counselor
education.

Qualitative data was also obtained through the text responses of the survey
participants to three open-ended response items on the CCI. The three open ended
response items included: Please describe the process you have used to incorporate
consultation strategies into your curriculum; Describe any obstacles your program has
experienced incorporating consultation competencies into your curriculum; and What
strategies has your program used to overcome these obstacles? These open-ended items
were primarily designed to address the second and third qualitative research questions.

Forty-two of the 83 survey participants provided responses to the open ended
questions on the CCI. The combined total of the interview participants and open-ended

survey responses provided a qualitative sample of 49 participants. One of the qualitative

105

interview tapes was damaged during transcription. General themes were extracted from
the notes taken during the course of that interview, although the transcript developed
from this participant’s interview was essentially lost.

Interview and text transcripts were reviewed and coded to identify emerging
themes. Preliminary coding of the transcripts and text responses to the open ended
questions yielded 1180 references and 102 codes using HyperResearch 2.7, a computer
assisted qualitative data analysis software system. Following the preliminary coding
process, each transcript and the master code list was reviewed for theme development.
The 102 codes were reduced to ﬁve fundamental themes: Perceptions, the consultant as a
scientist-practitioner, obstacles to incorporation, strategies and methods of incorporation,
and preparation. The final theme, reference frequency, and the proportion of a theme’s

contribution to the total study are represented in Table 36.

106

Table 36 - Qualitative Themes

 

 

Theme Frequency %
Perceptions 308 26
Consultant as a Scientist Practitioner 169 14
Obstacles to Incorporation 128 11
Strategies and Methods of Incorporation 342 29
Preparation 233 20
Total 1180 100

 

Table 37 provides perspective regarding the relative weight the seven interview
participants’ references contributed to the overall development of the emergent themes
in this study. Reviewing Table 37, it is apparent that despite the lower number of
qualitative interview participants, the frequency of the subject expert’s contributions
exceeds the relative contribution of the open ended item respondents for the themes of
perception, consultant as a scientist practitioner, obstacles to incorporation, and
preparation of rehabilitation counselors for consulting activities. The relative contribution
may also reﬂect the nature of the questions asked. The subject experts were asked their
perception of consultation in rehabilitation practice. Open-ended questions focused on the
barriers or obstacles to incorporation as well as strategies and methods of incorporation
since the survey participants had already been asked to address their perception of the

relative importance of 55 competency items on the CCI.

107

Table 37 - Participant’s Content Contribution to the Total Theme Development

 

 

Percentage of Percentage

Qualitative Theme Theme N Subject Experts* Open Ended
Participants"

Perceptions 308 68 32
Consultant as Scientist Practitioner 169 94 6
Preparation342
Obstacles to Incorporation 128 54 46
Strategies and Methods of 342 29 71
Incorporation
Preparation 233 67 33

 

*Subject Expert (N = 7). "Open End Item Partcipants (N = 42)

Text and qualitative interview data reﬂected that the educator’s perception of
consultation accounted for 26% of the educator’s aggregate references. Qualitatively, an
educator’s perception of the importance of consultation competencies appeared indicative
of whether they employed strategies or methods of incorporating these knowledge and
skill areas in their respective curricula. Thirty of the 49 qualitative participant’s
references (61%) supported the emergent hypotheses that educators who perceived
consultation competencies as rehabilitation counseling strategies rather than obstacles
identiﬁed strategies for inclusion or incorporation. Similarly, 29 of 49 participant’s
references (59%) supported the emergent hypothesis that when consultation
competencies were perceived as an advanced practice educators were less inclined to
incorporate competencies into their curriculum.

The educators’ conceptualization of employment sectors or context also appeared
related to the deﬁnition of consultation and their references regarding the incorporation or
exclusion of consultation competencies into program curricula. Two of the seven

qualitative interview participants were not aware that a deﬁnition of consultation was

108

included in the CRC Scope of Practice (2000). References made by 33 of 49 (67%) of the
qualitative participants regarding the perception of traditional rehabilitation counseling
education programs, contexts or sectors of rehabilitation counseling were indicative of
not including consultation competencies in program curricula.

Approximately 14%, or 169 of the 1180 content references were related to the
consultant as a scientist-practitioner. Content references included the identiﬁcation of
consultation competencies, observing that these competencies could be applied as
transferable skills across discipline or settings, the need for content and process
knowledge and the application of theory to practice.

Characteristics considered important for effective consultants included creativity,
integrity, objectivity and task orientation. Consulting competencies identiﬁed by
qualitative participants supported the inclusion of a number of competency items
included within the CCI. Examples of competencies that could be applied in individual,
organizational or systems settings identiﬁed through the qualitative process include:
active listening skills, analysis, communication skills, conﬂict resolution skills, critical
thinking, interviewing skills, negotiation skills, problem solving skills, research skills.
Ninety-six of the 169 references (57%) in this theme were related to consultation
competencies.

Content references to the obstacles to incorporating consultation competencies
throughout the interview and survey transcripts comprised 128 of the total 1180 citations
(11%). Accreditation standards and content, credit hour limitations, student as well as
faculty developmental issues, time limitations, faculty shortages, faculty skill sets,

ﬁnancial constraints, geography, institutional policy, lack of evidenced based research,

109

and program funding source requirements were all cited as reasons consultation
competencies could not be included in rehabilitation counselor education curricula. Eight
of the 42 educators who provided text responses to the open ended questions indicated
there were not any obstacles to incorporating the consulting competencies into their
curriculum.

Approximately 29% (342) of the total qualitative content references addressed
strategies for incorporating, current methods of incorporation, or conceptualizations of
how consultation competencies could be integrated into the curriculum of rehabilitation
counseling programs.

Qualitative interview data were also transformed into dichotomous variables in
order to control for more verbal participants or participants who reiterated concepts
(Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2006). The participants were assigned a 1 if a code was present
or a 0 if a code or sub-theme was absent. Codes or sub-themes present in all (100%) of
the qualitative interviews included: attention to consultation as a concept; consultation as
a competency; deﬁnitional issues; didactic instruction; guest speakers as a strategy of
incorporation; the importance of consultant objectivity; the inﬂuence of perception on the
perceived importance of consultation as a rehabilitation counseling practice; problem-
solving as a consultation competency; the need for research regarding consultation in
rehabilitation; the importance of role, setting or context; the perception of consultation as
a systems process or approach; the perception of consultation competencies as a
transferable skill for rehabilitation counselors; and that there were no substantive

obstacles for including consultation competencies in rehabilitation counseling education.

110

In summary, the qualitative research questions were addressed through qualitative
interviews with subject experts and through text responses to open ended response items
at the conclusion of the CCI. The four qualitative interview questions explored the
subject expert’s perception of consultation in rehabilitation counseling, the state of the
research regarding consultation, the anticipated obstacles to including consultation
competencies and strategies for incorporation. The open end response items focused on
the educators’ current methods of incorporating consultation competencies into their
curriculum, obstacles encountered and strategies to overcome these barriers. In contrast
to traditional quantitative studies, mixed methods research frequently incorporates
statistical results with qualitative quotes or thematic information in the discussion
(Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2006). The qualitative data analysis in this study supports the
existence of a relationship between the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of
the importance of consultation competencies and their strategies and methods for
incorporating the competencies into their curriculum. Qualitative data will be integrated
with this study’s empirical ﬁndings to discuss and explore the results and their

implications for practice, education, and future research.

111

Chapter V
Discussion

The purpose of this study was three-fold. The intent was to identify which
consultation competencies rehabilitation counselor educators perceived as important for
rehabilitation counseling practice, their perceived level of proﬁciency in teaching these
competencies, and to explore strategies for incorporating these knowledge and skills
areas into the rehabilitation counseling curriculum. In addition, this study addressed
whether the educators’ perceptibns of importance and proﬁciency differed according to
demographic characteristics.

A concurrent nested mixed methods design was used to allow simultaneous data
collection. An a priori criterion of (2 3.0) was established as the threshold for the
importance and proﬁciency of a consultation competency item or domain of items on the
CCI. A review of the item mean scores revealed 54 of the 55 importance items met or
exceeded the criterion established for importance. Only one of the impOrtance items
approached, but did not meet the a priori criterion level for importance. A review of the
mean scores for proﬁciency items reﬂects that on average, rehabilitation counselor
educators met or exceeded the a priori criterion established for proﬁciency on 49 of the
55 items. The item mean scores for the ﬁve domains comprising importance and
proﬁciency are represented in Table 38.

Rehabilitation counselor educators indicated that on average, they felt that the ﬁve
a priori clusters were important or very important and that they were at least proﬁcient
teaching the ﬁve a priori consultation competency domains. A moderately strong positive

empirical correlation was also demonstrated in this study, suggesting a relationship

112

between the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception of the importance of
consultation competencies and their self-reported instructional and pedagogical
proﬁciency in teaching consultation competencies. The qualitative data analysis supports
the existence of a relationship between the rehabilitation counselor educators’ perception
of the importance of consultation competencies and their strategies and methods for
incorporating the competencies into their curriculum. Qualitative data will be integrated
with this study’s empirical ﬁndings to discuss and explore the results and their
implications for practice, education, and future research.

Table 38 - Importance and Proﬁciency Item Means A Priori Competency Domains

 

 

 

Domain Importance Proﬁciency
Assessment 3.97 3.83
Business and Case Management 3.82 3.55
Consulting Process and Application 3.69 3.39
Interpersonal Relationship 4.17 3.93
Problem Solving 4.11 3.90
Perceived Importance

Overall, the rehabilitation counselor educators regarded the ﬁve a priori

consultation competency domains as important to very important for rehabilitation

113

counseling practice. The interpersonal relationship skills development and problem
solving skills domains were considered very important for consultation in rehabilitation
counseling practice. Twenty-ﬁve of the individual importance items exceeded the a priori
criterion of very important (M 2 4.0). Only one item, the importance of “Employ
computerized assessment techniques” (M = 2.89, SD = .928) approached but was Slightly
below the threshold criterion for importance.

Among the highest ranked individual importance items were: abiding by ethical
and legal considerations of case communication and recording (conﬁdentiality) (M =
4.62, SD = .792), identifying and complying with ethical and legal implications of client
and consultee relationships (M = 4.59, SD = .738), developing mutually agreed upon
goals (M = 4.47, SD = .756), the importance of interviewing to collect and verify
accuracy of case information (M = 4.45, SD =.727) and clarifying the mutual
expectations of the consulting relationship (M = 4.41, SD =.752). Ethical practice,
potential boundary issues, and the consultee’s active participation in goal development
appear to be of paramount importance to rehabilitation counselor educators when they
consider rehabilitation consulting competencies and rehabilitation counselor practice.

The importance of ethical behavior and integrity are referenced in the qualitative
data as well. Several of the participants in the interview component of this study
referenced consultation in relation to ethics. For one of the interview participants, the
application of the consultation process was perceived as an extension of the ethical
process, particularly in the area of providing or rehabilitation counselors understanding
when to seek supervision. Another participant emphasized the importance of a

consultant’s credibility and integrity as a competency or characteristic as evidenced in the

114

following passage:

I think the ﬁrst the over-riding competency if this was a competency, but a

Consultant has to have credibility with whoever they are consulting with. They

have to have credibility. They have to have integrity. They have to show ethics

and show that the Consultation is a neutral type of Consultation that you’re not
just telling people what you think they want to hear.

Although the educators considered each of the consultation competency domains
important, signiﬁcant mean differences were identiﬁed between the educators’
perceptions of their relative importance for the practicing rehabilitation counselor.
Among the ﬁve a priori domains of consultation competencies, rehabilitation counselor
educators ranked problem solving as the most important competency domain, followed
by consultation process and application skills, assessment, interpersonal relationship
skills, and business and case management competencies.

No signiﬁcant differences were identiﬁed in relation to the educator’s perception
of the importance of the ﬁve competency domains and the educator’s age, gender, years
of experience as a rehabilitation counselor educator, years of experience as a paid
consultant, doctoral degree major, or the number of credit hours required for completion
of a master’s degree at their respective rehabilitation counselor education programs.

A rehabilitation counselor educator’s perception of the importance of consultation
competencies for rehabilitation counseling practice did emerge as a central theme during
the analysis of the qualitative data. Text and qualitative interview data reﬂected that the
educator’s perception of consultation accounted for 26% of the educator’s aggregate

references. Qualitatively, an educator’s perception of the importance of consultation

115

competencies appeared indicative of whether they employed strategies or methods of
incorporating these knowledge and skill areas in their respective curricula. Thirty of the
49 qualitative participant’s references (61%) supported the emergent hypotheses that
educators who perceived consultation competencies as rehabilitation counseling
strategies rather than obstacles identiﬁed strategies for inclusion or incorporation.
Similarly, 29 of 49 participant’s references (59%) supported the emergent hypothesis that
when consultation competencies were perceived as an advanced practice educators were
less inclined to incorporate competencies into their curriculum.

The educators’ conceptualization of employment sectors or context also appeared
related to the deﬁnition of consultation and their references regarding the incorporation or
exclusion of consultation competencies into program curricula. References made by 33 of
49 (67%) of the qualitative participants regarding the perception of traditional
rehabilitation counseling education programs, contexts or sectors of rehabilitation
counseling were indicative of not including consultation competencies in program
curricula.

The differing perspectives of the importance of consultation competencies can in
part be attributed to the lack of a uniformly accepted deﬁnition of consultation in the
profession of rehabilitation counseling. It is noteworthy that although all of the
qualitative interview participants indicated that they are CRC’s, two of the seven
interview participants were not aware that consultation was deﬁned in the Scope of
Practice for rehabilitation counselors (CRCC, 2000). The qualitative data in this study
supports the conclusion that counseling and psychology lack a uniform deﬁnition of

consultation (Estrada-Hernandez & Saunders, 2005; Schein, 1999, & Zins, 1993).

116

Reviewing the generic deﬁnition of the consultation process authored by Kurpius, F uqua,
and Rozecki (1993), one qualitative interview participant stated the following:

What I found interesting about the deﬁnition you did provide though, what he

said, it looks an awful lot like the Rehab process. There’s an assessment phase,

an information, an intervention, an evaluation and you terminate it, so that was
just an observation, but I found that the deﬁnition you use closely parallels the

Rehab process as it is used with our Clients even in the public sector. I think that

anything that one does in the Rehab process or in Vocational Rehabilitation, if

you want to look at it differently, I think anything Rehab Counselors do that relate

to the roles and functions in which they have been trained can be done on a

Consultative basis. I think that we are frequently asked to do things as

Consultants that are kind of narrow aspects of Rehabilitation Counseling to solve

particular problems that third parties are having.

Acknowledging a parallel between consultation and the rehabilitation process, the
preceding quote reﬂects the educator’s perception of consultation as a process that
transcends setting or context. The parallels drawn between the deﬁnitions of
consultation and the rehabilitation counseling process also reﬂects the differences in the
perspectives between an expanded and traditional perception of rehabilitation counseling
practice. This contrast is reﬂected in a comparison of the previous quote and the
observations of another qualitative interview participant who expressed a potential
linkage between the deﬁnition of consultation and the terminology’s use in the traditional

rehabilitation setting or context in the following exchange:

117

Q Do you feel that there are certain settings where consultation might have

more direction application?

A I thought, let’s see... I took some notes on that I said that perhaps in my

view, all settings are appropriate.

Q Okay.

A But, maybe as a ﬁeld, we don’t necessarily perceive this and that’s where,

maybe, the terminology comes into play. That we don’t... maybe typically we

wouldn’t use the term consultation in the more traditional rehab setting, such as
the state/federal system.

Chan et al.’s (2003) study of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors training needs for
contemporary practice indicated rehabilitation counselors in both the public and private
sectors noted critical training needs in the areas of career counseling, assessment, and
consultation. Responses to the open ended questions contained on the CC1 support the
ﬁndings of Chan et al. and suggest that an emphasis on “sectors” of rehabilitation
practice reﬂects an obstacle to including consultation competencies into rehabilitation
counseling and represents an ongoing identity issue in the profession. A representative
comment is contained in the text response of participant 54:

When other professions talk about workplaces for their graduates, I don’t think

they put so much emphasis on where someone works (e.g., a P. T. working in a

private clinic vs a public hospital is still a respected PT). We have a long ways to

go to get this straight - and should probably start by not making such an emphasis
on the different“ sectors” of employment.

The qualitative comments generally support the importance of consultation

118

competencies to rehabilitation practice as reﬂected in the breath and depth of comments
regarding strategies and methods of incorporating consultation competencies into
graduate curricula. However, the educator’s comments do represent diverse perceptions
of consultation and perhaps the perceived role of rehabilitation counseling profession
within the academic community. Regardless of their demographic characteristics, the
quantitative results suggest that rehabilitation counselor educators consider consultation
skills important to very important for rehabilitation counseling practice. The absence of
signiﬁcant quantitative differences on six demographic factors suggest that although the
competencies are perceived as important other inﬂuences contribute to their incorporation
into the rehabilitation counseling education programs.
Perceived Proﬁciency

As a group, rehabilitation counselor educator’s rated themselves as instructionally
and pedagogically proﬁcient on 49 of the 55 consultation competency proﬁciency items.
Educators rated themselves as very proﬁcient (2 4.00) on 18 of the 55 proﬁciency items.
Among the highest rated proﬁciencies were: Teaching relationship development (M =
4.42, SD = .781), teaching how to abide by ethical and legal considerations of case
communication and recording (M = 4.42, SD = .762), teaching how to conduct a review
of the literature on given topic or case problem (M = 4.35, SD = .799), teaching how to
identify and comply with ethical and legal implications of client and consultee
relationships (M = 4.29, SD = .843), and how to develop mutually agreed upon goals (M
= 4.29, SD = .873).

Six of the 55 proﬁciency items were ranked as below the a priori proﬁciency

criterion level established for proﬁciency (2 3.0): Teaching how to employ computerized

119

assessment techniques (M = 2.99, SD = 1.212), how to negotiate ﬁnancial responsibilities
with a referral source (M = 2.86, SD = 1.261), understanding insurance claims and
professional responsibilities (M = 2.41, SD = 1.301), how to negotiate with employers or
labor unions to reinstate or rehire an injured worker (M = 2.85, SD = 1.126),. serve as a
vocational expert (M = 2.80, SD = 1.361), or provide expert opinion or testimony
regarding employability and rehabilitation feasibility (M = 2.78, SD = 1.401).

The item how to employ computerized assessment techniques had been assigned
to the a priori grouping of assessment proﬁciency. Negotiate ﬁnancial responsibilities
with a referral source and understanding insurance claims processes and professional
responsibilities were assigned to the a priori grouping of business and case management
proﬁciency. Three of these six items had been assigned to the a priori grouping variable
of consultation process and application skills. Despite differences in scale, the current
study’s ﬁnding that rehabilitation counselor educatOrs perceive themselves as somewhat
proﬁcient teaching consultation competencies is consistent with the ﬁndings of Ebener,
Berven, and Wright (1993). It is interesting that Ebener, et al. (1993) analyzed data
gathered during a 1987 study of the self-perceived abilities of rehabilitation counselor
educators’ teaching proﬁciency across 10 competency areas of rehabilitation practice.
Consultation, which included the areas of consultation, expert opinion and marketing was
ranked moderate to fair and was the lowest ranked of the 10 competency domains.
Rehabilitation counselor educators continue to rank items associated with these activities
among their least proﬁcient area of instruction.

Qualitatively, seven of 49 participants (14%) referenced the lack of faculty skill

sets as obstacles to incorporating consultation competencies in their program’s

120

curriculum. These references reﬂect Cumming’s (2002) concerns about faculty being
inadequately prepared to teach 11 of the consulting competencies recommended in the
principles for the education and training of psychological consultants. One of the
participants responding to the open ended questions indicated that new faculty lack
applied experience. Sixteen participants did not complete any of the proﬁciency items on
the CCI. Two of the sixteen participants indicated that they dropped out of the survey
when they arrived at the proﬁciency items on the CC1 as they did not perceive themselves
as competent to respond. Another participant commented that he only answered those
CCI teaching proﬁciency items that were within the realm of his own personal experience
as a consultant. These comments suggest the importance of the educator’s perception of
what constitutes consultation and their personal experience as mediators of proﬁciency as
well as importance.

On average, rehabilitation counselor educators rated themselves as instructionally
and pedagogically proﬁcient to teach each of the ﬁve competency domains on the
proﬁciency scale of the CCI. Signiﬁcant differences were noted in the educator’s
perceived level of proﬁciency on the ﬁve a priori proﬁciency domains. Among the item
mean scores in the ﬁve domains, educator’s indicated that they were most proﬁcient at
teaching interpersonal relationship skills, followed by problem solving, assessment,
business and case management and consultation process and application. Each of the ﬁve
domains was within the “proﬁcient” criterion range of (M = 3.00- 3.99).

No signiﬁcant differences were identiﬁed in relation to the educators’ perception of
their instructional proﬁciency and the demographic characteristics of age, gender, years

of experience as a rehabilitation counselor educator, years of experience as a paid

121

consultant, degree major, or the number of credit hours required to complete a master’s
degree at their respective program institutions.
Consultation Skills in Relation to Rehabilitation Counselor Practice

A number of educators offered their perceptions about consultation in relation to
rehabilitation counselor practice. Approximately 14%, or 169 of the 1180 content
references were related to the emergent theme of the consultant as a scientist-practitioner.
Content references included the identiﬁcation of consultation competencies, observing
that these competencies could be applied as transferable skills across discipline or
settings, the need for content and process knowledge and the application of theory to
practice.

Characteristics considered important for effective consultants included creativity,
integrity, objectivity and task orientation. Consulting competencies identiﬁed by
qualitative participants supported the inclusion of a number of competency items
included within the CCI. Examples of competencies that could be applied in individual,
organizational or systems settings identiﬁed through the qualitative process include:
active listening skills, analysis, communication skills, conﬂict resolution skills, critical
thinking, interviewing skills, negotiation skills, problem solving skills, research skills.
Ninety-six of the 169 references (5 7%) in this theme were related to consultation
competencies. Consultation competencies, as distinguished from the consultation process,
were often perceived as being commonly taught in current rehabilitation counselor
curricula although not identiﬁed with consultation. One of the educators expressed his
perspective regarding consultation competencies and rehabilitation counseling skills in

the following excerpt:

122

I don’t necessarily see that there are Rehab Counseling skills and then there are
these advanced Consultation skills, but rather than that people are asking more
experienced Rehab Counselors to come and give them just a piece of their skill
bank or knowledge bank and that could be virtually any professional activity that

a Rehab Counselor was trained to do. Often applied in a more creative way than

we think of it in the traditional jobs we do either in the public or private sector.

Educators in the qualitative interview portion of this study noted that although the
ﬁeld of rehabilitation may perceive consultation as a sector speciﬁc process or skill, ﬁ'om
their perspective, it was a cross-setting or cross-disciplinary skill. One educator offered
during the course of their interview that the setting mediates the process although the
process has broad application across any setting:

Well you know you can do Consulting in public and in private forums. You can

work with State Rehabilitation Agency people. You can work in sheltered

facilities, or you can do Consultation with private sector areas. You can apply
this in a variety of settings, and depending upon the needs that the constituent
group has, you would take the theory that best approaches what the problem is
and then apply it as I said before.

Consultation competencies were also perceived as transferable skills that
expanded the employment potential of rehabilitation counseling graduates. This
conceptualization is reﬂected in the excerpt from the transcript of one of the educator’s
interviews.

When I try to recruit students to the program and they ask, “What job I can get?”

I do tell them about the jobs they can get in the ﬁrst 3-5 years, but I can tell them

123

with enormous enthusiasm about the jobs they will have in 10—20 years is why

one would come into this. The opportunities are absolutely extraordinary. But

you can’t be thinking about it or you are never going to be successful trying to
recruit people to go to work for State PR. for $30,000.00 3 year and go to an out
of state school and pay $60,000.00 a year to get the degree to do that.

However, among the qualitative participants in this study awareness of
consultation as a professional rehabilitation activity does not appear universal. Discussing
consultation skills in relation to rehabilitation counseling practice, one educator stated, “I
don’t think we have actually attended to what it could or should mean in the ﬁeld. I think
that is kind of a very developing area within the practice.” Raising awareness, through
the labeling and identiﬁcation of consultation applications within the context of existing
courses was among the most frequently referenced strategies for, or the current method of
incorporating consultation content in existing curricula.

Obstacles to Incorporation

Obstacles to incorporating consultation competencies into the rehabilitation
counselor curriculum include the previously cited perceptions that some rehabilitation
counselor educators may hold about consultation as a professional activity, the
deﬁnitional issues, and lack of awareness. The qualitative responses obtained from
rehabilitation counseling educators during this research also support the conclusions of
(Brown, 1993; Estrada-Hernandez & Saunders, 2005). Brown (1993) suggested that
counselor education programs lacked adequate resources to offer comprehensive
preparation required by the diversity of employment roles and settings. Brown noted that

the requirements of accrediting bodies were frequently cited as leaving insufficient room

124

to incorporate consultation coursework. Estrada—Hemandez and Saunders (2005)
speculated that the barriers to including consultation competencies into the curriculum
include the lack of time, ﬁnancial or personal resources.

Content references to the obstacles to incorporating consultation competencies
throughout the interview and survey transcripts comprised 128 of the total 1180 citations
(11%). Accreditation standards and content, credit hour limitations, student as well as
faculty developmental issues, time limitations, faculty shortages, faculty skill sets,
ﬁnancial constraints, geography, institutional policy, lack of evidenced based research,
and program funding source requirements were all cited as reasons consultation
competencies could not be included in rehabilitation counselor education curricula

Although many of the text references in response to the open ended questions
regarding obstacles to incorporating consultation competencies were brief, they do appear
to represent the perspectives of a segment of the sample of rehabilitation counselor
educators that participated in this research. Beyond the perceptions of consultation, issues
of deﬁnition, or awareness, the identiﬁed obstacles to incorporating consultation
competencies appear overwhelming. The sense of being overwhelmed with content was
articulated throughout the text responses and during one of the faculty interviews:

You know I think maybe another barrier too is that our scope of practice is so

broad that trying to get everything into a 48-hour program in any kind of depth at

all seems like an insurmountable barrier.

However, the emphasis of this study was on consultation competencies that focus
on the foundational knowledge, skill, and abilities required to competently perform work.

Eight of the 42 educators who provided text responses to the open ended questions

125

indicated there were not any obstacles to incorporating the consulting competencies into
their curriculum and another indicated “ very few”. Educators also identiﬁed a variety of
strategies and methods that may prove beneﬁcial as a resource for faculty interested in
incorporating these competencies into their cuniculum in the future.
Strategies and Current Methods of Incorporation

Rehabilitation counselor educators provided a diverse range of strategies and
methods for incorporating consultation competencies into their curriculum.
Approximately 29% (342) of the total qualitative content references addressed strategies
for incorporating, current methods of incorporation, or conceptualizations of how
consultation competencies could be integrated into the curriculum of rehabilitation
counseling programs. Strategies for incorporation included adjunct faculty; advocacy
projects; alternate supervision; awareness through identiﬁcation or labeling of
consultative activities; use of case examples (actual or hypothetical); curriculum
appraisal, design, and syllabus revision; discussion with colleagues; dialogue with
students and needs assessment; elective course; emphasizing measurable goal
development; encourage and support student participation and presentations at state or
national conferences; experiential learning through practicum or internship; focusing on
competencies as content; group learning experiences; use of guest speakers; independent
study; infusion; use of media; research; role play; speciﬁc course(s); units within speciﬁc
courses; and teaching critical thinking and problem solving skills in a holistic manner
throughout the curriculum. Of the strategies reported, infusion was the most frequently
recommended strategy for incorporating programs that do not have the resources for the

development and implementation of speciﬁc coursework devoted to consultation.

126

Faculty identiﬁed a number of existing courses in their institution’s program as
appropriate for the infusion of consultation competency content. Identiﬁed courses
included: assessment, case management, ethics, job placement, foundations of
rehabilitation, medical aspects of disability, multi-cultural competency courses, private
rehabilitation, psychosocial aspects of disability, organizational development and
program development, research methods, practicum and internship. Review of the
strategies and methods of incorporation into current curricula suggest that in part
incorporation of consultation strategies is a matter of faculty interest and prioritization.
One of the interview participants attributed the incorporation or infusion of consulting
competencies to the “ the qualiﬁcations of the faculty and priorities of the faculty. It’s
not only that we know how to do it, it’s that we think it’s important that our students
recognize that they have the skill set to do it if they choose to.”

Preparation

Participants in this study offered disparate opinions regarding their perceptions of
when a rehabilitation counseling student or practitioner should be exposed to consultation
competencies. Perspectives about the timing of exposure to this skill and knowledge base
ranged from the master’s degree level, to post-graduate certiﬁcate programs through
doctoral study. A proponent of introducing consultation competencies at the master’s
degree level expressed:

I feel fairly strongly that it should be at the masters level, and the reason is you

won’t necessarily have that many people who will go straight out of school and

start right in with consultation because you just don’t know enough at that point to

consult with anybody about anything. It doesn’t take that long if you are a go

127

getter until you are in that place. Usually people don’t want to wait to capitalize

on that skill set that they realize they have. Well they go back and get a doctoral

Degree. Most people are going to become consultants with a master’s degree.

In contrast, a proponent of the development consultation competencies viewed
them as developmental and felt the post-master’s certiﬁcate program was a more
appropriate venue to develop consultation skills.

I think the best place to handle this kind of training is in a Post Master Certiﬁcate

Program. You can do them in almost any University and typically about 15

credits or 12 credits, and you design a program where we talk about the things

that we are talking about in this phone call and we organize it into a four or ﬁve
course curriculum, maybe a three course curriculum with a Clinical opportunity,
and then students that have been out for ﬁve years or more, and want to come
back and get that and when they are ready to get it, understand and appreciate it
and apply it, would do so. I really don’t think that you can and should be training
any professional for jobs they might or might not do in twenty years, and I don’t
think you should do that for all students.

Noting the developmental aspect of consultation skill development, an example of
a certiﬁcate program in development was provided among the text responses to the open
ended survey questions contained in the text response of participant # 32:

Currently in process of developing and implementing a 5-course (advanced

graduate) program in Forensic Rehabilitation Consultation (15 semester credits).

Four courses will be offered online and the ﬁnal course will combine both online

and face-to-face. Capstone experience involves the development of a

128

rehabilitation opinion for a simulated case and ﬁnal delivery in a trial setting, with
both examination and cross-examination. First course is scheduled for Spring
2008, with the Specialized Graduate Certiﬁcate being reviewed and ideally being
approved by the university and state university system by end of Fall semester
2007.
Whether consultation competencies are perceived as an advanced practice skill or
a foundation competency also appeared to be inﬂuence the qualitative participants
perception of when the competencies could be incorporated. Discussing the appropriate
timing for the introduction of this knowledge and skill base timing of students,
My thought is that in the Masters Program especially you have to really spend a
lot of time building those foundational aspects of Counseling both an
understanding of professional identity, learning the basic content skills and
applications, and getting enough practice as a Counselor so that you have a basic
capability. I view that there are a number of other skills that I had mentioned
earlier that are advanced skills that are certainly appropriate and valid, but I think
that they are kind of if you will second or third order kinds of things. Once you
have mastered the core, then you can go on to these. Because the Masters
curricular is so crowded, I think in many cases it is unrealistic to expect. A lot of
involvement with the second or third order of skill sets of these advanced practice
skill sets, and I see Consultation as one of those.
Reviewing the qualitative data, the range of opinions regarding the appropriate
timing for the introduction of consultation competencies reﬂects a lack of consensus

among the academe. The qualitative transcripts reﬂect the importance of an experiential

129

component to the development of consultation competencies. Whether that occurs pre-
service, through service learning, on-the-job, or through advanced study or post-graduate
work remains unresolved and requires research and further discussion.

Consensus did emerge during this study regarding the absence of and need for
evidenced based research regarding consultation in rehabilitation counseling. Research
was cited as a tool for making informed decisions regarding the inclusion of consultation
competencies in the curriculum. Participants cited the need for evidenced based research
in the areas including: best practices with employer consultation; models of employer
development; the role, contexts and settings of consultation in rehabilitation counseling;
role and function studies; and social justice or advocacy counseling.

Qualitatively, the areas identiﬁed as having potential for future rehabilitation
consultation preparation were also described as having previously emerged rather than
emergent. Existing niche areas were primarily identiﬁed as topics for expanded education
and training of rehabilitation counselors interested in consultation. Potential topics
included geriatric care management and life care planning, assistive technology, career
counseling with non-disabled populations, disability management, social justice and
advocacy counseling, and loss of earning capacity analysis. The educators participating in
the interview process expressed these were subject areas that had not received adequate
academic attention.

Limitations

The overall response rate for the quantitative portion of this mixed methods study

(29.2%) is an acknowledged limitation. The response rate did not yield a sufficient

sample to conduct the intended exploratory factor analysis of the CCI. Approximately

130

21% of the e-mail invitations to participate were returned as undeliverable. Post-survey
follow-up contact from rehabilitation counselor educators who initiated but dropped out
of the survey prior to completion primarily yielded comments that it was unintentional
and precipitated offers to complete the survey. However two participants did express they
dropped out rather than complete the proﬁciency items as they did not feel sufficiently
competent to participate.

Another possible limitation is the instrument used for data collection. The CCI
was primarily developed through a review of the literature, modiﬁcation of the RSI-R,
and through pilot testing. Each scale contained 55 items for a total of 110 items in
addition to 15 demographic items. Pilot testing yielded an average completion time of 20
to 25 minutes. Two participants responded to the open-ended survey questions expressing
that they felt the competency items bore too close of a resemblance to rehabilitation
counseling. One person who dropped out expressed similar concerns and added any
questions should have been asked within the contexts for which they applied. Another
participant expressed he only answered proﬁciency items that were within his experience
as a consultant.

The sample of rehabilitation counselor educators is also noted to have been a
sample of convenience. The sample belongs to a small, and what was thought to be a
known population of rehabilitation counselor educators. It is possible that only those
rehabilitation counselor educators interested in consultation participated in the survey,
further limiting the ability to generalize the results.

The primary underlying assumption of this study is the validity of using a self-

report methodology. It was assumed that rehabilitation counselor educators possessed the

131

requisite abilities, skills, and judgment to accurately assess the importance of consultation
competencies to rehabilitation counseling practice and their own instructional and
pedagogical proﬁciency to teach the respective competencies.
Implications
Implications for the Profession

The results of this investigation appear to have several potential applications for
the profession of rehabilitation counseling. This investigation represents an initial
empirical attempt towards deﬁning the importance, role and ﬁrnctions of consultation in
rehabilitation counseling. Consultation lacks a commonly accepted deﬁnition in
rehabilitation counseling, counseling, and psychology (Estrada-Hemandez & Saunders,
2005; Shein, 1999; Zins, 1993). The consultation competencies identiﬁed as important
for rehabilitation counseling practice in this study could be used to develop a tangible
deﬁnition of consultative practice in the rehabilitation counseling profession. The lack of
a commonly accepted deﬁnition also suggests a lack of accepted standards of practice for
rehabilitation counselors engaged in consultation. The results of this study could be used
to facilitate a dialogue about the deﬁnition consultation in rehabilitation, the perceptions
of its application and best practice methods of providing service within our profession’s
scope of practice. As evidenced in this study, consultation competencies are considered
important for rehabilitation counseling practice. Perhaps the greatest implications of this
study are for rehabilitation counselor educators.

Implications for Rehabilitation Education
The perception that consultation competencies are a sector speciﬁc skill appears

to be among the primary obstacles to their incorporation in the rehabilitation counselor

132

curriculum. All of the subject experts perceived consultation competencies as cross-
disciplinary skills that were not restricted to a speciﬁc sector of employment.
Rehabilitation counselors can be employed in a myriad of settings in this dynamic work
environment. Rehabilitation counselor educators play a pivotal role in promoting the
identity of a profession. Student recruitment and retention of trained professionals are
among the major challenges in the profession of rehabilitation counseling education
(Chan, 2003). Segmentation of the profession does not facilitate recruitment or retention.
Emphasis needs to be placed on developing a uniﬁed professional identity with skill sets
that can be applied regardless of employment environments.

Practitioners in the ﬁeld have expressed that they feel inadequately prepared for
consulting activities and require additional training (Chan, et al., 2003; Leahy, et al.,
2003). It is noteworthy that the 2003-2004 CORE Accreditation requirements include
consultation. As CORE does not accredit doctoral programs, it is apparent that the
standards apply to master’s level programs. Rehabilitation counselor educators will need
to analyze their curriculum in order to address these revised standards. The ﬁndings from
this study could be used to develop strategies and methods for rehabilitation counselor
educators to incorporate consultation competencies into their existing curriculum.

The results of this study could be used to promote a discussion among
rehabilitation counseling educators regarding the appropriate timing or developmental
introduction of consultation competencies in rehabilitation education. Whether
consultation can be addressed with sufﬁcient depth or breadth through infusion of
competencies, or requires the incorporation of speciﬁc courses or post-graduate

certiﬁcate programs or advanced degree training remains unresolved. Addressing these

133

issues, educators may be well served by considering the perspective of cross-setting or
cross-disciplinary competency development as a holistic or integrated approach to
curriculum development. In the interim, facilitating student awareness through the
identiﬁcation or labeling of developing skills, knowledge or approaches that would be
useful in a consulting application during existing courses could provide a foundation for
future development.

Although curriculum guides have been developed for the development of
consultation knowledge and skills in counselor education, there does not appear to be
equivalent guidelines for rehabilitation counseling (Brown, 1993; F roehle, 1978). The
current ﬁndings could be utilized as a basis for generating curriculum guidelines to assist
faculty who are interested in including consultation competencies although feel to
overwhelmed with the current expectations to creatively explore alternatives.

These ﬁndings also suggested areas rehabilitation counselor educators could
pursue for their own professional development. On average, educators ranked themselves
as being only somewhat proﬁcient teaching negotiation skills, understanding insurance
claims processing and professional responsibilities, computerized assessment and
vocational expert services and roles.

Implications for Research

This is the ﬁrst empirical study to attempt to focus exclusively on the importance
of consultation competencies in rehabilitation counseling. It is hoped that this study will
provide the impetus for role and function studies as well as evidenced based research
regarding the application of consultation competencies in rehabilitation counseling

contexts. Participants cited the need for evidenced based research in the areas including:

134

best practices with employer consultation; models of employer development; the role,
contexts and settings of consultation in rehabilitation counseling; role and function
studies; and social justice and advocacy counseling.

The ﬁndings also suggest a moderately strong relationship between the perceived
level of importance of consultation competencies and educators instructional proﬁciency.
In addition to future research regarding the ﬁeld application of consultation
competencies, additional research regarding the best methods of teaching consultation
competencies also seems indicated. Research could be directed towards addressing
whether approaching the content developmentally, integrating the pragmatic strategies for
incorporating consultation competencies into the curricula using the suggestions of
faculty peers is as effective as alternate strategies identiﬁed during the course of this
investigation. Addressing the differences between the instructional effectiveness of
teaching consultation competencies through a didactic course, an experiential course or
blended course would also be of interest.

Finally further research regarding the consultation competencies within the
profession of rehabilitation counseling is recommended. The current investigation
employed a priori groupings of items and variables based upon the literature,
modiﬁcation of the RSI-R, and pilot testing. Consideration of the context in which the
competencies applied may provide additional data regarding the relative importance of
consultation competencies in rehabilitation counseling.

Conclusions
The purpose of this mixed methods study was to identify which consultation

competencies rehabilitation counselor educators perceived as important for rehabilitation

135

counseling practice, their perceived level of proﬁciency in teaching these competencies,
and to explore strategies for incorporating these knowledge and Skills areas into the
rehabilitation counseling curriculum. In addition, this study addressed whether the
educators’ perceptions of the importance of consultation competencies and their self-
reported instructional proﬁciency differed according to demographic characteristics.

Rehabilitation counselor educators indicated that the a priori domains of
assessment, business and case management, consultation process and application,
interpersonal relationship skills, and problem solving skills were important to very
important for rehabilitation counseling practice. The participants in the survey also
expressed that they were instructionally proﬁcient teaching each of the ﬁve a priori
competency domains. A moderately strong positive relationship was demonstrated
between a rehabilitation counselor educators’ perceived importance of a consultation
competency and their self-reported instructional proﬁciency. Comparisons of
demographic variables did not reveal any signiﬁcant differences in the educator’s
perceived level of importance of the competency domains or the educator’s perceived
level of instructional proﬁciency. The empirical results appear to suggest that
rehabilitation counselor educators perceive consultation competencies as important to
rehabilitation counseling practice.

Analysis of the qualitative data revealed ﬁve broad themes regarding consultation
competencies and rehabilitation counselor education. Emergent themes included the
inﬂuence of perception, the consultant as a scientist-practitioner, obstacles to
incorporation, strategies and methods of incorporation and preparation. Competencies

identiﬁed during the qualitative aspect of this study supported the item and a priori

136

groupings of the consultation competency domains utilized during the quantitative
portion of this study.

Review of the quantitative data alone would convey the impression of the
universal endorsement of consultation competencies in rehabilitation counselor
education. The mixed methods design provides a rich portrayal of how consultation is
perceived and the diversity within the rehabilitation education community. Considering
our dynamic practice environment and the expanding employment alternatives available
to rehabilitation counselors, consultation as a theme seems to parallel current underlying
debate about our professional identity, role, and future within the rehabilitation counselor

education community.

137

APPENDICES

138

Appendix A: Consultation Competencies Inventory

(_,onsu|tation Competences in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

 

 

Rehab Iitation Consulcat on Competencies Survey

If you are a faculty member n a master's or doctoral degree program in renabi itat on counseling. I hope tnat
you wl consider participating n tnis study about consu tat on competenc es n i'eh abi itation counse or
education.

PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE PAGE CAREFULLY.

Please read the instructions and nfo'med consent statement. 1‘ you cecice to partic pate. you can then
proceed to competing the questionnaire.

Directions and ln‘ormed Consent:

I am a PhD. candidate in renabi itation counse or education at M chigan State Un versity. 1 am participating
in doctoral disse'tation research under the supervision and gu dance 0‘ Dr. Michael Leany. Tne purpose

th 5 research is to obtain your percept on about the importance of consultation ski Is it renabi itation
counseling pract ce and how you perce ve your own ab I ty to teacn these consu tation competencies.

Participation wil 'equ re 20~ 25 minutes of your tme in order to read and complete the questionnaires. You
will be asked questions about the importance of a variety 0‘ consultation competenc es ‘or rehab Itat on
counsel ng practice and your perceived abi ity to teacn these competencies. Demographic questions will be
asked in order to identify general cna'acten‘stics of participants, your current graduate program's
consultation content. professiona and consultat on expe' ence.

There will be no direct benefit to you througn your pa'ticipation in this study other than he personal insights
that may be ga ned through re‘lecting upon the questions that are asked. You can end your participat on at
any time without consequence. A tnough no information can be guaranteed comp etely safe, we have
attempted to protect your privacy to the ma:-: mum eaten: aI owable by law by hav ng you provide responses
through tnis Website. No denti‘ying information is requested in the questionnaires. It will not be possible to
persona ly associate you with your responses. During the survey. your responses are saved a‘ter eacn

se ection when you press the 'ne rt' button. You can discontinue the survey and retum to complete it at any
time. It will not be possible to withdraw or delete your responses after they are submitted.

The in‘ormat on n the study will be used for the secondary researchei’s doctoral dissertat on research. On y
the researchers wil nave access to ma database. All inoiv dual responses w I be protected to the maximum
extent al owed by law. Only group data wi I be included in reports from the project. not individual data.

If you have any questions about the study. you may contact the researcners:

Steve Zanskas, M.S., ABD. CRC. LPC: zanskaslémsuedu
Michael Leahy, Ph.D.. CRC: leahymémsuedu

Of‘ce of Rehabilitation 8: Disabil ry Stucies
Michigan State University

463 Erckson Hall

East Lansing. MI 48224

If you have questions about your n'gnts as a participant in this 'esearch. please contact:
Peter Vasi en ko. Ph.D.

Director of Human Research Protect ons

Michigan State University

202 Olqs Hall

East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1047

(517) 355-2180

Fax: (517) 432-4503

E-mai: irboiétmsuedu

 

 

 

139

 

.; (FE-.UltathV Competencres l'l Rehabilitation Counselor Education

 

Please print a copy of tnis page For your records.

C ick the ‘Complete Quest onnaire” Button be ow‘

0 By click ng the button. you acknowledge that you have agreed to participate in tnis study, triat you are at
least 18 years of age. have read he information presented on this page. and but your responses are being
provided For the purpose of research at Micnigan State University. Your pr vacy will be protected to the
mar-:imum extent alowable by law.

Than-t you

1' \ Complete Questionnaire

 

 
 

‘ WWI-(mom i'vn‘t‘r- ‘

   
  

1. Please enter your current age:

2. Please click one to indicate your gender:

3. Please indicate all current professional certifications:

[ I cec [ J ricc [ ] ccn ’ ' cons ’ ‘ Other

1

4. Please indicate all current professional licenses:

I l ”C [ I "WC [ ] licensed PSycholoo-st [ lo"...

5. Please enter your degree major:

D Behavioral : I Counsel-or [j Psy O E] Rehabilitation D Rehabilitation l Rh 0. Other
Psychomgy (Matron ——‘

Counselor Psychoiogy
Education

6. Please indicate the number of years you have been employed as a
Rehabilitation Counselor Educator:

[ Iv]

 

7. Please indicate the number of years that you have engaged in paid consulting
activities:

 

 

 

 

140

(:jriinsultation Competencres in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

     

gr“. Less than 5“". 1-5 years -/ 6 10 years - “~15 f". 1610 ff". 21 or ff". lot
.‘ I ,‘ '\_- ‘s- ' .x- _/ ' 4’ ‘._‘.'
K" one year " " years years \ more Applicable
years

8. Have you participated in any of the following forms of formal consultation
training?
(Please indicate all that apply)

D Workshops 1 Practicumrlnternship Specific On-The~lob Not Applicable
—‘ “penance — Course-art —— lrainino '—

9. Do you read journals devoted to the topic of consultation?

ﬁn.
'z-x' Yes I l he
k._/ \_/

10. Have you authored or co-authored any articles regarding consultation that
have been published in peer reviewed journals, book chapters, or books during

the past:

I”. "i V“? " ~.; 3 “a“ i’~ "i 5 Years " 6 IO "-. iris ."' "; lb 20 f 20 or 1" Not

‘~ J .- 0 x J l I 7“" .- 7“” i. '1 Years i‘ " more " Applicable
tears

11. Have you written any grants or completed requests for proposals (rfp's)
involving consultation services?
(includes program evaluation)

I, \| YOS I... "'1 IO
\ I. _‘

‘-

12. Does your current Rehabilitation Counselor Education (RCE) curriculum offer
students a course emphasizing consultation knowledge and skill preparation
through any of these options?

A required course as part or the RCE curriculum

,
.—' A required course as part of an Interdepartmental curriculum
_ An elective counse

Practicum or lntemsh-p experience

Currently developing a course

Not applicable

13. Please click to indicate your college or university's NCRE membership region:

If-) Region "-3 ReOlon if") Rea-on i/ﬁ'i Region f,‘ Keaton if": Moron (PW “00'0" "3 “ﬁlm" If} “9'“
‘- l ‘-’ n ‘- m “-’ iv ‘-’ v ‘-’ V! V vu —’ vm ‘-’ ix

 

 

 

141

Corsultation Competencres in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

 

14. Please indicate the number of semester credit hours your institution requires
to complete the requirements for a master's degree:

I I u I I so I I «orso (rear ' ‘ Between 49 and ' ‘ Other
hour option ‘ 59 hours ’

15. Courses with consultation content in your rehabilitation counselor education
program are taught by (Please click on all that apply):

I I Fullvtlrne ' I Pull-Irma I I Adyunctor I I Full time ' Faculty from I I let
faculty in the ‘ Faculty from an Part time Faculy from ‘ ' the areas of Applicable
Rehabilitation Interdisciplinary Faculty the College Industrial.

Coonselor Counselor or business Organ-rational
Eaticat-on Education or Schom
Program Program Psychology

 

 

 

 

 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE:

Consultation For the purpose 05 th 5 study 5 deﬁned as the application 0‘ scentti pr nc p es and procedures
in counsel ng and numan development to prov de assistance in understanding and solv ng problems that the
consultee may have in re ation to a tnird party. be it indiv dua , group. or organization.

This quest onna re contains two (2) sections.
General Instructions Sect on I:

In Section I, you wl be asked to rate your percept on of the importance of each competency statement For
practic ng rehab I tat on counselors.

Please rate the IMPORTANCE 0‘ each consulting competency described in the statements below to the role
of renabilitation counselors n the settings in which they work:

SCALE FOR IMPORTANCE

I = Not Important

2 = Somewhat Important
3 = Important

4 8 Very Important

5 = Ez-ztremely Imponant

General Instructions Section II:

In Section II. you will be asked to rate your own proficiency to teach the tasks described n the consulting
competency statements.

For the purpose of this study. teaching prof ciency is operational y defined as possessing tne subject-matter
knowledge. the ability to use this (nowIeOge in practice to appraise and adapt instructional materials to
present the content. the ability to p an and conduct instruction. and to assess what students are earn ng.

 

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the tasks descrbed in the follow'ng competency statements:

 

142

Consultation CompetenCies in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

 

SCALE FOR PROFICIENCY

1 = Not Proﬁcient

2 8 Somewhat ProFc'ent
3 = Proficient

4 = Very Pro‘cient

5 = Extremely Proficent

Please read each item caretu‘ly.

 

 

4. Section I - Scale for Importance

 

I. SCALE FOR IMPORTANCE

Rate each statement on a scale of 1-5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of a practicing rehabilitation counselor.

Somewhat E stremely
Important Important Very Important Important

_. ..___ _ x
\ r i l, I

i. Interview to cod-ect and verify accuracy of f' ‘2. : :i j' l . , _ ,
case information. "- -—- '-— _ _--
2. Evaluate support systems (individual. ;’ :. I. ‘3 5‘ . .
WW. groups, organizations, community —" -—' ~-: ~-=
relationships)

J. Daterrnme appropriate services ior f" " _, .' "I 1‘ “I

consultees ' identified needs. " -‘ r

4. Identify transferable wort stills by analyzing .t' :' '-..

“I‘M“ *0" ”"0er. functional assets. and " - -' .'

limitations.

5. Select evaluation instruments and strategies 1” 3 g" i ' .' '
according to their appropriateness and --" '--- -—-' __,
usenalness for a particular client.

1.. Employ computerized assessment 1. ‘ I := 2: I" . .
techniques. ---- -.-- »._.. .__. -_,
7. Administer appropriate standarazed tests "y -" - ', : "'. 1' 3' :
and ecological assessment techrugues. .--- '- ‘>- '--A- .,__,
l. Interpret test and ecological assessment “3 : ..
outcomes to others. -—" ‘~- ~- --

9. Integrate assessment data to describe I "-, ‘7: 1' ~.. . .
assets, iinutations and preferences for "-" --- -—-' ---- -----
rehabilitation planning pmposes.

m- ”WW “IONOMhlps characterized by I“ l ,r“! a)
empathy and positive regard. ' ' ‘ ‘

iiot Important

 

 

 

143

 

Consultation Competences in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

5. Scale for Importance Continued

 

Rate each statement on a scale of 1-5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of a practicing rehabi itatlon counselor.

r l
Io! Important SC "3mm." Important Very Important in emc V
Important Important

II .; rarity mutual expectation; and me nature . ; _ . If '. _ '—
ol the cons ulting relationsn ' " ‘ r' t

I? Identify one‘s own biases and wealne::cs_ _ i ; . '. V
which may atlcct the development 3' a healthy ’ “ " ‘ "
consulting relationship.

I]. Adlust consulting approaches or styles " l. ; a i.
according to the consultees characteristuc: ' ' '

14. Apply organisat- aria: psycholoaiul and j ,
system 'theo r, to develop stratcg- er. ror
rehabiltatidn Inter-e rn-tlcn

I5. [mpl . counseling techniques is . i . . . .
reflection, interpl c(.aI|on summarintionl to — — H' '— "'
facilitate problem enpiaratlon.

6. Identify soc-al. economic and . . .", ' *,
enu-ronrrvental lorres that may present barriers , " '
to Dian Implementation.

11. Prepare rehahlitar-on plans n-Ih mutually .i . 7 H j .
agreed upon Interventions, goals and "
conclusion of service

I! ilse behavioral techniques such as . . ; .
shaping, rehea' :al. model no and contingency r " r r
management

19. Consult using group methods I . 1 .

In. Dove-op mutually agreed upon goals. 1 ' ' ‘

 

 

144

Consultation Comoete ‘09; in Rehabilitation CCU“

6. Scale For Importance Continued

 

Rate each statement on a scale of 1-5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of a practicing rehabilitation counselor.

Same-«hat Ittrertlciv
Nut Imom‘tant Impoctant 'u'crv lmponam

Imoovtant Imp-:dant
2 l. Conduct group active-es or programs ’ t .
regarding work and d-sab-iltp Issues. ' "
22‘ Hanltor outcomes to determine need for ‘V 4.
additional services.
21, Analyae the tasks at a job. ' -
2'4. lecommcni modificatlcns 0' ion tasks I: i
accarnmodatc lurvctiorlal limitaticns using
t'gonomlc principles
1'5. Apply Inouledge ol assistive technology In V' I , 1V '
)nb BCCOmmOﬂiUOn , . ,
.‘E. Ut.ii:e labor mar-ct or othcr accurationai ‘7 , "7 ‘ ’ '
imarmation from sources such as the DUI.
C-(xk, U'Iet arid other puniutlons.
J . Understand the apalucatlons or current 1’ . ; l; 9 ,' ' '
legislation atlect-ng the emDiOyment oi ' '
disaaleg individuals [c.g , ADA}.
II. Respond ti: cmolovcr biases or»: “mains .
regarding tinting person: with disab-lit-cs.
1‘9, Newt-ate with employers or labor union " .
repcescntatlaes to reinstaterrchrre an inward
worker.

30. Pro-toe c'nspecnm employers mth
auptcp'are Irxrarmation on clients' man skills
and abilities.

 

 

 

145

Consultation Competenoes in Rehabilitation Com elor Educatitii‘i

7. Scale for Importance Continued

 

Rate each statement on a scale of 1—5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of a practicing rehabilitation counselor.

Somewhat
Important

tttremcly

lint I11 ortant Im d'tant ‘Jer Irn or‘tam
l o D I V D Important

31. Provide consultation to cmplo ers ; . 1 '_ . ¥ .
regarding accessibllty and issues related to c a " ‘ ‘
AL-A compliance

3}. Serve as a .ocatlonal e-pert tc pupil: ;‘ , Vi

agencies, Ian llr'ms, and, or private businesses. ' ‘ ‘

51. Provide expert opinion or testimony’ ; V, j ' 'I I i

regarding employability and rehabilitation ' ‘ ‘

mas-curry

Ed. Preside lnrnrmatlan regard-rig your _ . i

organisation s programs to curvcnt and a " ” "
patentlal relerral spurccs.

35. Collaborate with other prnvlders so that 1' '. ; l " ‘.

services are coordinated, appropriate and " ’ " ' ‘

.36. Consult with medical maresslonait ‘ - i ; i V ' .
regarding lunctianai capax'itlcs. prognosis, and ' "
treatment plan an‘ cl-ents.

31. Understand insurance claims processing 'i ; 'i >

and prntesslonal responsibilities. * n' n . ,
3!. Never to appropriate specialists and or tor ,1 . , , . , V
special scr'rvfes ' " ' ,

M. Compile document and Interpret ‘ L. l ; . .
inrnrrrution to maintain a current case record ,- ' ’ n W
40. Write thcs, summar.es and reports sc > . H I
that others can understand the case

 

 

 

146

Consultation Competences in Rehabilitation Comrselor Education

8. Scale for Importance Continued

 

Rate each statement on a scale of 1-5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of a practicing rehabilitation counselor.

5 Jr, in r 'e .
Int important c '6' 3 important Very important [it "‘0'
:rroc run! Important

ii, Neootlaie tinanrlei responsitulitles with the .4 .
referral source

42'. Mariel renabilitatian sen‘lcc'. to

bris-rvesses and organizations.

4]. identity and comply mth ethical and legal
imolwatlons oi :Iien! and (ansuttee

reiat-onships.

4‘. laid: by ctr-rm an: legal (:1: Jerazic as

at fast rc’r-manlcatlon and re-‘a'd-r‘q ie 9 ,
(natioent-ai-hi

45. lead prc-lessic-nal literature reiatcxi to . V r
business. labor markets medicine and
rehabilitation

46. Condor? a reticu- ol the rehabilitation ‘
literature on a oi-en topic or case problem

47. Apply pool-shed research results to ,
proless-nnel ormite

4L Applu‘ prIr-ripies at rehatilitatIc-n legislator

tc daii‘ man-:c.

49. {curate vc-ur consultees regarding their .
rights unoer redual and state law

SD, identi", and chalierqe SYC'OJ'yD :al V cm;

lc-arc persons with jisanilitk

9. Scale for Importance Continued

 

Rate each statement on a scale of 1-5 for the IMPORTANCE of the consulting
competency to the role of the practicing rehabilitation counselor.

Some n'ti at I namely

hot Important Important 'i'crv impa 1am
lrnoc rtant important

St Discuss rem-to-wort octlons nth an ,
QleOpr. " ’

33. .Jnairc! iabni‘ rrsarict anawses.

5]. Use erlorlive conflict resolution strategies. ‘V f

 

£4, ilse cried-we lime manaoerr-ent ‘
strategies.

35 [eveloo racpart network mtti plusmans ; '4
and other prolessionais.

 

 

 

147

Consultation Competences in Ren bilitation CDLﬂSelO! Education

13. Scale for Teaching Proﬁciency Continued

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in the
statements below.

I rtrernely
l'rotirrent

lot Protercnt Somewhat Fruticient Very Praririent
Proﬁcient

3 1. Provide consultation to employers ;' r ‘ 1 1_ ‘r ~
regarding accessibility and issues related to '-’ " r" " '4
ADA compliance

52. Serve as a vocational expert to public I V. ,i' , i
agencres, ia- lirrns, andxar private businesses. ' ' " '
J]. rrovlde expert opinion or testimony ". v "; ‘.
regarding employability and rehabilitation ' ' ’ '
laasrhllty

14. Provide information regardmg your 3 i : , . .
organization s programs to torrent and ' '
DJ‘cflhII relerral sources.

35. Collaborate with other providers so that 1 ', :V V 3 : l'. ' V ‘
servvces are (nominated, anoroprtate and ' ' '

timely

36. Consult nith med-cal praiesslonais j i 1‘ ', ‘I .
regarding tun-:t-nnal capac-t-es. prognns-s. and ' ' ' ' '
treatment plan tor chents.

)1. Understand insurance claims processing ; ‘. 1 ': l '-
and p-rotessiortal responsibilities,
3!. Reler to app-rnpnate speciaiists and or lor . : 7 I '.
special serwcos '

 

19. Compile, document, and interpret j" ‘. : 1 g" }
Inlormation to maintain a current case record '
40. Write notes, summaries. and reports so '_ . ;“; _“,
that others can understand the case. " ' '

 

 

 

151

Consultation Comoeteroes in Rehabilitation Come or Educatio

10. Section 11: Scale For Teaching Proficiency

 

Please raoe your own PROFICIENCV to teach tne tasks descr bed in toe follow ng competency statements:

Scale For Proﬁciency

1= Not P’oﬁcient
2= Somewhat Prof C en:
3= P T‘icier t

4: \r'e'y Pr“o tie-it
5= E- trer‘ely Ptpﬁden:

II. Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in
the statements below.

Somewhat . l itremcly
lint Prat-merit Prnllcient Very Proficient
Wntlclent Proficient

i. Interview to collect and verify the accuracy or 3 . IV i ' '
case information . ' .
2 I naluate slipport svstems -'iriaivldual ; . i

m.iiy groups organizations or community I
(zlatianshlps'
J. Deterrmne appropriate serwces tor j i 1 ‘y 1 ii
consultees toentmedn eeds —' — "
1. Identity transferable «ori- stvlls bv analvi‘ino
clients work history and iunctlonal assets and
limitations.
5. Select evaluation instruments and strategies 1" ‘ i - ; > i
accordion to their appropriateness ' '
untulness ior a particular client
6. (mole, computerized assessment
techniques

.Adm-nister appropriate standardized tests I‘ . ‘7 '3 i
and ecological assessment techni " ‘ ‘ " '
8. Interpret test and ecological assessment ; L‘. ; . r
outcomes to others ' ' '

.lnteorate assessment data to describe 1 ". ; '. ‘ ‘.
as ssets limitations and preferences tor ' '
rehabilitation Liannlna purposes
ll). Dir-clot: ‘eiatic nsnlos characterited by ‘7 '.
empathy and positive regard ‘

 

 

 

148

Consultatlon Competenoes m Rehablhtahon Com n5; or Hm: Btlllfl

1 1. Scale for Teaching Proﬁciency

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in the
statements below.

‘ 1
lot Moment "”M' Wong”, we” pmhmm Imamc v
Pratlclent Pram-cm

ll. Clam” mutual expe-ztatlons and the nature :7 L. ; ‘ .
or the consultmo Inlahammp ~
I}. ldcnh'v one : mun blast: and wealncszcz, ‘ I
whlct‘. may affect the development at a healthy ‘
(onsultlno Felatlcvnshl
l]. Aaluzt (ansumno approaches or style: ; '. ‘ V.
accotdlno to the consultees (harlctenst-c: ‘ ' ’ ‘
ll. Apply oroanlzatlanal. nsycnoloaxcal and g ' I ‘,
“Hem: theory to develoc strategy“ for ‘ ~ '
rehab-Iltatmn lmer-crxtlon

mploy munnhnq tecnnlqu es e ‘ l ‘ ‘ ‘ I
reflect-on, .ntelpr etnatlo . summannt-om to “
noiltatc p'oblcm uploratlon
16. Menu" sooal. ecor-am-t and . 1' V "
ennronmcmal tones that may plesent Dame”. ’ ‘
to plan Implementation.
17. Prague rehab-Illatlan plans n-th mutually :7 . 1' ; " ,
agreed upon lntencntlont. goal: and ' ‘ “
cmcmslon nl ur-Ico
ll. Ute Dena-ﬂoral In: nnlques mm (M l'.
shaping mnear s al. rnodchnq and (ontlnqency "
management

[9, Consult uslno group methods 7 . 2' l ,

ID. Develoo mutually aoleea upon onalt. I 7' , ‘

 

 

 

149

Corsaltamor Compoter‘oes m Renabllltahm Crtzl lrtl' Hmatlm

12. Scale for Teaching Proficiency Continued

 

Please rate you own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in the
statements below.

. ' ,
lot Fmrcucnr S 'le‘at F'ntlclcnt Very Prarmmm ""th '
"3""“1' Prarlrlcnt

2!. Conduct grout: Rhymes or programs l _ V l
regarding work and dn. atrl“; vszues, '
Hort tor Cu :amc; ra acrerm- nc nctj rur .
addltlonal scrvlcct.

2]. Analyze the tasks at a job.

)4. Recommend moavllcatlcns or lab tr. ii I: j .
accommodate functlonal I-mltatlcn'. uslno ' ‘
raonomlc prlnc Iple:

.Aaply knowledge 0! ass-stlye technology In ; :. ;
)ab accent-nodal
26. Utullze labor market or other occupatlonal ; . 7.
Informahan "cm '.-:lult't$ mm as the DUI
C-OM. O'Net and other cubllcatlons.
27. Understand the apnlu‘atlont of current . l ; ‘ .
Ieouslatlon attectlno the emola'yment or L‘ ' ‘
dlsablea molly-duals. [2.9 , ADA)
2!. le pond tr. emoloyer man. an: (on: em: I 1 -. I
recaldunq name oer tans m -tn axubllltl c5. " ' '
20. eoot-ate mm ensoloyers or labor un-on ‘ . _l‘ '.
representatlyes to remstatevrehau an Imured ' " '

hr

20. Pin-lac prospect!“ emoloytrx unth A ', r' ' -‘
apomcnate lntarrnatlon on chants wort xkllls ' ‘
and aolllnu

 

 

 

150

Car‘sultatlon Competences m Rehabllltatlum Cows lor Education

14. Scale for Teaching Proﬁciency Continued

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in the
statements below.

lxtremely

Frailrlent Very Fl‘atlcrent
Fratccnt

cvme
let Prohnerlt S *h‘"
Pv’nflclcnt

ll. Newtlate ﬁnancial rupansutllltles Inn the . .
reherral source ' “ '
4:. Han-er Itnabnlltatlun wry/Ices to '7 .
bmxneszcs and nrganlratlom. '
4]. Identlry' and comply mth ethlral and legal '- . 3'" - .
Imolncatlons or {Hurt and consultee ' ' ..
relahonshlps.

H. Ablde Dy erhvral and legal (clnzderarlan'. . . 1
ct (ate (ommunlratlon and recnralnq M q.. ' '
cori'loer‘t-alxhl

45. lead wolecslonal l-terature relate: to .

bus-M“, labor markets medlhne and
rehatvrlttatlon

~16. Con-jun a rewlc- or tne rchabll tatIc-n . [h V '.
lltctature on a char topic or can: problem. I
47. Apply pool-med research results tr. 7 . i » l
protest-anal practice ' '
43. Apply princlcle: cl rchatlllratlon leqlzlatlarl
tn: daily praztpge.

4‘1. toucare your consultee: reqaramq their '7 . 1 ' " ',
ﬁghts under federal and mate law ' ' "
El]. identity and challenge 2ru¢3t,n~:al vlews .,

tau-arc person: wlm vaanllltlez

15. Scale for Proficiency Continued

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teadt the competency described in the
statements below.

Somewhat ltrremclv
Int Prof-bent Prutlclcnt Very Pram-em
Fl'aflclcnt Prat-(lent

St Dm‘uss letutn'to-wotk aotlm; mth an . ; ‘ ‘ i .
employer. . .

33. :JI‘VGJCY labor market ana'yses. I. -

5]. Uze ertectlye contllct Iesolutlon atrateules. "

34. Ute elven-u: tlrrlc management ;
“rate-ales. '

35 [‘eyeioo “own network mm pﬂpilCrIﬂ‘ : 1 f .
and other prctaulonalt. ' ‘

 

 

 

152

 

Consultattor‘ Competeroes m Rehatllltatlont

(llxlselry Ejllcatlorl

14. Scale for Teaching Proficiency Continued

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described in the

statements below.

41. Newtlate ﬂnehclal raspans-t-nlltles ulth the
role")! Lourt
42. Harlet renabllltatvan services to
bus-nesses and maanuatlorvs

em and comply ninth ethlcal and legal
lrnol-catlons or: Item and (onsote
relationships
44. Amide Dy etiural all: legal cans-Jeratrnns
at case communication and rcrn'alnq (e 0..
(untlocrt-allh‘l

ead pralesslonal literature relateﬂ to
d

bus-hess, labor mar eis. malflﬂ. an
rehabrlitat
16. Conduct a teylen or the rehabilitation

l-tcrature on a Clecl" tapir or case c'ohlcm
47 Apply publvshed research results to
protesslonal pra

u. Apcn‘ p-rlnr.ples or rehat-litatlol‘i leavslatmrr
tr. daily uract-sc

4‘3. Educate your consultees reqaralnq their
nqhts under rederal and state

30. Identity and (hallerqc stereatmual ylews
tcuara persons with Jlsanlltles

Sc rr-cn h at
Proficient

l‘c'lorpnent

15. Scale for Proficiency Continued

Ernlltient

'n‘ cry

[lY'Ql‘FClY

l‘rarrc-em
rat-r -ent

 

Please rate your own PROFICIENCY to teach the competency described

statements below.

51 Orr—:uss return to-worl ootlms with an
employer

n1

. Zanaua labor market analyses.

3]. Use e'tertlye conflict resolutlon strategies.

 

54. Use erie ye time management
strategies.
35 Develop t pan 'networl mm phys-c-ant

and other protesslon als.

.D‘ Frat-hen!

S
Fratlclent

mentlat
Frutlcle nt

'ylerv

inthe

lttremely

Frannem
Prat-(lent

 

152

 

Consultation Competencnes in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

16. Other Information

 

1. Please describe the process you have used to incorporate consultation
competencies into your curriculum.

v l
d

2. Describe any obstacles your program has experienced incorporating
consultation competencies into your curriculum.

.‘i

3. What strategies has your program used to overcome these obstacles?
:J

:J

M

Thank you for participating in our study regarding Consultation Competencies in Rehablitation Counselor
Education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

153

Appendix B: A Priori Competency Domains

Assessment (11 Items):

1. Interview to collect and verify accuracy of case information.

2. Evaluate support systems.

4. Identify transferable work skills by analyzing client’s work history,
functional assets, and limitations.

5. Select evaluation instruments and strategies according to their appropriateness

and usefulness to a particular client.

Employ computerized assessment techniques.

Administer appropriate standardized tests.

Interpret tests and assessment results.

Integrate assessment data to describe assets, limitations, and preferences for

rehabilitation planning.

23. Analyze tasks of a job.

46. Conduct a review of the literature on a given topic, case, or problem.

52. Conduct labor market analysis.

pass

Business and Case Management Applications (9 Items):

34. Provide information regarding your organization’s programs to current and
potential referral sources. ‘

37. Understand insurance claims processing and professional responsibilities.

38. Refer to appropriate specialties and/or special services.

39. Compile, document, and interpret information to maintain a current case record.

40. Write notes, summaries, and reports, so that others can read them.

41. Negotiate ﬁnancial responsibilities with the referral source.

42. Market rehabilitation services to businesses and organizations.

45. Read professional literature related to business, labor markets, medicine, and
rehabilitation.

54. Use effective time management skills.

Consultation Process and Application Skills (13 Items):

18. Use behavioral techniques.

19. Consult using group methods.

21. Conduct group activities or programs.

24. Recommend modiﬁcation of jobs.

28. Respond to prospective employer biases.

29. Negotiate with employers or labor union representatives to reinstate/rehire an
injured worker.

30. Provide prospective employers with appropriate information on clients’ work
skills and abilities.

154

31. Provide consultation to employers regarding accessibility and issues related to
ADA compliance.

32. Serve as a vocational expert to public agencies, law ﬁrms, and/or private
businesses.

33. Provide expert opinion or testimony regarding employability and rehabilitation
feasibility.

36. Consult with medical professionals regarding functional capacities, prognosis, and
treatment plan for clients.

49. Educate your consultees regarding their rights under federal and state law.

51. Discuss return to work options with an employer.

Interpersonal Relationship Skills (9 Items):

10. Develop relationships with unconditional positive regard.

11. Clarify mutual expectations and the nature of the consulting relationship.

12. Identify one’s own biases and weaknesses, which may effect the development of a
healthy consulting relationship.

13. Adjust consulting approaches or styles according to the consultee’s
characteristics.

15. Employ group consulting techniques.

20. Develop mutually agreed upon goals.

35. Collaborate with other providers so that services are coordinated, appropriate and
timely.

53. Use conﬂict resolution strategies.

55. Develop rapport/network with physicians and other professionals.

Problem Solving (13 Items):

3. Determine appropriate services for consultees identiﬁed needs.
14. Apply organizational systems theories to develop strategies for rehabilitation
interventions.

16. Identify social, economic, and environmental factors that may present barriers to
plan implementation.

17. Prepare rehabilitation plans with mutually agreed upon goals, interventions, and
conclusion of services.

22. Monitor outcomes to determine need for additional services.

25. Apply knowledge of assistive technology in job accommodation.

26. Use labor market or other occupational information from sources such as the
DOT, OOH, O*Net and other applications.

27. Understand the application of current legislation.

43. Identify and comply with ethical and legal implications of client and consultee
relationships.

44. Abide by ethical and legal considerations of case communication and recording
(e.g., Conﬁdentiality).

47. Apply published research results to professional practice.

155

48. Apply principles of rehabilitation legislation to every day practice.
50. Identify and challenge stereotypical views toward persons with disabilities.

156

Appendix C: Quantitative Survey Transmittal Letter

Re: Consultation in Rehabilitation Counselor Education

Dear Dr.

 

You have been selected to participate in this nationwide survey of rehabilitation
educators regarding consultation skills for rehabilitation counseling practice.

Consultation has consistently been identiﬁed as an important professional knowledge and
skill domain by practicing rehabilitation counselors. However, very limited information is
available concerning how these competencies are addressed in pre-service curriculums.

Your participation in this survey would provide a valuable contribution to the further
understanding of this competency area, and how educators address these competencies in
their teaching role. The research is being conducted by Steve Zanskas, a doctoral
candidate 1n rehabilitation counselor education at Michigan State University. Dr. Michael
Leahy 13 his dissertation chair and advisor.

Consultation has been deﬁned as “the application of scientiﬁc principles and procedures
in counseling and human development to provide assistance in understanding and
solving problems that the consultee may have in relation to a third party, be it
individual, group, or organization” (CRCC Scope of Practice, 2000, p.2).

Participation will require about 15-20 minutes of your time to read and complete the set
of instruments. In addition to basic demographic information, you will be asked to
identify which consultation competencies you perceive to be important to rehabilitation
counseling practice, as well as your perceived level of proﬁciency for teaching the
respective competency The instruments are available on the website link below. The
questions will be asked without obtaining any identifying information. It will not be
possible to identify you or associate you with your responses.

The NCRE Research Committee has reviewed and approved this national study. This
research study has also been approved by the Social Science, Behavioral and Education
Institutional Review Board (SIRB) located at Michigan State University. Inquiries may
be addressed to Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research, Michigan State
University, 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, Michigan 48824. Phone: (517) 355-2180; Fax:
(517) 432-4503 or via email: Irb@msu.edu. The IRB # is: 07 — 214.

We hope that you will participate in this study. As a rehabilitation educator, your
contributions will be of great value in advancing knowledge, practice, and preparation in

this area.

If you are willing to participate, please copy and paste the following link into your web
browser and you will be taken to the informed consent page of the survey.

157

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=81 1713186218

If you have any questions, please contact Steve Zanskas at zanskasl @msu.edu, or Dr.
Michael Leahy at leahym@msu.edu.

Thank you for your assistance and contribution to our further understanding of
consultation as a professional rehabilitation activity.

Respectfully,

Steve Zanskas, MS, ABD, CRC, LPC
Doctoral Candidate

Ofﬁce of Rehabilitation & Disability Studies
Michigan State University

455 Erickson Hall

East Lansing, Michigan 48824

158

Appendix D: Qualitative Transmittal Letter

Transmittal Letter
Invitation to Participate in Qualitative Interview

Re: Consultation in Rehabilitation Counselor Education: A Mixed Methods Study
Dear Dr. :

You have been selected to participate in this nationwide survey regarding consultation
skills for rehabilitation counseling practice. Consultation has consistently been identiﬁed
as an important professional knowledge and skill domain by practicing rehabilitation
counselors. However, very limited information is available concerning how these
competencies are addressed in pre-service curriculums.

Your participation in this survey would provide a valuable contribution to the further
understanding of this competency area, and how educators address these competencies in
their teaching role. The research is being conducted by Steve Zanskas, a doctoral
candidate in rehabilitation counselor education at Michigan State University. Dr. Michael
Leahy is his dissertation chair and advisor.

Consultation has been deﬁned as "the application of scientiﬁc principles and procedures
in counseling and human development to provide assistance in understanding and
solving problems that the consultee may have in relation to a third party, be it
individual, group, or organization" (CRCC Scope of Practice, 2000, p.2).

Considering the depth and breadth of your content expertise in the ﬁeld of rehabilitation,
you have been selected as someone we would like to interview regarding your
perceptions of the value of consultation to the rehabilitation counseling profession, and
how consultation could be effectively incorporated into graduate rehabilitation education.

The interview will be audio taped and may last up to 30 minutes. It will address your
perception of the value of consultation competencies in rehabilitation counseling practice,
your experiences incorporating consultation competencies into courses, potential
strategies for incorporating these competencies into a curriculum and the barriers or
obstacles to their implementation. We hope that you will participate in this study. As a
rehabilitation educator, your contributions will be of great value in advancing the
knowledge, practice, and preparation in this area. Participation in this study is voluntary.
All participants will be randomly assigned a ntunerical code and your identity will be
protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. There are no expected harmful effects
to participants. An informed consent form is also attached to this e-mail for your review.

This research study has also been approved by the Social Science, Behavioral and

Education Institutional Review Board (SIRB) located at Michigan State University.
Inquiries may be addressed to Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research,

159

Michigan State University, 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, Michigan 48824. Phone: (517)
355-2180; Fax: (517)432-4503 or via email: Irb@r_nsu.edu. The IRB # is: 07 - 214.

Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly, or Dr.
Michael Leahy, my dissertation chairperson at leahym@msu.edu.

I will follow up with you by telephone in a few days in order to determine your interest in
participating in this research study and schedule an appointment to conduct the telephone
interview, if you agree to participate. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Respectfully,

Steve Zanskas, M.S., ABD, CRC, LPC
Doctoral Candidate

Michigan State University

Office of Rehabilitation and Disability Studies
455 Erickson Hall

East Lansing, MI 48224

(248) 231-8096

160

Appendix E: Qualitative Interview Consent F orm

Consultation in Rehabilitation Counselor Education: A Mixed Methods Study
Qualitative Interview Consent Form

1, , agree to participate in an interview study as
part of doctoral dissertation research titled "Consultation in Rehabilitation Counselor
Education: A Mixed Methods Study" conducted by Steve Zanskas under the supervision
of Micahel J. Leahy Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Research at
Michigan State University. My participation is voluntary. I can stop taking part without
giving any reason, and without penalty. I can ask to have all of the information about me
returned to me, removed from the research records, or destroyed.

 

The reason for this study is designed so that the interviewer can gain some understanding
about consultation in rehabilitation education.

If I volunteer to take part in this study, I will be asked to do the following things:

1) Participate in a one-hour recorded telephone interview with the interviewer.

2) Clarify any follow-up questions the interviewer might have when interpreting my
words.

As a participant

I The researcher will audiotape conversations and interviews that occur between the
researcher and me.

I The data will be kept by the researcher and will be shared while maintaining
conﬁdentiality with Dr. Michael Leahy.

I The researcher will analyze the data and keep it for three years for educational and
research purposes.

I There is no direct beneﬁt for me for participating in the project.

I No risk is expected but if I experience some discomfort or stress during observations
or conversations, then I can choose to discontinue my participation in the study
without any penalty.

No information about me, or provided by me during the research, will be shared with
others, except if it is necessary to protect my welfare (for example, if I were injured and
need physician care) or if required by law. I will be assigned a random numerical code
which will be used in interview transcript and all other data documents.

The researcher will answer any further questions about the research, now or during the
course of the project.

My electronic signature on this form reﬂects my agreement to participate in this research
project. I will receive a signed copy of this consent form for my records.

161

Steve Zanskas. ABD, M.S., CRC. LPC

 

 

Name of Researcher Signature Date
Telephone: 248.23 1.8096
E-mail: zanskasl @msu.edu

 

 

 

Name of Participant Signature Date

Please electronically sign and date your copy, attach and return the document to the
researcher via e-mail. Once received, the researcher will acknowledge receipt, sign and
return an electronically signed copy to your attention by e-mail. E-mail accompanying
the consent forms will be maintained with a copy of the authorization to verify consent to
participate. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law.

Additional questions or problems regarding your rights as a research participant should
be addressed to Dr. Michael Leahy, Ofﬁce of Rehabilitation & Disability Studies,
Michigan State University, 463 Erickson Hall

East Lansing, MI 48824. E-mail: leahym@msu.edu.

If you have questions about your rights as a participant in this research, please contact the
Social Science Institutional Review Board (SIRB), Michigan State University: Peter
Vasilenko, Ph.D., Director of Human Research, Michigan State University, 202 Olds
Hall, East Lansing, Michigan 48824. Telephone: (517) 355-2180; Fax: (517)432-4503
Irb@msu.edu.

Please print a copy of this page for your records.

162

Appendix F: Qualitative Demographic Questionnaire

Qualitative Participant Demographic Questionnaire
1. Gender: M

F

2. Age:

 

3. Certiﬁcation Status: CRC

NCC

CCM

CDMS

Other (Please Identify)

 

4. Licensure Status: LPC

 

LMHC
Licensed Psychologist

Other (Please Identify)

 

5. Degree (Major): Counselor Education
Psy. D.
Rehabilitation Counselor Education—
Rehabilitation Psychology
Rh. D.__
Other (Please Identify)
6. Number of years of employed as a Rehabilitation Counselor Educator?

7. Number of years engaged in paid consulting activities?

163

Appendix G: Qualitative Interview Questions

There are many deﬁnitions and models of consultation. For the purpose of this study, I
am using the deﬁnition contained in the CRC Scope of Practice (2000):

Consultation: The application of scientiﬁc principles and procedures in counseling and
human development to provide assistance in understanding and solving current or
potential problems that the consultee may have in relation to a third party, be it an
individual, group, or organization.

The process is essentially the same regardless of the model, duration, whether it is
individual or organizational (Kurpius, F uqua, & Rozecki, 1993):

l. Pre-entry - A self-assessment and evaluation by the consultant considering their own
competency to address the needs of the referral source.

2. Entry - Problem exploration. The consultee (referral source) explores the problem with
the consultant. A verbal or written contract may be developed.

3. Information Gathering - Gathering information, problem conﬁguration, and goal
setting. Qualitative and quantitative data are gathered. The consultee’s are involved in
deﬁning or conﬁrming problems. There could be many examples here that are more
traditional, but it is also evident in prevention programs, social action or participatory
research.

4. Intervention - Searching for a solution, selecting an intervention.

5. Evaluation of the success of the intervention. It may be determined that redeﬁnition of
the problem is necessary.

6. Termination - Reﬂection on the process, debrieﬁng, etc.

It might be helpful to consider the parallels among the counseling process, case or
disability management processes, and the deﬁnition and the consultation process
described above.
Qualitative Interview Questions
1. How would you generally describe consultation skills in relation to rehabilitation
counselor practice?
A. How did you form that View?
B. Are there certain practice settings that you feel are more appropriate for
consultation?

C. How do you feel the ﬁeld of rehabilitation perceives consultation?

2. What consultation competencies do you feel are most important for rehabilitation
counseling practice?

164

A. Why do believe these are important?

How would you describe your experience incorporating consultation
competencies into the RC curriculum?

A. What would have to be done to effectively incorporate consultation
competencies into rehabilitation counseling programs?

B. What obstacles would you anticipate?

C. What strategies would you recommend to over come these obstacles or
barriers?

How would you characterize what we know about consultation in terms of
evidenced based practice?
A. Where do you feel the research needs
B. Are there any emerging areas of practice that you think would require
additional training for consultation?

165

Appendix H: Descriptive Statistics Importance Items Means and Standard Deviations

Descriptive Statistics: Importance Items Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

N Mean Std. Deviation
1. Interview Importance 73 4.45 .727
2. Evaluation Importance 73 4.14 .822
3. Service Identiﬁcation Importance 73 4.41 .779
4. Identify Transferable Skills 72 4.25 .946
5. Select Evaluationnstruments 72 4.11 1.015
6. Comupterized Assessment 72 2.89 .928
7. Administer tests 72 3.76 1.014
8. Interpret Test Results 72 4.17 1.035
9. Integrate Data 72 4.29 1.013
10. Develop Relationships 72 4.26 .949
11. Clarify Expectations 70 4.41 .752
12. IdentifyI One's Biases 70 4.30 .787
13. Adjust Consulting Approaches 70 4.13 1.006
14. Apply Systems Theory 69 3.67 .834
15. Employ Counseling Techniques 70 4.06 .866
16. Identify Plan Barriers 69 4.39 .790
17. Prepare Plans 69 4.26 .995
18. Use Behavioral Techniques 68 3.19 .981
19. Consult with Group Methods 70 3.16 .973
20. Develop Mutual Goals 70 4.47 .756
21. Conduct Group Activities 68 3.07 .997
22. Monitor Outcomes 69 4.00 1.000
23. Analyze Tasks 68 3.78 .912
24. Recommend Modiﬁcations 69 3.87 .938
25. Apply Assistive Technology 69 3.97 .874
26. Use Labor Market Information 69 3.84 1.009
27. Apply ADA 69 3.96 .898
28. Respond to Employer Bias 69 4.12 .932
29. Negotiation 70 3.49 ' 1.100
30. Provide Employers Information 70 3.94 1.020
31. Consult Regarding Accessibility 69 3.86 .912
32. Serve as a Vocational Expert 69 3.43 1.078
33. Expert Testimony 69 3.41 1.180
34. Provide Information re: Services 69 3.75 1.020
35. Collaborate with Providers 67 4.13 .851
36. Consult with Medical Pro's 67 3.97 .887
37. Understand Insurance Claims 67 3.52 .911
38. Appropriate Referrals 66 3.98 .886
39. Compile Document Interpret 66 4.14 .875
40. Write Notes & Reports 67 4.22 .918
41. Negotiate Financial 67 3.40 1.031
42. Marketing 68 3.56 .968
43. Identify Ethical & Legal 68 4.59 .738
44. Abide by Ethical & Legal 68 4.62 .792
45. Read Prof. Literature 68 3.71 .915
46. Conduct Literature Review 67 3.66 1.023
47. Apply Rs. to Practice 67 3.82 .920
48. Apply Legislation to Practice 67 3.87 .936

 

166

 

49. Educate About Rights
50. Challenge Stereotypes
51. Discuss Return to Work
52. Conduct Labor Market Analyses
53. Conﬂict Resolution Strategies
54. Time Management
55. Develop Rapport
Valid N (listwise)

167

67
68
68
66
68
67
67
55

4.03
4.16
3.93
3.76
3.91
4.15
3.99

.92 l
l .002
.935
.993
.958
.803
.992

Appendix 1: Descriptive Statistics Proﬁciency Items Means and Standard Deviations

Proﬁciency Items Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

Proﬁciency Item N Mean Std. Deviation
1. Teach Interview Skills 67 4.16 .828
2. Teach Support System Evaluation 67 4.03 .969
3. Teach Needs Identiﬁcation 67 3.97 .852
4. Teach Transferable Skill Analysis 67 3.90 1.002
5. Teach Selection of Evaluation 67 3.87 1.072
6. Teach Computerized Assessment 67 2.99 1.212
7. Teach Test Administration 67 3.72 1.191
8. Teach Test Interpretation 67 3.87 1.086
9. Teach Integration of Results 67 4.01 1.007
10. Teach Relationship Development 67 4.42 .781
11. Teach Goal Clariﬁcatiom 66 4.14 .821
12. Teach Self-Assessment 66 4.17 .796
13. Teach Consulting Styles 66 3.80 .980
14. Teach Systems Theory 66 3.33 1.100
15. Teach Problem Exploration 66 4.21 .869
16. Teach Plan Implementation 66 3.95 .952
17. Teach Plan Development 65 4.00 .968
18. Teach Behavioral Techniques 66 3.50 1.193
19. Teach Group Consulting Methods 66 3.21 1.196
20. Teach Goal Development 66 4.29 .873
21. Teach Group Activities 66 3.33 1.072
22. Teach Outcome Monitoring 66 3.91 .956
23. Teach Job Analysis 65 3.89 1.077
24. Teach Job Modiﬁcation Techniques 66 3.74 1.127
25. Teach Application of Assistive Tech 66 3.33 1.168
26. Teach use of LMI 66 3.74 1.071
27. Teach Application of Legislation 66 3.68 .963
28. Teach Responding to ER Biases 66 3.97 1.022
29. Teach Negotiation Skills 66 2.85 1.126
30. Teach Employer Consultation 66 4.02 .903
31. Teach Accessibility Consultation 66 3.50 1.071
32. Teach Vocational Expert Services 66 2.80 1.361
33. Teach Expert testimony 65 2.78 1.409
34. Teach Informational Marketing 66 3.79 .920
35. Teach Intergroup Collaboration 66 3.85 .949
36. Teach Medical Consultation 66 3.79 1.031
37. Teach about Insurance Systems 66 2.41 1.301
38. Teach Referral Protocols 65 3.80 .887
39. Teach Case Documentation 66 4.06 .943
40. Teach Writing 66 4.18 .927
41. Teach Financial Negotiation 65 2.86 1.261
42. Teach Marketing 65 3.20 1.202
43. Teach Ethical & Legal Implications 65 4.29 .843
44. Teach how to Abide by Ethical/Legal 65 4.42 .768
45. Teach Reading Prof. Literature 65 3.95 .926
46. Teach to Conduct Literature Reviews 65 4.35 .799

 

168

 

47 .Teach Application of Rs. to Practice
48. Teach Application of Legislation
49. Teach Federal & State Rights

50. Teach how to Challenge Stereotypes
51. Teach Retum to Work Discussions
52. Teach How to Conduct LMA's

53. Teach Conﬂict Resolution

54. Teach Time Management

55. Teach Rapport Development

Valid N (listwise)

169

65

65
65
66
66
66
66
66
60

4.05
3.77
3.62
4.20
3.39
3.45
3.45
3.80
4.05

.926
1.020
I .01 I

.971
1.122
1.267
1.084

.881

.919

REFERENCES

Albee, G. W. (1968). Conceptual models and manpower requirements in psychology.
American Psychologist, 23, 317-320.

Alpert, J. L., & Meyers, J. (Eds) (Ed.). (1983). Training in consultation. Springﬁeld, IL:
Charles C. Thomas.

Ambert, A. M., Adler, P. A., Adler, P., & Detzner, D. F. (1995). Understanding and
evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy, 5 7(4),
879-893.

Atella, M. D., & Figgatt, J. E. (1998). Practicums in consulting psychology: Working
with doctoral clinical programs. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 50(4), 218-227.

Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (2005). Analytic perspectives. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.). The sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 821-840).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing Company.

Babbie, E. J. (1990). Survey research methods (2"d ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Publishing Company.

Benschoff, J. J ., & Souheaver, H. G. (1991). Private sector rehabilitation and the
Americans with Disabilities Act. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling.
22(4), 27-31. (1991). Private sector rehabilitation and the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 22(4), 27-31.

Berven, N. L. (1979). Training needs of state agency rehabilitation counselors.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin. 22, 320-329.

Bimbaum, M. (2004). Human research and data collection via the internet. Annual
Review of Psychology, 55, 803-832.

Blackwell, T. L., Field, T.F., Johnson, C.B., Kelsay, M., & Neulicht, A. T. (Ed). (2005).
The Vocational Expert Revised and Updated. Athens, GA: Elliott & Fitzpatrick.

Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1976). Consultation. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for eﬂective performance. New
York: Wiley-Interscience.

Brown, D. (1985). The preservice training and supervision of consultants. The
Counseling Psychologist, 13, 410-425.

170

Brown, D. (1993). Training consultants: A call to action. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 72(2), 139-143.

Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?
Qualitative Research, 6, 97-113.

Bryman, L. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal
of Mixed Methods Research 1(1), 8-22.

Campbell, W. J. (2002). Consideration of consulting psychology/organizational
educational principles as they relate to the practice of industrial-organizational
psychology and the society for industrial and organizational psychology's
education and training guidelines. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 54(4), 261-274.

Caplan, G., & Caplan, R. . (1993). Mental Health Consultation and Collaboration. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Caplan, G., Caplan, R B., & Erchul, W. P. (1994). Caplanian Mental Health
Consultation: Historical Background and Current Status. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice & Research, 46(4), 2-12.

Caracelli, V. J., & Greene, J. C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method
evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 195-207.

Carey, K. T. (1995). Consultation in the real world. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 6, 397—400.

Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certiﬁcation, C. o. R. C. (2000). Scope of
practice for rehabilitation counseling. Retrieved September 25, 2005, from
http://www.crccertiﬁcation.com/downloads/35
scope/scope_of_practice_%200307.pdf

Chan, F., Leahy, M. J., Saunders, J. L., Tarvydas, V. M., Ferrin, J., & Lee, G. . (2003).
Training needs of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors for contemporary practice.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 46(2), 82-91.

Chan, T. (2003). Evaluation study: Findings and usage. Paper presented at the Paper
presented at the NCRE/RSA/CSAVR, Conference on Rehabilitation Education,
Arlington, VA.

Chapman, C. A., Executive Director, Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor

Certiﬁcation. (2006). Correspondence dated November 28, 2006 to Steve
Zanskas.

171

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through
qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Cochrane, W. S., & Saylers, KM. (2006). Collaborative consultation training: The
missing link to the enhancement of collaborative relationships among education
and mental health professionals. Improving Schools, 9(2), 131-140.

Cooper, S. E. (2002 a). Foreword: Perspectives and Reactions to the Principles for
Education and
Training in Organizational Consulting Psychology. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 5 4(4), 211-212.

Cooper, S. E. (2002b). Reﬂections on Contributions. Consulting Psychology Journal:
Practice and Research, 54(4), 275-278.

Crawford, S., McCabe, S. E., and Pope, D. . (2005). Applying web-based survey design
standards. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 29(1/2), 43-
66.

Creswell, J. W., Trout, S., & Barbuto, Jr., J. E. (2002). A decade of mixed methods
writings: A retrospective. Retrieved December 24, 2006, from
www.aom.pace.edu/rmd/2002forum/retrospect.pdf

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W., F etters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods
study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7-12.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2006). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Crystal, R. M. (1987). Developing a business-industry emphasis in the curriculum.
Rehabilitation Education, 1, 139-141.

Cummings, J. A. (2002). A school psychological perspective on the consulting
psychology education and training principles. Consulting Psychology Journal:
Practice and Research, 54(4), 252-260.

Cummings, M. (1995). Impact of managed care on employment and training: A primer
for survival. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26(1), 10-15.

Cunier, K.F., Chan, F., Berven, N.L., Habeck, RM., & Taylor, D. (2001). Function and
knowledge domains for disability management practice: A Delphi study.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 4 4 (3)1 33- 143 .

I72

Curtis, M. J., & Zins, J. E. (Ed.). (1981). The theory and practice of school consultation.
Springﬁeld, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Davidson, M. M., Waldo, M., & Adams, EM. (2006). Promoting social justice through
preventive interventions in schools. In R. L. Toporek, Gerstein, Lawrence H.,
Fouad, Nadya A., Roysircar, Gargi, & Israel, Tanya (Ed.), Handbook for Social
Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action (pp. 117-129).
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research
(Third ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Desmond, R. E. (1985). Careers in employee assistance programs. Journal of Applied
Rehabiliation Counseling, 16, 26-30.

Ebener, D. J., & Berven, N. L. & Wright, G. N. (1993). Self-perceived abilities of
rehabilitation educators to teach competencies for rehabilitation practice.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 3 7(1), 6-14.

Education and Training Committee, Society of Organizational and Consulting
Psychology, American Psychological Association. (2002). Principles for
education and training at the doctoral and post-doctoral level in consulting
psychology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 5 4, 213-222.

Emener, W. G., Rasch, J. D., & Spector, P. E. (1983). Knowledge adequacies and
training needs of rehabilitation educators. Counselor Education and Supervision,
22, 242-249.

Emener, W. G., & Rubin, S. E. (1980). Rehabilitation counselor roles and functions and
sources of role strain. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 11(2), 57-69.

Estrada-Hemandez, N., & Saunders, J. L. . (2005). Consultation in rehabilitation:
Implications for rehabilitation counselor educators. Rehabilitation Education,
19(1), 25-35.

F einberg, L. R., & McFarlane, F. R. (1979). Setting-based factors in rehabilitation
counselor role variability. Journal of Applied Rehabiliation Counseling, 10, 95-
101.

Fitch, K. L. (1994). Criteria for evidence in qualitative research. Western Journal of
Communication, 58(1), 32-3 8.

Fox, R. (1994). Training professional psychologists for the twenty-ﬁrst century.
American Psychologist, 49, 200-206.

Fraser, R. T., & Clowers, M. R. (1978). Rehabilitation counselor functions: Perceptions

173

of time spent and complexity. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 9(2),
31-35.

Froehle, T. C. (1978). Systematic training for consultants through competency-based
education. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 56, 436-441.

Froehle, T. C., F uqua, D. R, Gibson, R. G., Kurpius, D. J., & Robinson, S. E. (1989).
Implications of consulting psychology survey ﬁndings for the development of
education and training programs. Consulting Psychology Bulletin, 41(3), 16-19.

F uqua, D., & Newman, J. (2002). Academic Perspectives on the Principles for Training
in Consulting Psychology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 54(4), 223-232.

Garman, A. N., Zlatoper, K. W., & Whiston, D. L. (1998). Graduate Training and
Consulting Psychology: A Content Analysis of Doctoral-Level Programs.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 5 0(4), 201 -2 l 7.

Garvin, R. E. (1985). The role of the rehabilitation counselor in industry. Journal of
Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 16(4), 44-47, 50.

Gerstein, L. & Shullman, S. (1992). Counseling psychology and the workplace: The

emergence of organizational counseling psychology. In S. Brown & R. Lent
(Eds.), Handbook of Counseling Psychology (2d ed. pp. 581-625). New York:
John Wiley.

Gibson, G., & Chard, K. M. . (1994). Quantifying the effects of community mental health
consultation interventions. Consulting Psychology Journal, 46(4), 1061-1087.

Gilbride, D. D., Connolly, M., & Stensrud, R (1990). Rehabilitation education for the
private-for proﬁt sector. Rehabilitation Education, 4, 155-162.

Gilbride, D. D., Stensrud, R., & Johnson, M. (1994). Current models of job placement
and employer development: Research, competencies and eductational

considerations. Rehabilitation Education, 7(4), 215-239.

Gottlieb, A., Vandergoot, D., & Lutsky, L. (1991). The role of the rehabilitation
professional in corporate disability management. Journal of Rehabilitation, 5 7(2),
23-28.

Habeck, R. (1997). Trail markers for our newest pathﬁnders. Rehabilitation Education,
11(4), 373-378.

Habeck R. V., Kress, M., Scully S., & Kirchner K. (1994). Determining the signiﬁcance

of the disability management movement for rehabilitation counselor education.
Rehabilitation Education, 8(3), 195-240.

174

Habeck, R. V., & Ellien, V. (1986). Implications of worksite practice for rehabilitation
counselor education and training. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling,
1 7(3), 49-54.

Habeck, R. V., & Kirchner, K. (1999). Case-management issues within employer-based
disability management. In F. Chan & M. J. Leahy (Eds), Health care and
disability case management (pp. 239-264). Lake Zurich, IL: Vocational

Consultants Press.

Habeck, R. V., & Munrowd, D. C. (1987). Employer-based rehabilitation practice: An
educational perspective. Rehabilitation Education, 1 , 95-107.

Hanley-Maxwell, C., Al Hano, I., & Skivington, M. (2007). Qualitatative research in
rehabilitation counseling. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 50(2), 99-110.

Hansen, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Plano-Clark, V. L., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D.
(2005). Mixed methods designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 52(2), 224-235.

Hansen, J. C., Himes, B. S., & Meier, S. (1990). Consultation concepts and practices.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Harrison, D. K., & Lee, C. C. (1979). Rehabilitation counseling competencies. Journal of
Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 10(3), 135-141.

Hawley, C. E., McMahon, B. T., Reid, C., & Shaw, LR. (2000). Rehabilitation
counseling and education: Career counseling suggestions for the profession.
Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 14, 95-101.

Heckler, V. (1998). On Being Helped to Become a Management Psychologist: Partially
Paying Back a Debt of Gratitude. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 5 0(4), 255-262.

Hellkarnp, D. T., & Morgan, L. . (1990). A 1989 proﬁle of consulting psychologists:
Survey of APA Division 13. Consulting Psychology Bulletin, 42(2), 4-9.

Hellkarnp, D. T., Zins, J. E., Ferguson, K., & Hodge, M. . (1998). Training Practices in
Consultation: A National Survey of Clinical, Counseling,
Industrial/Organizational, and School Psychology Faculty. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 5 0(4), 228-236.

Heppner, P. P., Kivlinghan, D. M., & Wampold, B. E. (1992). Research design in
counseling. Paciﬁc Grove, CA: Brooks Cole Publishing Company.

Hershenson, D. B., & McKenna, M. A. (1998). Trends affecting rehabilitation counselor

175

education. Rehabilitation Education, 12(4), 277-288.

Hodges, W. F ., & Cooper, S. (1983). General Introduction. In B. L. Bloom (Ed), The
Mental Health Consultation Field (Vol. XI, pp. 247). New York: Human Sciences
Press, Inc.

Horne, S. G., & Mathews, S. S. (2006). A social justice approach to international
collaborative consultation. In R L. Toporek, Gerstein, L.H., F ouad, N. A.,
Roysircar, G., & Israel, T. (Ed.), Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling
Psychology: Leadesrhip, Vision, andAction (pp. 388-405). Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publications.

Howell, D. C. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology. (Fifth ed.). Paciﬁc Grove, CA:
Wadsworth Group.

HyperRESARCH 2.7 (2006). [Computer software]. Randolph, MA: ResearchWare, Inc.

Jacques, M. E. (1959). Critical counseling behavior in rehabilitation settings. iowa City:
State University of Iowa, College of Education.

Jakubiak, J. E. (1995). Specialty occupation outlook: Professions. Detroit, MI: Gale
Research.

Jenkins, W., & Strausser, D. R. (1999). Horizontal expansion of the role of the
rehabilitation counselor. Journal of Rehabilitation, 65(1), 4-9.

Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602-611.

Kilbury, R. F., Benshoff, J. J ., & Riggar, T.F. (1990). The expansion of private sector
rehabilitation: Will rehabilitation respond? Rehabilitation Education, 4(3), 163-
170.

Klein, M., Relliek, C., & Kelz, J. M. . (1987). Counselors in business and industry: A
survey of corporate human service programs and potential roles and functions.
Rehabilitation Education, 1(4), 265-269.

Knoff, H. M., Hines, C.V., & Kromrey, J. D. (1995). Finalizing the consultant
effectiveness scale: An analysis and validation of the characteristics of effective
consultants. School Psychology Review, 24(3), 480-496.

Knoke, D. B., P. J. (1980). Log-linear models. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, Inc.

Koch, L. C., & Rumrill, P. D. . (1997). Rehabilitation counseling outside of the state

agency: Settings, roles, and functions for the new millennium. Journal of Applied
Rehabiliation Counseling, 28(4), 9-14.

176

Kurpius, D. J., F uqua, D. R, & Rozecki, T. . (1993). The consulting process: A multi-
dimensional approach. Journal of Counseling and Development, 71(6), 601-606.

Kurpius, D. J ., & Fuqua, D. R. (1993). Fundamental issues in deﬁning consultation.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 71(6).

Leahy, M. J., Shapson, P. R, & Wright, G. N. . (1987). Rehabilitation practitioner
competencies by role and setting. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 31(2), 119-
130.

Leahy, M. J., Chan, F., Shaw, L., & Lui, J. (1997). Preparation of rehabilitation
counselors for case management practice in health care settings. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 63, 53-59.

Leahy, M. J. (2002). The 60-hour credit requirement: An educational standard whose
time has come. Rehabilitation Education, 16(4), 1-10.

Leahy, M. J ., Chan, F ., & Saunders, J. L. . (2003). Job functions and knowledge
requirements of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors in the 2 1 st century.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 46(2), 66-81.

Lee, G. K., Chronister, J ., Tsang, H., & Ingraharn, K. (2005). Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Training Needs of State Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors: A Preliminary
Study. Journal of Rehabilitation, 71(3), 11-19.

Leedy, P. D., & Ormond, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design, 8th
edition. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

Lepage, K., Kratochwill, T. R., & Elliot, S. N. . (2004). Competency-based behavior
consultation training: An evaluation of consultant outcomes, treatment effects,
and customer satisfaction. School Psychology Quarterly, 19(1), 1-28.

Lewins, A., & Silver, C. (2006, July 2006). Choosing a CAQDAS package: A working
paper. Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDAS) Networking
Project. 5th Edition. Retrieved January 6 2007, from

ht_tp://cagdas.soc.surrey.ac.uk/

Linkowski, D. L., Thoreson, R, Diamond, E., Leahy, M. J., Szymanski, E. M., & Witty,
T. . (1993). Instrument to validate rehabilitation counseling accreditation and
certiﬁcation knowledge areas. Journal of Applied Rehabiliation Counseling,

24(4), 32-35.

Lowman, R L. (1998). New directions for graduate training in consulting psychology.
Consluting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 5 0(4), 263-270.

177

Lowman, R. L. (2002). Principles for education and training at the doctoral and

postdoctoral level in consulting psychology/organizational. Consulting
Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 5 4(4), 213-222.

Lynch, R, Habeck, R., & Sebastian, M. (1997). Professional practice: Consultation. In D.
R. Maki, T. F. (Ed.), Rehabilitation counseling: Profession and practice (3rd ed.,
pp. 183-196). New York: Springer Publishing Co.

Lynch, R. K., & Martin T. (1982). Rehabilitation counseling in the private sector. Journal
of Rehabilitation, 48(3), 51-53;73.

Lynch, R. K., & Herbert, J. T. (1984). Employment trends for rehabilitation counselors.
Journal of Applied Rehabiliation Counseling, 15(3), 43-46.

Maki, D., & Riggar, T. . (2004). Rehabilitation counseling: Profession and Practice.
New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Marascuilo, L. A. S., R. C. (1988). Statistical methods for the social and behavioral
sciences. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

Matarazza, J. D. (1987). There is only one psychology, no specialties, but many
applications. .American Psychologist, 42, 893-903.

Matkin, R. E. (1980). The rehabilitation counselor in the private sector: Perspective for
education and preparation. Journal of Rehabilitation, 46(2), 60-62.

Matkin, R. E. (1983). The roles and functions of rehabilitation specialists in the private
sector. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 14(1), 14-27.

Matkin, R. E., & Riggar, T. F. (1986). The rise of the private sector rehabilitation and its
effects on training programs. Journal of Rehabilitation, 52(2), 50-58.

Matkin, R. E. (1987). Content areas and recommended training sites of insurance
rehabilitation knowledge. Rehabilitation Education, 1(4), 233-246.

Maxwell, J ., A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.

McMahon, B. T. (1979). Private sector rehabilitation: Beneﬁts, dangers, and implications
for education. Journal of Rehabilitation, 45(3), 56-58.

McMahon, B. T., & Matkin, R. E. (1983). Preservice graduate education for private
sector rehabilitation counselors. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 27(1), 54-60.

Merrell, D. W., & Weigel, R. G. (1998). Professional development for beginning

178

consultants in ﬁrms: Real-world considerations. Consulting Psychology Journal:
Practice and Research, 5 0(4), 242-254.

Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies foe combining qualitative and quantitative
methods: Applications for health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8, 362-
376.

Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological
implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed
Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.

Muthard, J. E., & Salamone, P. (1969). The roles and functions of the rehabilitation
counselor. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 13, 81-168.

0' Roark, A. M. (1999). A history of Division 13 initiatives on education and training in
consulting psychology. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
51(4), 218-225.

Patterson, J. B., & Parker, R (2003). Rehabilitation counselor education at the
crossroads: Private practice or human service? Rehabilitation Education, 1 7(1), 9-
1 7.

Perakyla, A. (2005). Analyzing text and talk. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds). The
sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 869-886). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publishing Company.

Porter, S. R., & Whitcomb, M. E. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey
response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), 579-588.

Preston-Whyte, M. E., Fraser, R. C., & McKinley, R. K. . (1998). Teaching and
assessment in the consultation: A hospital clinician’s perspective preparatory
workshop for integrated teaching of clinical method to undergraduate medical
students. Medical Teacher, 20(3), 10-15.

Pryzwansky, W. B. (1985). Challenges in consultation training. Counseling Psychologist,
13(3), 441-443.

Rasch, J. D. (1992). RCE curricula and insurance rehabilitation. Rehabilitation
Education, 6, 33-39.

Reddy, L. A., Barboza-Whitehead, S., Files, T., & Rubel, E. . (2000). Clinical focus of
consultation outcome research with children and adolescents. Special Services in

the Schools, 6, 1-22.

Remley, T. P., Jr. . (1993). Consultation Contracts. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 72(2), 157-158.

179

Robinson Kurpius, S. E., Fuqua, D. R, & Gibson, G. (1995). An occupational analysis of
consulting psychology: Results of a national survey. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practices and Research, 4 7, 75-88.

Rockwood, G. F. (1993). Shein’s process versus content consultation models. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 71(6), 636-638.

Rosenthal, D. A., Hursch, N., Lui, J ., Isom, R, & Sasson, J. (2007). A survey of current
disability management practice: Emerging trends and implications for
certiﬁcation. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 50(2), 76 — 86.

Rosenthal, D. A., & Olsheski, J. A. (1999). Disability management and rehabilitation
counseling: Present and future opportunities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 65(1), 31-
38.

Rubin, S. E., Matkin, R.E., Ashley, I., Beardsley, M. M., May, V. R., Onstott, K., &
Puckett, F. D. (1984). Roles and functions of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 27, 199-224.

Rumrill, P. D., & Roessler, R. T. . (1999). New direction in vocational rehabilitation: A
“career development” perspective on “closure”. Journal of Rehabilitation, 65(1),
26-30.

Sales, A. (1979). Rehabilitation counseling in the private sector: Implications for
graduate education. Journal of Rehabilitation, 45(3), 59-61, 72.

Scully, S. M. (1996). Knowledge and skills areas associated with disability management
practice for rehabilitation counselors. Unpublished Dissertation, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Shahnasarian, M. (2002). The rehabilitation counselor as forensic expert, and case
manager in catastrophic disability: A case illustration. Journal of Applied
Rehabilitation Counseling, 33(4), 5-9.

Shaw, L. R, Leahy, M. J., Chan, F ., & Catalano, D. (2006). Contemporary issues facing
rehabilitation counseling: A delphi study of the perspectives of leaders of the
discipline. Rehabilitation Education, 20(3), 163-178.

Shein, E. H. (1999). Process consultation revisited. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Shrey, D. E. (1994). Worksite disability management and industrial rehabilitation.
Winter Park: PMD Publishers Group, Inc.

Shullman, S. L. (2002). Reﬂections of a consulting counseling psychologist: Implications
of the principles for education and training at the doctoral and postdoctoral level

180

in consulting psychology for the practice of counseling psychology. Consulting
Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 5 4(4), 242-251.

Steward, R. J. (1996). Training consulting psychologists to be sensitive to multicultural
issues in organizational consultation. Consluting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 48, 180-189.

Stoltenberg, C. D. (1993). Supervising consultants in training: An application of a model
of supervision. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72(2), 131-138.

Szymanski, E. M., Leahy, M. J ., & Linkowski, D. L. . (1993). Reported preparedness of
certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors in rehabilitation counseling knowledge areas.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 37(2), 146-162.

Szymanski, E. M., Linkowski, D. L., Leahy, M. J., Diamond, E. E., & Thoreson, R. W.
(1993). Human resource development: An examination of perceived training
needs of certiﬁed rehabilitation counselors. Journal of Applied Rehabiliation
Counseling, 24(4), 58-70.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. . (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed).
Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods. Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 3-7.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and
quantitative approaches (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tate, D. G., Habeck, R. V., & Galvin, D. E. (1986). Disability management: Origins,
concepts, and principles of practice. Journal of Applied Rehabiliation Counseling,
1 7(3), 5-11.

Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling a typology with examples.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77-100.

Thomas, S. W. (1999). Vocational evaluation in the 2lst century: Diversiﬁcation and
independence. Journal of Rehabilitation, 65(1), 10-15.

Toporek, R. L., Gerstein, L.H., Fouad, N. A., Roysircar, G., & Israel, T. (2006). Future
directions for counseling psychology. In R. L. Toporek, Gerstein, L.H., Fouad, N.
A., Roysircar, G., & Israel, T. (Ed), Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling
Psychology; Leadership, Action, and Vision (pp. 533-552). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey research and societal change. Annual Review of
Psychology, 55, 775-801.

Vash, C. (1992). Thoughts to share with educators: On teaching consumerism to

181

rehabilitation students. Rehabilitation Education, 6, 251-255.

Williams, F., & Monge, P. (2001). Reasoning with statistics (5th ed). Orlando: Harcourt,
Inc.

Wright, G. N. (1980). Total rehabilitation. Boston: Little, Brown.

Wright, G. N., & Ebener, D. J. (1987). Demographics of rehabilitation educators and
their university programs. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 31(2), 146-158.

Wright, G. N. & Fraser, RT. (1975). Task analysis for the evaluation, preparation,
classiﬁcation, and utilization of rehabilitation counselor track personnel.
Wisconsin Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation Monograph 22(3).

Wright, G. N., Leahy, M. J., & Shapson, P. (1987). Rehabilitation skills inventory:
Importance of counselor competencies. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 31(2),
107-118.

Zins, J. E. (1993). Enhancing consultee problem-solving skills in consultative
interactions. Journal of Counseling and Devlopment, 72(2), 185-190.

Zins, J. E., Kratochwill, T. R., & Elliott, S. N. (1993). Current status of the ﬁeld. In J. E.

Zins, T. R. Kratochwill, & S. N. Elliott (Eds), Handbook of consultation services
for children (pp. 1-12). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

182

      

     

  

mmmmm

11111113111, 1

1 2

l