second general conclusion is that changes in knowledge, attitude, and skill did occur. Wherever and however attempts were made to measure them, significant differences between initial and final measures were found. These conclusions should not make one lose sight of the variability of the appraisal data. Some enrollees registered very unfavorable attitudes toward the experience they had undergone, even in situations where almost everybody else described it in glowing terms. Some institutes evoked less enthusiasm than others in the participants. Some parts of the programs were rated considerably lower than others. As one reads the reports, he begins to suspect that these unfavorable ratings do not reflect discredit on the institute programs where they occurred, but they do pose problems for concern. One particular institute, for example, where a good many of the enrollee ratings were somewhat negative, had selected counselors from States that constitute an underdeveloped area, so far as guidance is concerned, and then attempted to present course work that would show them what professional training for counselors is really like. Many of these enrollees did not meet the standards such courses set and were graded accordingly. The experience was undoubtedly painful for some individuals, but perhaps it was essential if improvements are to come. In several other cases, differential evaluations of separate parts of the program resulted in a more negative evaluation of the measurement and statistics courses than of other parts of the program. Yet it seems clear that in present-day high schools, with their extensive testing programs, this is essential knowledge for counselors, whether they like it or not. Furthermore, the feelings should not be ignored of those few individuals who were unhappy and extremely critical in situations that were congenial and stimulating to the majority. We are tempted to conclude that they do not belong in the counseling profession, but we do not really know this. In the long run, either selection methods should screen out such persons at the beginning, or training methods allow them to progress in their own ways. The amount and kind of appraisal that could be carried out while institutes were in progress was necessarily limited. The real test of their value will be the accomplishments of the participants after they return to their own schools. Fortunately, followup procedures have been planned for most if not all of the 50 institutes. In many cases the enrollees themselves made these arrangements before they separated. It reflects their strong feeling that this was such an important experience in their lives that they wished to make permanent the friendships and the kinds of mutual stimulation they had learned to prize. In addition to this social and inspirational function, followup plans in several places specifically provide for the collection of research data. Tests and attitude measures used during or at the close of the institute are to be repeated at various intervals to measure longterm changes. Information of various sorts about counseling duties is to be collected. These individual followup studies will be of great interest to all those who are concerned with counselor training. Here, as in the other areas, some novel ideas about followup plans have emerged. In one State, guidance programs in individual schools are to be evaluated, according to a predetermined set of standards, by visiting committees made up of institute enrollees from other schools. In some States, administrators in the school where enrollees serve will be asked to make comments. Since title V (B) of the National Defense Education Act does not provide for the use of any funds for research purposes, such investigations of institute effects must necessarily be the responsibility of the training institutions rather than of the Office of Education. It is gratifying to find that research of this kind has been considered in so many places. There is one difficulty that arises in trying to draw firm conclusions about the value of the short-term institutes. We cannot assess with certainty the value of the outcomes without one or more control groups for comparison purposes. Two kinds of questions, then, are apparent to any skeptic. First, are changes in institute enrollees significantly greater than changes that occur in similar persons undergoing no special kind of educational experience during the same interval? Second, are changes in institute enrollees significantly greater than changes that occur in similar persons registered in regular summer session courses in counselor education? Though we must maintain some skepticism until long-range and control group studies have been done, we need not hesitate to say that the qualitative character of the institute experience was memorable. The spontaneous statements of both enrollees and faculty members testify to its unusual vividness. Many instructors remarked that while they had never worked so hard at summer teaching jobs, they had never enjoyed their work so much. The enrollee's eagerness to learn met the instructor's eagerness to teach, and an exciting interchange occurred. In addition to the high ratings of institute programs and the changes in institute participants, many directors took note of other results. Enrollees, besides adding to their knowledge and skill, and changing their attitudes about many aspects of counseling and human relations, became more professional in their outlook. This was indicated in a number of ways. Many of them worked out plans for fur ther graduate training. They became aware of their limitations and realized what complete preparation for counseling would entail. Thus for many the institute was just the beginning of a planned program leading to a master's degree, State certification, or some other tangible evidence of full professional status. Many enrollees joined professional organizations on the national or the State level, or both. A sense of professional identity as a counselor developed. The person formed a new image of himself and his role, an image that could be distinguished from that of the teacher or of the school administrator. At least one State guidance association was revitalized as a result of the interest the enrollees developed. There were some other indirect effects that seemed to many institute directors to be important. Guidance took on a new and more respected meaning in the schools and in the communities from which enrollees came. High school principals assigned counselors to halftime counseling duties in place of the period or two a day they had previously been allowed for it. Physical facilities and administrative arrangements were improved. Practicum centers where high school students were invited to come for counseling during the summer made parents as well as teachers and school administrators aware of the part counseling might play in the efforts of boys and girls to formulate good plans for their lives. Newspaper stories in the hundreds of towns and cities from which individual enrollees came brought guidance to the attention of citizens who had never thought about it before. While it would be hard to assess in any accurate way this indirect impact of the institute program on attitudes in school and community, there are many indications that it was an important outcome. Another indirect effect was on training institutions and their ongoing programs for training counselors. In many instances persons from different university departments and from State offices of education cooperated in a way they had not considered possible before. Such cooperation tends to be maintained. Some of the techniques that worked best in institute classes are applicable to all classes in which the same subject matter is taught. The desire for further training on the part of enrollees will almost certainly increase the demand for summer session courses, apart from the institute program. There is some indication that even in 1959 the publicity the institutes received stimulated an unusual number of teachers to enroll voluntarily in guidance courses offered in the regular summer programs. While we cannot assess this outcome with any accuracy, it may well rank with the others in long-range significance. CHAPTER 11 Problems and Issues in Institute Operation THE 'HE DIRECTORS AND FACULTY MEMBERS of short-term institutes were confronted during the first season of the program with certain persistent problems. The identification of these difficulties and the thinking that was done about them should prepare later faculties to handle them in the most satisfactory way possible. In many cases, specific suggestions can be made. The first of these problems is the wide variation in ability, background, and temperament that turned out to be present even in groups that were expected to be homogeneous. As has been explained in chapter 8, special efforts were made to select, for any one institute, enrollees who would not be too different from one another in level of training. Courses were pitched at what the instructors thought would be an appropriate difficulty level for the group. But again and again the reports mention that the enrollees were far less alike than had been expected. For instance, even in a group consisting entirely of counselors with 5 to 10 years of experience, all of whom reported from 10 to 20 semester hours of previous course work in guidance, there would be marked individual differences. In places where tests were given at the beginning of the institute, the extent of this range of individual differences could be well documented. In one institute, a high level test of academic aptitude produced a distribution of scores ranging from the 5th to the 95th percentile on norms for graduate students. Such a difference in the ability to understand abstract ideas and concepts is something an instructor cannot ignore. The student at the 5th-percentile point is completely lost when he grapples with material which the 95th-percentile student grasps with ease. Differences in just what kinds of things individual students already knew also complicated the picture. Many training programs and State certification plans allow a good deal of latitude for qualifying training. It may be required, for example, that the person have on his record 15 graduate semester hours chosen from a list of areas |