Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

A Validation Study of the 2016 CACREP Standards and an Exploration of Future Trends

Abstract Details

2018, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Ohio University, Counselor Education (Education).
Members of the counseling profession and counselor education have been striving to strengthen the profession. Counselor education has especially been recognized as the factor that shapes the helping philosophy and professional identity. Among counselor education, the Council of for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) has been the accrediting body that influences the direction of counselor education since 1981. Several revisions of CACREP Standards have been made over the past three decades, with the 2016 CACREP Standards as the latest revision. However, it was unknown that whether counselor educators perceived the standards as relevant to counselor education and as clear to interpret. In addition, literature has not yet explored the next movement of counselor education and the counseling profession. Therefore, the purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine the relevance and clarity of the 2016 CACREP Standards, and to explore the future trends in the counseling profession and counselor education. Using a mixed-methods design, the researcher collected the perception of core faculty counselor educators and program liaisons (N = 155) in the CACREP accredited programs on the relevance and clarity of the 2016 CACREP Standards using two online surveys. In addition, the opinions of ACA Fellows and those referred by ACA Fellows on the future of counseling profession were obtained through qualitative interviews. The results of each section were collected, analyzed, and merged for discussion to strengthen the findings of this study. The results of the quantitative section showed that, generally, participants perceived the 2016 CACREP Standards as relevant to counselor education and clear for interpretation. Two standards (1.W and 1.D) from Section 1 to Section 4 of the 2016 CACREP Standards were rated lower than 0.9 (i.e., more than 10% of participants perceived them as non-relevant) on their relevance. In addition, four standards (1.T, 1.M, 1.U, and 1.E) from Section 1 to Section 4 were rated lower than 0.9 on their clarity. Participants` narrative comments regarding these standards were summarized. Lastly, themes identified through the qualitative interviews included (1) compelling issues; (2) trends; (3) professional identity; (4) perceptions of CACREP; and (5) the big picture. By merging the results, the researcher summarized and discussed several findings, including (1) issues related to faculty and program strengths; (2) the 60-credit-hour requirement, student support, and the unified profession; (3) future trends; and (4) a complicated task. Implications and recommendations for future research as well as the limitations of this study are provided.
Yegan Pillay (Committee Chair)
Thomas Davis (Committee Member)
Christine Bhat (Committee Member)
Gordon Brooks (Committee Member)
187 p.

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Lu, H.-T. (2018). A Validation Study of the 2016 CACREP Standards and an Exploration of Future Trends [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1522763051318698

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Lu, Huan-Tang. A Validation Study of the 2016 CACREP Standards and an Exploration of Future Trends. 2018. Ohio University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1522763051318698.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Lu, Huan-Tang. "A Validation Study of the 2016 CACREP Standards and an Exploration of Future Trends." Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University, 2018. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1522763051318698

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)