Introduction Advocacy has a long history

Advocacy has a long history in the counseling profession. The counseling

profession was developed by individuals who wanted to make a change to the status quo

as well as increase opportunities for the disadvantaged and oppressed (Grothaus,

McAuliffe, & Craigen, 2012; Osborne et al.,1998). According to experts in the field,

students in the profession of counseling should understand that counseling was

established in part through self-advocacy by persons such as Sigmund Freud and Clifford

Beers, and in part by social advocacy for the community (Gladding & Newsome, 2010;

Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). In the past, the primary focus of the advocacy movement

primary has been on advocating for clients/students and school/community to reduce

barriers stunting personal, academic, and career development (Grothaus et al., 2012;

Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Toporek, Lewis, & Crethar, 2009).

In recent years, however, there has been a shift to counselors directing their

advocacy efforts toward the public arena. Lewis and colleagues (2003) described

advocacy in the public arena as conveying awareness to the public pertaining to societal

and systemic barriers that impact human development and advocating for policies that

change the status quo. For example, counselors and counseling students are encouraged

to advocate for the profession of counseling to help impact policy changes salient to the

profession (Ratts & Hutchins, 2009; Ratts & Wayman, 2014). Students entering the

profession as well as current professional counselors should advocate for the profession

at government levels to ensure the continuation of the counseling profession related to

reimbursement for their services from insurance companies, funding for school

counselors, and increased access by the public to counselors for mental health care

services (Nilsson, Schale, & Khamphakdy-Brown, 2011; Smith, Reynolds, & Rovak,

2009).

The counseling profession is relatively new and, when compared to the social

work profession, is still in the infancy phase related to social justice and professional

legislative advocacy (Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005). Webb (2015) said that both the

psychology and counseling professions have been slow to move toward political action.

In contrast, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), with its more than

132,000 members and 55 chapters, has been preparing social work students and social

work professionals to be politically active for the past two decades (starting in the early

2000s) and has a commitment to advocating for social and economic justice (Beimers,

2015). NASW and its members’ involvement in federal political action for both social

workers and the population they serve are facilitated through using email listserv

advocacy, policy position development, hosting Political Action for Candidate Election

(PACE) committee, which provides candidates who have shared political views with

NASW with financial support and endorse (Beimers, 2015).

Counselors are fighting to convince legislators and various boards (state, federal,

insurance, etc.) to honor competent practice(s) and insurance parity (Chang, Crethar, &

Ratts, 2010). According to Lating, Barnett, and Horowik (2010), counseling students

should be introduced to advocacy and its core beliefs, purposes, and objectives during

orientation. In addition, advocacy concepts should be systematically infused into the

counseling graduate program curriculum to create a positive mindset and attitude toward

advocacy (Cooks, Hayden, Gracia, & Terrell, 2015; Ratts & Pederson, 2014; Ratts &

Wayman, 2014). Most students are aware of the need to advocate on behalf of

clients/students and school/community; however, the concept of advocating for the

counseling profession is not as obvious to them (Toporek et al., 2009).

Program expectations are generally laid out prior the student enrolling into a

counseling program or during student orientation. From their entrance into a graduate

counseling program, students are encouraged to think critically and question all aspects of

counseling theoretical tenets, applied concepts, and research outcomes (Bemak et al.,

2011). From the beginning of their graduate programs, counseling students should be

exposed to the basic tenets of advocacy that will help foster in them an attitude for

service extending beyond clients/students and the school/community (Nilsson & Schmidt,

2005; Toporek et al., 2009). Yet, in spite of the mounting evidence supporting the

increased need for graduate students to be involved in advocacy, there remains a dearth of

literature on the experiences of counseling students or practicing counselors who are

involved in legislative advocacy.

In this chapter, I provide the background of this study, the problem statement, and

the purpose statement. I also include the research question; the conceptual framework;

the nature of the study; key definitions; and discussion of the assumptions, scope and

delimitations, limitations, and ethical considerations of the study. To conclude the

chapter, I discuss the significance of this study and its implications for social change and

provide a summary of the chapter.

Background

According to Ratts and Wayman (2014), numerous studies have focused on the

subject of advocacy for the counseling profession. Nevertheless, there remains a paucity

of empirical data available on the experiences of counseling students who are involved in

legislative advocacy for the counseling profession (Briggs, Magnus, Lassiter, Patterson,

& Smith, 2011; Remley & Herlihy, 2016). Most counseling students are not privy to

professional legislative advocacy involvement at the academic level; thus, they may not

develop a focus on professional legislative advocacy as a core aspect of their professional

identity (Lating et al., 2010). However, understanding the importance of social change

advocacy, more specifically professional legislative advocacy, as it relates to the

counseling profession is necessary to promote leadership and to influence legislators, in

the view of Calley and Hawley (2008). Collins and his colleagues (2015) agreed that

participating in social change advocacy for the counseling profession as a counseling

student has received little attention in the literature. Thus, there appears to be a gap in

knowledge regarding certain aspects of advocacy in counseling education and practice.

Grothaus et al. (2012) discussed the need to integrate advocacy into strengthbased

counseling interventions. The authors also provided a definition of counseling advocacy

and said that it is “the act of empowering individuals or groups through actions that

increase self-efficacy, remove barriers to needed services, and promote systemic change”

(p. 58). Myers, Sweeney, and White (2002) noted that although advocacy both for clients

and for the profession are essential for the future of counseling and counselors, advocacy

for the profession has received little systematic attention. In another study, Nilsson and

Schmidt (2005) conducted an initial exploration of social justice advocacy among

counseling graduate students. According to these scholars, literature focused on college

students and social justice advocacy dates back to the 1950s. However, none of the

aforementioned studies focused on counseling students’ engagement in professional

legislative advocacy.

In this study, I explored the meaning counseling students place on advocating for

the profession, factors that influence legislative advocacy, and methods of gaining entry

to legislative advocacy. Singh (2010) provided clarity as to how educators can weave

social justice advocacy into the curriculum as well as the personal meaning ascribed to

social justice advocacy. Reiner, Dobmeier, and Hernández (2013) and Remley and

Herlihy (2016) explored historical factors, professional identity, credentialing, and

advocacy within the counseling profession. Reiner et al. also highlighted the significance

of advocacy at the professional level. The above studies provided a starting place for my

study.

Problem Statement

Involvement in social change advocacy at the professional level allows counselors

and counselor educators to obtain recognition from other professionals, pass legislation

salient to the counseling profession, ensure funding for the counseling profession as a

whole, and sustain a continued viable income for counseling professionals (Reiner et al.,

2013). Ratts and Hutchins (2009) ascertained that political action and legislation,

particularly advocacy efforts, are increasingly becoming a real part of the counselor’s

existence. Thus, preparing counseling students for professional legislative advocacy

engagement at the academic level may be crucial to advancing the counseling profession.

Although advocacy in the counseling profession has a long history, there remains

a dearth of empirical data available on the experiences of counseling students involved in

legislative advocacy for the counseling profession as an act of social change advocacy

(Briggs et al., 2011; Remley & Herlihy, 2016). The significant of social change advocacy

as a counseling student is lacking from the current body of literature (Collins et al.,

2015). Calley and Hawley (2008) postulated that counseling students need to understand

the importance of social change advocacy, more specifically, legislative advocacy as it

relates to the counseling profession, in order to promote leadership and to influence

legislators. Hence, the purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the meaning

counseling students ascribe to their involvement in legislative advocacy for the

counseling profession.

I explored the lived experiences of counseling graduate students and recent

graduates who participated in a 4-day long American Counseling Association (ACA)

Institute for Leadership Training on legislative advocacy and leadership or participated in

professional legislative advocacy at the state level. The Institute for Leadership Training

was established during Dr. Mark Pope’s 2003-2004 ACA Presidency (M. Pope, personal

communication, December 19, 2016). Pope explained that the institute was designed to

train counselors at a national level on how to advocate for the counseling profession.

Participants learn legislative terminology that is most useful when addressing legislators.

Detailed descriptions of the current bills that participants will advocate for are provided

during large sessions by experts in the field (M. Pope, personal communication,

December 19, 2016). Small group sessions allow participants to learn how to justify their

support of bills, define leadership roles, and explain fiduciary responsibilities. According

to Pope, they then apply the knowledge they have garnered through face-to-face meetings

with legislators on Capitol Hill. By the end of the institute, participants are able to

distinguish the difference between lobbying and professional advocacy, define legislative

terms, advocate for the profession, identify which legislators are in favor of the bills,

provide a summary of their experience, and discuss follow up procedures with legislators

(M. Pope, personal communication, December 19, 2016). Hopefully, the results of this

study will provide an understanding of the meaning counseling students ascribe to their

involvement in legislative advocacy for the counseling profession. By learning about

their experiences, counselor educators may be in a better position to encourage future

counselors to be more involved in professional legislative advocacy.

Purpose of the Study

Little is known about the experiences of counseling students who are involved in

professional legislative advocacy or their motivation for professional advocacy

involvement. Hence, the purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the lived

experiences of graduate students and recent graduates who have been involved in

professional legislative advocacy.

Research Question

In order to find out the meaning counseling students place on advocating for the

profession, I explored the factors that influence legislative advocacy and methods of

gaining entry to legislative advocacy. There was one central and 13 subquestions (see

Chapter 3) that comprised the interview protocol (see Appendix A) for this study. The

central research question for this study was the following: What meaning do counseling

graduate students and recent graduates ascribe to their experiences of involvement in

professional legislative advocacy?

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework I used to guide this inquiry was Astin’s (1984) theory

of student involvement. The theory is based on the physical and psychological energy a

student devotes to the academic experience. According to Astin (1999), a student’s

growth and development is dependent on the amount of time spent involved in campus

activities and time shared with faculty. Astin’s student involvement theory has been

widely utilized in higher education to better understand and explore student involvement

(Astin, 1993; Astin & Astin, 2000; Foreman & Retallick, 2013; Junco, Heiberger, &

Loken, 2010; Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, & Kinzie, 2008). Astin’s (1999) theory was useful for

this study because it provided a lens for exploring the experiences of counseling graduate

students who are involved in legislative advocacy activities.

According to Astin (1984), students who spend time studying, participating in

campus activities and organizations, as well as interacting with faculty are more invested

in the learning experience. Moreover, a student’s degree of involvement will develop

over time; a student’s involvement is determined based on his or her level of motivation.

Astin (1999) asserted that involvement can be measured both quantitatively and

qualitatively. For instance, the amount of hours a student spends meeting with legislators

can be measured quantitatively while interviewing students to understand their

motivation for involvement in legislative advocacy provides a qualitative measure.

Student involvement theory further assumes that a student’s involvement enhances

student learning and personal development (Astin, 1984). Astin’s theory is the best fit for

my study.

Nature of the Study

The nature of this study was qualitative. According to Creswell (2013),

qualitative research focuses on the lived experiences of an individual or group.

Phenomenological design and semistructured interviews will be utilized to uncover

themes associated with professional legislative advocacy involvement of master’s and

doctoral level students or recent professionals who had graduated within the last two

years (Bryman, 2015). The most appropriate design for this study was Hermeneutic

phenomenological because of the need for increased understanding of counseling

students’ motivation and attitudes regarding legislative advocacy.

Definitions

The following definitions provide an understanding of words and phrases as they

are understood in this particular study:

Advocacy: A plea or social cause that challenges barriers which impede academic,

personal, or career development (Lee, 1998).

  Bill: Proposed legislation under consideration by a legislature (NCSL, 2017). A 
bill does not become law until it is passed by the legislature and, in most cases, approved 
by the executive. Once a bill has been enacted into law, it is called an act of the 
legislature, or a statute.    
Change agent: Individuals who work to affect social systems in ways that will 
ultimately benefit society as a whole (Grothaus et al., 2012).    
Direct lobbying: An attempt to influence legislation by stating a position on that 
specific legislation to legislators or other government employees who participate in the 
formulation of legislation (Drutman, 2010).   
  Grassroots lobbying: An activity that occurs when an organization urges its 
members and nonmembers to become involved in direct lobbying (Drutman, 2010).  
 Legislative advocacy: A reliance on legislative processes (local, state, or federal) as a 
strategy to bring about change (Drutman, 2010).  
Social justice: A “multifaceted approach to counseling in which practitioners 
strive to simultaneously promote human development and the common good through 
addressing challenges related to both individual and distributive justice regulations” 
(ACA Division Counselors for Social Justice, 2017).  
Social justice advocacy: Within the professional counseling literature, a phrase 
that distinguishes advocacy related to issues of power and privilege, allocation of 
resources, and discrimination (Grothaus et al., 2012; Smith et al., 2009; Toporek et al., 
2009).  

Sponsor: The person (usually a legislator) who presents a bill or resolution for

consideration. A sponsor can be joined by others, who are known as cosponsors (NCSL,

2017).

White paper: A government or other authorized report giving information or

proposal on an issue (Rouse, 2015).

Assumptions

In this study, I assumed that all participants would take the time to reflect and

answer all questions honestly. Participants were asked to recall thoughts and feelings

from experiences of professional legislative advocacy involvement. I further assumed

that all participants who were involved in professional legislative advocacy as a social

change agent through ACA’s Institute for Leadership Training or similar training at the

state level had an understanding of the distinction between client and professional

advocacy. Participants carry their own biases, and because this study relied on the

individuals’ perceptions, biases may be reflected in the participants’ views of professional

legislative advocacy involvement.

In addition, I carried my own biases into this research project that came from my

personal experiences as a professional legislative advocate and my direct participation in

three of the ACA Institutes for Leadership Training. I bracketed my biases and did my

best to keep them from influencing my collection or analysis of the data.

Scope and Delimitations

I interviewed masters and doctoral level students who were involved in legislative

advocacy for the counseling profession. I interviewed new professionals who had

graduated within the last two years who were students at the time of their involvement in

professional legislative advocacy. The various motivations and attitudes from the

participants disclosed patterns and themes (Creswell, 2013). By identifying emerging

themes produced by these motivations and attitudes, I was able to identify the essential

elements that appeared across the sources and provided a description of how the

experiences appeared (Polkinghorne, 2005).

Furthermore, multiple participants serve as a kind of triangulation of the

experience, locating its core meaning by approaching it through various accounts.

Triangulation does not serve to verify a particular account, but instead allows the

researcher to move beyond a single view of the experience. The utilization of multiple

participants deepens the understanding of the investigated experience or phenomena

(Polkinghorne, 2005). I remained flexible as a student researcher to allow participants to

provide detailed accounts of their shared lived experiences as well as to address emerging

themes produced by the data (Creswell, 2013).

Limitations

This study was limited to only counseling students and recent graduates who had

participated in professional legislative advocacy. Due to the subjective experiences of the

participants, it may be difficult to replicate this study (Patton, 2015). Creswell (2013)

asserted that one contributing factor to consider as a limitation is that participants may

drop out of the study before completion. Participants may have a preconceived meaning

of the operational definitions that may affect their input. As a professional legislative

advocate for the past four years, my personal experience as a legislative advocate may

have created biases. Participants may also have perceived me as an expert in the area of

professional legislative advocacy.

Significance

One of the essential characteristics of counseling professionals is to advocate on

behalf of clients and the profession (Mallinckrodt, Miles, & Levy, 2014). The value of

social change advocacy has a longstanding history in the profession of counseling (Pope,

2000; Toporek et al., 2009). According to Myers et al. (2002), social change advocacy

implies an action in pursuit of social and political justice. In other words, social change

advocacy requires activism to carry out systemic political and societal change.

Furthermore, professional legislative advocacy requires activism to change the status quo,

carry out systemic political and societal change, and influence legislators at the local,

state, and federal levels.

Historically, counseling professionals have answered the call of social change

advocacy on behalf of client populations (Grothaus et al., 2012; Ratts & Hutchins; 2009).

Recently, Tennessee passed into law a bill allowing counselors to refuse service to clients

who are involved in activities that are in conflict with the deeply held religious beliefs of

the counselor. Tennessee’s new law is a direct violation of the ACA Code of Ethics

(2014) which indicates that counselors do not discriminate against clients based “on age,

culture, disability, ethnicity, race, religion/spirituality, gender, gender identity, sexual

orientation, marital/partnership status, language preference, socioeconomic status,

immigration status, or any basis proscribed by law” (ACA, C.5, p. 9). In a video, ACA’s

Chief Executive Office, Richard Yep, said, “It is an affront to our profession and we must

stand firm to prevent other states from enacting a law like HB 1840” (YouTube, 2016).

In the past seven years, the American Counseling Association (ACA) has called

for increased social change advocacy as it relates to the counseling profession (ACA,

2014). Yep (2010) stated, “The time is now for all professional counselors and counselor

educators to advocate for the profession…You need to advocate for the profession with as

much intensity... as is done for those whom you serve…” (p. 7). Despite the importance

of social change advocacy for the profession, there remains a lack of student involvement

in legislative advocacy for the profession of counseling (Collins et al., 2015; Haight,

1982; Myers et al., 2002). This study sought to identify the meaning counseling students

place on advocating for the profession, factors that influence legislative advocacy, and

methods of gaining entry to legislative advocacy by exploring their motivation and

attitudes toward legislative advocacy for the counseling profession.

Summary

This chapter provides an introduction to the study. The aim of this qualitative

study is to explore the lived experiences counseling students and recent graduates to

uncover the meaning ascribed to their experiences of involvement in professional

legislative advocacy. Participants were generated from my personal contacts of

counseling students who were involved in professional legislative advocacy. A brief

background of the study and definitions has been provided within this chapter.

The conceptual framework guiding this inquiry is based on Astin’s (1999) theory

of student involvement. Astin’s theory is useful for this study because it provides a lens

for exploring the experiences of counseling graduate students and recent graduates who

have been involved in professional legislative advocacy activities. Assumptions, scope

and delimitations, limitations, and ethical considerations have also been addressed in this

chapter. Chapter 2 discusses the foundational literature for the study.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction

Emerging research has demonstrated a growing need for counseling students to be

trained in legislative advocacy. One reason is that counselors are increasingly involved in

political action and the legislative movement (Ratts & Hutchins, 2009). According to

Ratts and Wayman (2014), numerous studies have focused on the subject of advocacy for

the counseling profession. Nevertheless, there remains a paucity of empirical data

available on the motivation and attitudes of counseling students toward professional

legislative advocacy for the counseling profession as an act of social change advocacy

(Briggs et al., 2011; Remley & Herlihy, 2016). In addition, involvement in social change

advocacy as a counseling student has received little attention in the literature (Collins et

al., 2015). Most counseling students are not aware of professional legislative advocacy

involvement at the academic level and thus may not develop a focus on advocacy as a

core aspect of their professional identity (Lating et al., 2010). However, counseling

students need to understand the importance of social change advocacy, more specifically

legislative advocacy as it relates to the counseling profession, to promote leadership and

advocacy and to influence legislators, according to some experts (Calley & Hawley,

2008).

The consistent necessity to promote systemic change through advocacy has been

widely accepted as a core value in the counseling and mental health professions

(Cashwell, 2010; Lee, 2007; Toporek et al., 2009); however, the action component (e.g.,

protesting, advocating, e-mailing, etc.) of advocacy has not carried over to practice

(Cooks et al., 2015; Ratts & Pedersen, 2014; Ratts & Wayman, 2014). Chang et al.

(2010) agreed that counselors are called upon to alleviate societal problems and should be

fighting oppression of diverse populations, addressing racial and sexual injustice in work

settings, and advocating for families suffering from violence, and eliminating barriers to

learning. Yet, many counselors do not advocate on behalf of the profession (Cashwell,

2010; Lee, 2007; Nilsson et al., 2011; Smith et al., 2009; Toporek et al., 2009).

Some scholars have suggested that counselor educators can better prepare

counseling students to become legislative advocates for the counseling profession by

infusing legislative advocacy into the curriculum and the field experience (Cooks et al.,

2015; Ratts & Pederson, 2014; Ratts & Wayman, 2014; Toporek et al., 2009; Zalaquett,

Foley, Tillotson, Dinsmore, & Hof, 2008). Based on the literature review for this study,

current research on professional legislative advocacy has shown that advocacy is a core

value of counselors and that professional legislative advocacy is an important part of a

counselor’s professional identity (Lating et al., 2010; Ratts & Hutchins, 2009; Ratts &

Wayman, 2014 ). Still, there is no research literature that focuses on the lived

experiences of counseling students and their motivation and attitudes toward legislative

advocacy (Briggs et al., 2011; Collins et al., 2015; Remley & Herlihy, 2016). To better

understand the importance of professional legislative advocacy, the legislative advocacy

movement within the counseling profession must first be understood.

Literature Search Strategy

I conducted 33 searches with broad keywords in a variety of mental health

counseling and psychology related databases and search engines in order to gather as

much germinal material as possible that could help inform a study on student

involvement in professional legislative advocacy. I used the keyword search words and

terms listed in Table 1 using Boolean/phrase broad search with no combined categories

without differentiating search fields.

Table 1

Keyword Search Terms

Keyword

ACA advocacy

competencies advocacy

advocacy competencies

advocate Astin’s student

involvement

theory

change agent

community mental

health competency

counseling advocacy

counseling programs

counseling students

counselor counselor

education counselor

educator critical

consciousness doctoral

student doctoral training

fieldwork higher

education intergroup

dialogue

Lawmaking

legislation legislative

advocate

lobbying macro-

systems master’s

student mental health

multicultural

counseling nonprofit

organizations policy

advocate

policy advocacy

policy instructional

approach

policy-making

political action

practicum practicum

course professional

identity professional

involvement

professional legislation

advocate

public policy public policy

advocacy scholar-

practitioner-training

scientist-

practitioneradvocate social

advocacy social advocacy

movement social cognitive

career theory social

construction social justice

social justice advocate

social justice commitment

social justice competency

social justice counseling

social justice interest social

policy students student

attitudes student

involvement student

lobbying student

involvement theory student

motivation

I searched the individual terms in the following peer-reviewed databases: PsycINFO,

PsycARTICLES, Counseling and Psychotherapy Transcripts, Student Narratives,

Reference Works, Counseling and Therapy in Video, SocINDEX with Full Text,

Professional Legislative Advocacy with Full Text, ERIC – Educational Information

Resource Center, EBSCO ebooks, CINAHL & MEDLINE Simultaneous Search,

Academic Search Complete, Expanded Academic ASAP, ProQuest Central, LexisNexis

Academic, Thoreau, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text, Dissertations & Theses

at Walden University, Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research

(ICPSR) Datasets, and Google Scholar.

I then parsed the literature by the title of the document, date of publication, and

relevance based on the information found in the abstract. Because there was very little

literature that focused on the keywords of legislative advocate, change agent or social

justice advocate, I broadened the search for common group relationship dynamics found

in articles with the following keywords: advocate, advocacy, counselors, counseling

students, social justice, social justice advocate, social justice counseling, students, and

other keywords or phrases listed in Table 1. This included searching for information

pertaining to advocacy and the meaning counseling students ascribe to professional

legislative advocacy. I reviewed the literature for dynamics that might also exist in

legislative involvement, protest, letter writing, professional advocacy, and societal

implications for counseling students trained in legislative advocacy.

I began researching the literature July 2014. I concluded my source once I

exhausted the literature for my study. It was difficult to find evidence-based studies or

empirical research on professional legislative advocacy or student involvement.

Therefore, I examined existing research on social justice and advocacy in counseling to

draw out common experiences in an attempt to better understand the dynamics that might

be occurring in student legislative advocacy involvement. I also examined nonscientific

articles found in newsletter editorials, news stories, public commentaries, legal

proceedings, forums and workshops, symposiums, blogs, and literary works in order to

better understand potential issues faced by counseling graduate students who engage in

advocacy on behalf of the counseling profession.

Conceptual Framework

Synthesis of Astin’s Student Involvement Theory

Student involvement theory has been widely cited in both qualitative and

quantitative research in investigations of student development, and it has been widely

used by university faculty members to design effective learning environments (Burch et

al., 2015; Lund & Jolly, 2012; Pike & Kuh, 2005; Pike et al., 2012). Alexander Astin

developed student involvement theory in July 1984 to describe the importance of student

involvement in college and the link between student involvement and student retention

rates. Involvement refers to the amount of physical and psychological energy students

devote to the academic experience (Astin, 1984). According to Astin (1999), students

who spend time studying and participating in campus activities and organizations, as well

as interacting with faculty, are more invested in the learning experience. Moreover, a

student’s degree of involvement will develop over time; involvement of students is

determined based on their level of motivation. Astin (1999) asserted that involvement

can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively. For instance, a quantitative can

measure the number of hours a student spends calling legislators a while interviewing

students to understand their motivation to get involved in legislative advocacy provides a

qualitative measure. An assumption of student involvement theory is that student

involvement enhances student learning and personal development (Astin, 1999).

Studies Utilizing Student Involvement Theory and Assumptions

Multiple researchers have utilized student involvement theory to assess students

in various educational disciplines and to explore various outcomes of student

involvement (Burch, Heller, Burch, Freed, & Steed, 2015; Foreman & Retallick, 2013;

Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005; Pike & Kuh, 2005; Pike, Smart, & Ethington, 2012).

Additionally, student involvement theory has used in both qualitative and quantitative

methods. Notwithstanding the growing body of literature on counseling students and

professional legislative advocacy, most publications in this area remain theoretical

(Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005).

Burch et al. (2015) explored themes related to social justice involvement utilizing

Astin’s Student Involvement Theory. The purpose of the study was to develop and

psychometrically test a student involvement survey (four-factor model of student

involvement). They hypothesized that student involvement consists of the separate

constructs of emotional involvement, physical involvement, cognitive involvement in

class, and cognitive involvement out of class. In this quantitative study, Burch et al.

(2015) analyzed the correlation between fraternity/sorority involvement and academic

performance of 214 undergraduate business students at a Southern University. As a

result, the authors developed a theoretically grounded student involvement scale that

measures course level student involvement, and they suggested that educators can

enhance “…their teaching by investigating involvement as a primary contributor to

learning outcomes” (p. 224). They also said that they believed that educators should

track student involvement at the course level and provide detailed feedback to improve

programs for student involvement.

Literature Review Related to Key Variables and/or Concepts

The Development and Evolution of Legislative Advocacy

The counseling profession emerged in the late 1890s out of humanitarian concerns

to improve the lives of children and young adults in communities (Gladding & Newsome,

2010). According to Glosoff and Schwarz-Whittaker (2013), counselors were labeled

social reformers during the late 1800s. The researchers indicated that Lysander

S. Richards coined the term vocophers or counselor in 1881 and published the Vocophy.

The Vocophy detailed steps to successful career practices based on an individual’s

interest and tips from successful leaders to influence occupation success.

The 1900s called for a need for community counselors in settings outside of the

school or university (Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker, 2013). Three major contributors to

this movement were Frank Parson, Jesse B. Davis, and Clifford Beers (Gladding &

Newsome, 2010; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). Parson is known as the father of

vocational counseling for his organization of the Bureau of Vocational Guidance in which

young men were trained to become counselors and managers (Zunker, 2002). Davis was

the first to provide a systematic school guidance program (Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker,

2013). According to Gladding and Newsome (2010), Beers reported on the inhumane

treatment of individuals in asylums and advocated for better treatment of individuals in

mental health institutes. This was a result of the multiple hospitalizations Beers

experienced due to symptoms of mental illness. Additionally, Beers established the first

outpatient mental health clinic in 1913 in New Haven, Connecticut (Gladding &

Newsome, 2010). While these pioneers did not contribute to legislative advocacy, their

efforts in community counseling paved the way for professional advocacy.

The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 documented the first counseling legislation

adopted by the federal government (Hillison, 1987). According to Hillison, The

SmithHughes Act was the first piece of substantial legislation that was passed related to

school counseling. The Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933 provided vocational counselors with

a national employment system to help return unemployed workers to the workforce

(Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker, 2013). The authors asserted that the George-Dean Act of

1936 allocated 14 million dollars for vocational education. In 1938, the Inception of

Occupational and Information Guidance Services Bureau provided counselors with

resources to match people with occupations (Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker, 2013).

However, no formal legislation focused on the mental health needs of the population

served.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH; 2016), the Veteran’s

Administration provided guidance services for veterans in 1944 and employed counselors

to assist. The George-Barden Act of 1946 increased vocational funding to $29 million

(NIMH, 2016). According to Glosoff and Schwarz-Whittaker (2013), that same year,

NIMH was established to provide training stipends to doctoral students, and the National

Mental Health Act was passed. The National Mental Health Act was the first legislation

to focus on mental health and made mental health a national priority (Glosoff &

SchwarzWhittaker, 2013). The National Mental Health Act of 1946 addressed the need

for school and vocational counselors to focus on the mental health of those they served.

The Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1945 provided funds to higher education to train

rehabilitation professionals (Elliot & Leung, 2005). The allocated funds allowed for the

expansion of rehabilitation facilities, extended services to persons with mental illness and

mental retardation, upgraded state rehabilitation agencies, and provided funding for

research. However, funds extended services only to persons with mental illness and

mental retardation.

In 1952, four independent associations -- The National Vocational Guidance

Association (NVGA), the National Association of Guidance and Counselor Trainers

(NAGCT), the Student Personnel Association for Teacher Education (SPATE), and the

American College Personnel Association (ACPA) -- joined to form what is now known as

ACA in hopes of providing a greater professional voice (ACA, 2017). ACA was first

named the American Personnel and Guidance Association (APGA) and the American

Association for Counseling and Development (AACD) before changing its name to the

American Counseling Association (ACA). The American Counseling Association was

the first national professional organization for counselors inside and outside academic

and vocational settings (Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker, 2013). The Mental Health Study

Act was enacted in 1955 to improve and expand programs for mental health and public

health (NIMH, 2016). Furthermore, the National Defense Act of 1958 was established to

identify youth with strong mathematics and science skills to be recruited to work in the

space program. Still, the need for professional counselors that focused on mental health

issues was not identified.

Universities were authorized to improve counselor training in 1962 due to the

enactment of Title V-D (NIMH, 2016). The Community Mental Health Centers Acts of

1963 established more than 2,000 mental health centers and provided an opportunity for

counselors to be employed outside of educational settings (Sharfstein, 2000). In 1964,

the Amendment to the National Defense Education Act expanded and improved vital

funding for school counselors (Glosoff & Schwarz-Whittaker, 2013). Additionally, more

funding was allotted through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to

ensure that low-income primary and secondary schools established a national curriculum.

Thus far, the need to address students’ mental health and the impact of mental health on

student learning was not addressed. For example, in 1972, the 1964 Civil Rights Act

added Title IX of the Education Amendments which mandated that no one could be

discriminated against, including through sex-biased appraisal (Glosoff &

SchwarzWhittaker, 2013). Additionally, Public Law 94-142 was enacted in 1975 to

guarantee a free appropriate public education to each child with a disability.

Public Law 85-864, the National Defense Education Act of 1958, provided

funding for guidance and counseling graduate institutes and expanded guidance and

testing programs in schools, causing an increase in university enrollment in counseling

graduate programs (West, Osborn, & Bubenzer, 2003, pp. 28-29). Furthermore, pioneers

Robert Stripling and Bill Dugan embarked on a quest for national professional standards

for the preparation of counselors in the 1960s. Additionally, West et al. (2003) asserted

that Stripling worked to secure a counselor licensing law in the state of Florida. In

collaboration with Joe Wittmer, the two professors lobbied the state Senate

representatives in Florida for the rights of professional counselors to practice.

According to West et al. (2003), Culbreath Cook was arrested and booked in 1972

in Virginia for practicing psychology without a license. However, with the support of

fellow counselors, Carl Swanson, who was a counselor, attorney, and Episcopal priest, the

judge determined that Cook was well within his rights to practice as the definition of

counselor was different from the definition of the practice of psychology. The verdict of

the Cook case and the passage of the first counselor licensure law in Virginia were vital to

the counseling profession as they allowed counselors to practice as separate professionals

without being accused of practicing psychology without a psychology

license.

The emergence of the 2000s increased legislative enactments that greatly

impacted the counseling profession. For example, the Veterans Benefits, Healthcare, and

Information Technology Act of 2006 Section 2 provided language that included licensed

mental health counselors and marriage and family counselors as mental health providers

(Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). Additionally, Section 203 allowed for the use of

telecounseling as an approved method of mental health counseling and Section 205

expanded services to civilian counselors.

According to the ACA Government Affairs (2017) web page, in 2008, the Paul

Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and the Addiction Equity Act was

enacted to supersede the 1996 Mental Health Parity law. The language within each Act

ensured that large group health plans could not impose caps on mental health benefits.

The December 21, 2017, edition of Counseling Today announced the authorizing of the

Veteran’s Health Care Improvement Act and the 21st Century Cure Act. The Veteran’s

Health Care Improvement Act of 2016, H.R. 6416, allowed doctoral-level licensed

professional counselors to gain employment with the Department of Veteran Affairs.

Before the Veteran’s Health Care Improvement Act was signed by President Barack

Obama, the language in the hiring contract for the Department of Veteran’s Affairs

excluded licensed professional counselors. On December 13, 2016, President Obama

closed out the year by signing the 21st Century Cures Act, providing vital funding for

mental health research and prevention.

As the profession of counseling continues to strive to be a reputable among other

mental health professions, leaders have suggested that more legislative advocacy is

needed to ensure the viability of the profession (Collins et al., 2015; Cook et al., 2015;

Dollarhide, et al. 2016; Ratts & Wayman, 2014). Some have argued that counseling

programs need to implement courses that make students aware of legislative advocacy

and how to become involved in legislative advocacy (Cooks et al., 2015; Ratts &

Pederson, 2014).

While numerous federal acts have been approved by the government to maintain

and improve services for school counselors, vocational counselors, and the public, there

remains a lack of legislation which includes professional counselors in the language

(Ratts & Pederson, 2014). According to Glosoff and Schwarz-Whittaker (2013), such

exclusions (a) continue to block professional counselors from gaining Medicare and

third-party insurance reimbursement; (b) deny the public access to affordable mental

health care; and (c) deny counselors the ability to diagnosis and assess in some states.

According to Sweeney (2015), preparing counselors-in-training at the academic level to

become involved in advocacy for the profession of counseling increases social justice

awareness, makes students better advocates after graduation, and promotes an affinity for

legislative advocacy beyond graduation (Kress & Barrio-Minton, 2015).

Education and Training for Counseling Students

Training counselors regarding social justice and professional legislative advocacy

are becoming increasingly important for the profession of counseling. Establishing

educational standards across counseling academic programs provides an opportunity to

infuse the topic into the counseling curriculum. Stripling contributed to the counseling

field in 1981 by providing leadership that led to the establishment of the Council of

Accreditation for Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) (Remley &

Herlihy, 2015). CACREP is the accrediting body for counseling programs and its

specialties in the United States (CACREP, 2017; West et. al., 2003). Educational

requirements for counselor licensure vary across states, but CACREP national

educational standards ensure that professional counselors receive similar preparation.

Adopting a model similar to the Scientist-Practitioner-Advocacy Training Model

(Mallinckrodt et al., 2014) or the Scholar-Practitioner-Leadership Model (McClintock,

2003) at the academic level could be beneficial in assisting counseling students and

counseling programs in fostering a life-long commitment to leadership and advocacy.

According to Toporek et al. (2009) counselors possess key skills such as critical thinking,

active listening, ability to assess and dialogue, as well as other skills to provide a sound

foundation for legislative advocacy. Toporek et al. (2009) said, “…human relations,

group dynamics, assessment, multicultural issues, and lifespan development…” courses

teach counseling students skills that are transferable; making counselors great advocates

(p. 265).

The entire curriculum that prepares counseling students to be professional

counselors also provides them with skills to be advocates. Cook et al. (2015) said that

theory courses provide evidenced-based approaches for counselors to use when providing

services to multiple client populations. Students learn underlying professional principles

through ethics courses. Counseling techniques courses emphasize various interventions

that could be used to resolve societal issues, thus preparing counseling graduate students

for legislative involvement. Human development courses provide an understanding of

human physiology and human behaviors and this information could be used by

counselors to convince legislators to pass laws that benefit society. Cook et al. (2015)

said that research courses prepare counseling students to interpret data, conduct statistical

analysis, and explore current research that can address problems plaguing society and the

counseling profession.

Brubaker, Puig, Reese, and Young (2010) agreed with Cook et al. (2015) that

counseling theory courses prepare counseling students for social justice advocacy. The

authors cautioned educators that if social justice is not infused into their pedagogy and

teaching content, students may fail to understand how their theory of choice could guide

in developing a professional identity. More importantly, students may be unaware of how

their theory of choice may alleviate or perpetuate oppression. Brubaker et al. (2010)

provided a case example demonstrating how counselor educators can integrate social

justice into a counseling theory course to increase social and counseling awareness and

how students can acquire knowledge and skills necessary to become social change

advocates.

Bemak et al. (2011) explained the implementation of the Counseling and

Development Program at George Mason University. The authors illustrated the

successful integration of multicultural social justice values into an entire graduate

counselor training program. The authors conducted a two-year study with George Mason

University faculty to develop the counseling program. As a result of the two-year study,

the counseling graduate program was able to develop a mission statement, admission

criteria, and course content with a multicultural social justice focus. The mission

statement is based on Davis’ definition of social justice. According to Davis (1996),

social justice is “a basic value and desired goal in democratic societies and include

equitable and fair access to societal institutions, laws, resources [and] opportunities,

without arbitrary limitations based on observed, or interpretation of, differences in age,

color, culture, physical or mental disability, education, gender, income, language, national

origin, race, religion, or sexual orientation” (Bemak et al., 2011, p. 1). Students are

required to attend an orientation and agree to the mission of counseling graduate program

at George Mason University. The course content was developed to infuse multicultural

social justice into each course. The university also infused mentorship and community

involvement to foster student development toward multicultural social justice and move

students to action.

Pieterse et al. (2008) examined multicultural coursework and syllabi of 54

counseling and counseling psychology training programs in the United States, of which

29 (52%) were doctoral programs and 25 (46%) were masters-level programs. The

researchers analyzed course goals and objectives, required texts, course content, and

methods of grade assessment. Reading lists were not reviewed in this study. The

researchers found that 59% of syllabi stated goals related to social justice and 48%

included content matter related to social inequity. Syllabi that incorporated multicultural

competencies and focused on oppression were determined by raters to infuse a significant

focus on multiculturalism or social justice. The raters of the data determined that 92% of

the syllabi infused multiculturalism or social justice. Course syllabi focused more on

multicultural training with little emphasis on social justice issues, more specifically,

advocacy for the profession. The authors did not indicate whether the syllabi included

student involvement in multicultural or social justice activities.

Zalaquett et al. (2008) examined the impact of a multicultural/social justice

professional organizational development project. The aim of the study was to examine

the impact of multicultural/social justice professional organizational development

initiatives at five undisclosed universities throughout the United States. The initiative

was designed to assist counseling faculty members, administrators, and students in

developing institutional change that would coincide with the multicultural/social justice

movement in the fields of counseling and education. The national tour of the five

universities was composed of lectures, videos, live demonstrations, as well as small and

large group meetings. The average number of participants at each university was 100

with a range of 50 to 200. Participants included individuals who were enrolled in or

affiliated with K-12 teacher education programs as well as counseling psychology and

marriage and family therapy graduate programs. Upon conclusion of the national tour,

one faculty member from each university (4 female; 1 male) was randomly selected to

participate in a semi-structured interview that was aligned with data analysis procedures

recommended by Strauss and Corbin (1998). The interview questions addressed gender;

the size of the institution; the number of students, faculty, administrators, and community

members that attended a 1 or 1.5 day on campus training; the length of the training

program; the impact on participants; and suggestions for further multicultural/social

justice professional-organizational development interventions. The researchers also

assessed four institutional categories: characteristics and overall evaluation, support of

multicultural social justice education, the impact of the national tour on students, and the

impact of the national tour on faculty members. The results of the study indicated that

each program’s policies and evaluation procedures infused multicultural social justice.

The degree of organizational support for multicultural/social justice issues also increased.

The results further indicated gains in the participants’ knowledge of multicultural

competence.

Social justice and advocacy are considered to be a principle value for counselors.

In a phenomenological study by Dollarhide, Clevenger, Dogan, and Edwards (2016), six

counselor educators and four doctoral level counseling students were interviewed to

describe their experiences of social justice identity and to identify from their responses

consistent themes that describe the experiences of social justice identity development.

Utilizing Moustakas’ (1994) phenomenological analysis, four themes emerged based on

the participants’ lived experience of developing a social justice identity. The first theme

was that participants’ social justice awareness emerged from family values, personal

experiences with oppression or discrimination, or witnessing oppression or

discrimination. The second theme encompassed the changes in four domains: context,

cognition, behavior, and affect. Context refers to change in dialogue around social justice

and increased community involvement. Participants’ cognition of self-awareness,

learning, and understanding of the dynamics of oppression and cognitive humility were

increased. Participants’ behavior moved from general awareness of social inequality to a

specific population. No specific outcomes were addressed by the authors. Participants’

affective and emotional reality, their feelings about the meaning of their activities, as well

as their purpose in life and identity changed as they experienced a deepening of the

meaning of their social justice efforts. The third theme was how participants developed

their social justice identity. The fourth theme was the feedback loop by which

participants attributed to their continuous social justice identity. According to Senge

(1990), a feedback loop refers to a system structure that causes output from one theme to

eventually influence input to that same theme. In other words, the first theme influences

the second and so on. The authors concluded that counselors have a moral obligation to

address societal issues that detrimentally affect clients, students, and the community and

to end the silence of oppression.

To address the disparity of developing a social justice identity, in 2001-2002, Jane

Goodman’s American Counseling Association (ACA) presidential initiative established

the Task Force on Advocacy Competencies. The Task Force was charged with

developing ethical and effective guidelines to ensure counselors and counselors-

intraining demonstrate abilities, understanding, and knowledge to carry out counseling

advocacy on three levels: clients/students, school/community, and the public arena

(Cooks et al., 2015). Each level is comprised of two domains that specify advocacy with

and on behalf of the one or more of the three levels. According to Ratts and Hutchins

(2009), the client/student level uses “direct counseling to empower individuals” (p. 270)

and advocacy is provided at the individual level. The school/community level focuses

more on systems advocacy and collaboration. The public arena involves bringing

awareness to the public regarding societal and systemic barriers that impact human

development and advocating for policies that change the status quo.

In 2002, the Advocacy Competencies were completed but were not accepted by

the ACA Governing Council until 2003. The Advocacy Competencies illustrate that

counselors act with or act on behalf of clients/students, school/community, and the public

arena (Lewis, Arnold, House, & Toporek, 2003). Legislative advocacy is one component

of the advocacy competencies that have a direct impact on society, political issues,

economics, and cultural influences on human development. Hence, the Advocacy

Competencies provide a description of how counselors and counselors-in-training can

become involved in advocacy and empowerment on multiple levels.

According to ACA’s CEO, Richard Yep (2010), ACA provides annual training

oriented toward advocacy for both students and professionals. The training focuses on

advocacy for the profession; however, skills are interchangeable for non-professional

issues (Terrazas, Todd, Harp, & Nickel, 2016). Furthermore, participants develop skills

that foster confidence in addressing advocacy needs for clients, students, the public, and

the profession. Terrazas et al. (2016) indicated that resources for advocacy are available

via the ACA website (http://www.counseling.org).

Prevalence and Types of Advocacy Today

Historical factors, professional identity, credentialing, and advocacy within the

counseling profession have been explored by various researcher (Cooks et al., 2015; Ratts

& Pederson, 2014; Ratts & Wayman, 2014; Reiner et al., 2013). Scholars have noted that

professional counselors have been called upon to educate the public and policymakers

regarding the benefits and uniqueness of the counseling profession. A call to action has

been sounded among various professional counseling organizations in an attempt to

establish a unified professional identity to achieve recognition across professions and to

secure third-party reimbursement for services, Medicare reimbursement (affecting a

viable income), accessibility to seniors and members of rural communities, funding for

school counselors, and portability of licenses held by counselors from one state to another

(Barstow, 2014; Ratts & Hutchins, 2009; 2011; Terrazas et al., 2016).

Based on my observation and A. Terrazas (personal communication, November

02, 2017), the ACA Institute for Leadership Training is an opportunity for ACA members

and non-counseling affiliates to enhance their leadership and professional legislative

advocacy skills during a 4-day training experience. The training is comprised of lectures,

videos, live demonstrations, as well as small and large group meetings. The first two

days participates learn leadership and professional legislative advocacy skills. Each year,

session content is developed to address the current issues to be discussed with legislators.

However, the main content was designed to focus on ethical leadership, fiduciary

responsibilities, and experiential activities geared toward legislative advocacy at local,

state, and federal levels. Lecture and live demonstrations are the two primary methods of

learning how to explain current legislative bills to elected legislators. White papers are

disseminated to describe the legislative bills.

On the third day, participants are bused to Capitol Hill for a pre-scheduled

meeting with legislators from their states to apply the knowledge learned from the two

days of training. Participates can expect to answer questions pertaining to bills and how

the legislation impacts the community. Some legislators are already knowledgeable about

the issue. For those who are not, participants are encouraged to leave the white paper

with the legislator or his or her representative for further review. Participants are told that

the most important factor when addressing legislators is to remember to relax and explain

their stories. As Terrazas has stated at the last four institutes, “You are the expert

educating a person on a topic that is familiar to you.”

On the last day, participants report their experiences with legislators. They are

able to identify which bills legislators favor. Expert speaker and legislative leaders in the

field explain follow up procedures participates can apply when they return home, for

example, writing a letter or email message or calling the legislators to thank them for

their time.

ACA staff members and leaders have campaigned and met with legislators on

Capitol Hill advocating for the inclusion of mental health access to seniors (S. 562),

funding for school counselors, increased hiring of school counselors, and Medicare

reimbursement for LPCs and MFTs (H. R. 2759). In 2014, a bill was introduced in the

U.S. Senate that called for adding counselors to Veterans Administration training

programs and recognizing counseling doctoral degrees. A number of proposed Senate

bills were discussed during the ACA 2014 Institute for Leadership Training (Terrazas,

2016). Counselors within ACA have converged on the U.S. Capitol to meet with

members of Congress for the past seven years to tell their stories in hopes their

representatives would agree to cosponsor legislation that is favorable to counselors and

their clients (Terrazas et al., 2016).

Scott Barstow was an ACA staff member from 2005 until 2014. Prior to his work

with ACA, he served as Director of Congressional Affairs for the American

Psychological Association and has more than 20 years of experience working in

Washington, DC (www.pcpcc.org, 2017). He has published over 90 newsletter articles in

Counseling Today describing bills that were introduced into the U.S. House of

Representatives and Senate. Mostwere not enacted (ACA, 2017). Barstow’s quarterly

publications in Counseling Today, “The Two-Minute Advocate” and “Washington

Updates” have focused on legislative issues salient to the counseling profession (Barstow

& Holt, 2010). For example, Barstow and Holt (2010) called for action by asking ACA

members to contact congressional offices to cosponsor two separate House of

Representative bills. In 2013, Barstow highlighted several pieces of legislation as high

priority federal policy issues for the counseling profession. Barstow’s informative

columns have provided counselors with vital information regarding bills introduced to the

U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate for the advancement of the counseling

profession.

I developed the following timeline to illustrate the chronological history of

legislative advocacy salient to the field of counseling. Content within the timeline

provides a description of the bills introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives and

the Senate. Additionally, this timeline provides a foundation for counseling students to

explore the history of legislative advocacy within the counseling profession. Not all bills

within the timeline were enacted into law. However, the timeline illustrates the

legislative advocacy history of the counseling profession and includes the most prevalent

types of legislation salient to the profession of counseling. Only acts that focused on

mental health counseling are included.

President’s

Commission

on Mental

Health

- The

Mental

Health

Insurance

Parity Act

- HIPPA

- The Older

American

Act

The Veterans

Benefits,

Healthcare,

and

Information

Technology

- Student

Support Act

-Support Mental

Health in

Schools Act

- Veterans

Act of 2015

- Veterans

Equal

Access Act

Figure 1. Historical timeline of professional counseling legislative advocacy.

Societal Implications for Student Training in Legislative Advocacy

When properly trained, “…counselors can make great advocates” (Toporek et al.,

2009, p. 265). According to Nilsson and Schmidt (2005), preparing counseling students

for professional legislative advocacy during the time students spend in academia could

help develop their skills to organize rallies, create ways to protest, form grass-root

organizations, communicate with legislators and policymakers, and understand how to

collaborate with other stakeholders. Awareness of legislative trends helps students

identify issues important to meet the counseling needs of marginalized groups and

promote multicultural/social justice advocacy competencies inherent to the American

Counseling Association’s Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014). According to Section F.7.e,

counselors, counselor education programs, counselor educators, and students have a

professional and ethical obligation to challenge the status quo and reduce or eliminate

barriers that impede client progress (Pope & Vasquez, 2016; Welfel, 2015). Stylianos and

Kehyayan (2012) agreed that legislative advocacy promotes “substantive systemic gains”

for the public arena (p. 116). For example, legislative advocacy can ensure that

individuals who reside in rural communities receive access to affordable mental health

care and help local schools receive funding to promote the equal education of all

students.

Being a change agent for social injustice and inequity at the client level,

community level, and public area/governmental level should be an integral part of the

learning experience of counseling graduate students (ACA, 2014; Kress & Minton, 2014;

Ratts & Pedersen, 2014). According to Haight (1982) and Myers et al. (2002),

counselors can be more effective advocates for clients when the profession is recognized

by legislators and policymakers. “It is vital that …counseling students become skillful,

knowledgeable, and politically active to continue to have an impact on the passage of

helpful legislation and on policies makers” (Toporek et al., 2009, p. 266).

Summary

Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the rationale for this study. Current

research on professional legislative advocacy has shown that advocacy is a core value of

counselors and that legislative advocacy is becoming an important part of a counselor’s

professional identity (Lating et al., 2010; Ratts & Hutchins, 2009; Ratts & Wayman,

2014). My literature review strategy included identifying key words and key phrases

using a Boolean/phrase broad search with no combined categories without differentiating

search fields. The conceptual framework guiding this inquiry is based on Astin’s (1999)

theory of student involvement which was summarized. I provided a summary of other

studies that utilized Astin’s theory as well as assumptions about the theory. I gave a

detailed description of the development and evolution of legislative advocacy along with

available education and training. I detailed the prevalence and types of advocacy used by

counselors and discussed social implications. The methodological orientation of this

study is described in Chapter 3.

Chapter 3: Research Methods

Introduction

In this study, I explored the lived experiences of individuals who had been

involved with professional legislative advocacy while they were a counseling graduate

student. Participants were either currently counseling graduate students or had completed

their counseling degree programs in the past 2 years. Participants had either attended an

ACA Institute for Leadership Training or a similar state-level institute in the past while

they still were counseling graduate students. I did not seek to identify, inform, or

describe the experiences of participants during the Institute for Leadership Training;

instead, I sought to describe the meaning counseling students ascribed to their

experiences of involvement in professional legislative advocacy. I selected the

population based on their involvement in professional legislative advocacy.

In qualitative research, researchers use their own experiences to inform analysis

of the data they gather from participants. I have attended three ACA Institutes for

Leadership Training and my experience were important in completing this study, but I

was aware of my biases and bracketed them to avoid imposing my own views on the

experiences of the participants in this study. Additionally, I remained in the role of a

student researcher until the dissertation was completed, and I did not reply to any

questions from participants regarding my expertise or experiences in the area of

professional legislative advocacy. Use of these practices, I believe, helped me to produce

a comprehensive and accurate assessment of participants’ perceptions regarding

counseling students motivation for professional legislative advocacy engagement.

I found a qualitative inquiry that incorporated interpretative phenomenological

analysis (see Gill, 2014; Golsworthy & Coyle, 2001; Nel, 2006; Smith, Flowers, &

Larkin, 2009) to be useful in uncovering specific themes that involve counseling students

in pursuing professional legislative advocacy. The aim of this study was to identify the

meaning counseling students place on advocating for the profession. Also, factors that

influence legislative advocacy and methods of gaining entry to legislative advocacy were

explored. The literature review demonstrated there is a paucity of empirical data

available on the motivation and attitude of counseling students toward legislative

advocacy for the counseling profession as an act of social change advocacy (Briggs et al.,

2011; Remley, & Herlihy, 2016). Hence, the purpose of this hermeneutic

phenomenological study was to explore the lived experiences of counseling graduate

students and recent graduates who had been involved in professional legislative advocacy

through attending an ACA Institute for Leadership Training or at the state level.

In this chapter, I review the research methodology that I used to describe the lived

experiences of counseling students and recent graduates who had participated in

legislative advocacy for the counseling profession. Using interpretative

phenomenological analysis allowed the study to remain more exploratory in nature,

documenting the lived subjective experiences of the participants (Finlay, 2012; Reason, &

Bradbury, 2008; Smith et al., 2009). It also helped me to create themes to understand

counseling student motivation and attitudes toward professional legislative advocacy

involvement (Finlay, 2012; Reason, & Bradbury, 2008; Smith et al., 2009). In the

chapter, I also address participant selection, sample saturation criteria, the methodology

used for recruiting participants, and the instrumentation for data collection. A detailed

account of interview procedures used is discussed, along with the methodology used for

analyzing data. I also explain the procedures used for maintaining credibility,

confirmability, transferability, and dependability of the data (Hall, 2009).

Research Design and Rationale

I used qualitative research methodology in this study to examine the individual

lived experiences of master’s and doctoral level counseling students or recent graduates

who had graduated within the past 2 years who participated in professional legislative

advocacy. The primary goal was to summarize the full meaning of the participants’

experiences as shared in their own words (Marshall & Rossman, 1999). Qualitative

researchers seek to uncover themes by utilizing questioning (Creswell, 2013).

Hermeneutic phenomenology is an approach utilized by qualitative researchers to identify

phenomena through the perception of the individual based on his or her experience with

the world (Lester, 1999). The purpose of this hermeneutic phenomenology study was to

better understand the lived professional legislative advocacy experiences of master’s and

doctoral level counseling students who participated in legislative advocacy for the

counseling professional (Creswell, 2013; Husserl, Smith, & Osborn, 2013).

Research Question

What meaning do counseling graduate students and recent graduates ascribe to

their experiences of involvement in professional legislative advocacy?

Interview Questions

I based interviews around one central question and 13 subquestions. In my initial

interaction with participants at the beginning of the interviews, I explained how

professional legislative advocacy is described in the counseling literature, and then I

asked them questions. The central question was, What meaning do you ascribe to your

experience of professional legislative advocacy as a counseling student? I asked the

following subquestions if they had not already been addressed by participants in

responding to the initial question:

1. How important to you is legislative advocacy for the counseling profession?

2. What was your level of awareness of the essential elements of legislative

advocacy prior to speaking with legislators?

3. What has been most rewarding during your experiences talking to legislators

or their representatives?

4. What has been most difficult during your experiences talking to legislators or

their representatives?

5. What has been most disappointing during your experiences talking to

legislators or their representatives?

6. To what extent does you believe the time and effort you spent talking to

legislators or their representatives was worthwhile?

7. Did any courses or experiences during your counseling graduate program

prepare you to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators or

their representatives?

8. To what extent do your personal values and beliefs drive your political action

on behalf of the counseling profession?

9. To what do you attribute your passion for being involved in advocating for the

counseling profession?

10. How would you evaluate the preparation you received prior to talking with

legislators or their representatives?

11. Looking back on your experiences, is there anything that could have prepared

you better for talking to legislators or their representatives?

12. What are some of the obstacles to counseling students becoming involved in

professional legislative advocacy and how can those obstacles be overcome?

13. Is there anything else you would like to add? Role of the Researcher

I am a national certified counselor and an approved clinical supervisor with the

National Board of Certified Counselors. Also, I am a licensed professional counselor in

the State of Michigan and a clinical traumatologist who maintains a small private

practice. I conducted one-to-one interviews with each participant using open-ended

questions included in the interview protocol (Baker & Edwards, 2012). Interviewing

participants can be a daunting process for both the researcher and the participant (Sloan

& Bowe, 2014). I did not have to follow up with any participants with additional

questions.

I was aware of my biases during the development of the interview questions

(Baker & Edwards, 2012; Dworkin, 2012). As a professional legislative advocate, I had

been involved in legislative advocacy at the local, state, and federal levels. I am

cognizant of my biases. As I conducted this study, I remained in the role of student

researcher in my interactions with participants to eliminate being perceived as an expert

in this area. Therefore, I incorporated member checking strategies from committee

members, informants, and colleagues to ensure my questions and data result

interpretations were written in a nonbiased manner (Creswell, 2013; Smith, Flowers, &

Larkin, 2009). I also consulted with my dissertation committee members during the

entire dissertation process. The process I used for the analysis of the data I collected took

into consideration any potential bias I had that could have influenced my objectivity. My

goal was to present myself and the results in an objective manner.

Methodology

Participant Selection Logic

The sampling methods selected for this qualitative research study were

convenient and snowball sampling. Convenient sampling is utilized when researching

subjects of the population that are easily accessible to the researcher (Etikan, 2016).

According to Griffith, Morris, and Thakar (2016) a few originally contacted participants

are selected at random by the researcher because they are relevant to the study; then they

supply the researcher with an introduction to the subsequent set of potential participants.

To ensure participants in this study have the characteristics I am seeking, I plan to select

participants using criteria.

Criterion strategies are utilized as an assurance of data quality (Creswell, 2013).

This sampling strategy is used when specific indicators are imposed in order for

individuals to participate in a study (Maxwell, 2013; Polkinghorne, 2005). To participate

in this study, individuals had be currently enrolled as masters or doctoral level students or

had to be recent professionals who had graduated within the last two years. All

participants must have been a graduate student in a counseling graduate program at the

time they participated in professional legislative advocacy and they must have been a

member of the American Counseling Association.

I recruited volunteers using convenient and snowball sampling. First, I contacted

all the people I knew personally who had attended the ACA Institute for Leadership

Training who I had email addresses or telephone numbers for and asked them if they

would be willing to participate in my study. I also asked them to send my request to

others they knew who had been involved in professional legislative advocacy as a

counseling student. I also posted a request for participants on CESNET (see Appendix B).

Eight participants were recruited to participate in the study. The small sample size

allowed me to gather rich descriptions of the participants’ lived experiences with the

phenomenon through in-depth interview procedures (Baker & Edwards, 2012; Dworkin,

2012; Lester, 1999). According to Dworkin (2012), saturation is reached when the

information gathered does not yield any new themes or patterns. After eight participants

had been interviewed, I consulted with my committee chair and determined that

saturation of the data had been reached (Baker & Edwards, 2012; Creswell, 2009).

Procedures for Recruitment, Participation, and Data Collection

Qualitative data are collected primarily in spoken or written language rather than

numerical. According to Janesick (2011), possible data sources are interviews with

participants, observations, documents, and artifacts. The spoken data are transformed

into written text for analytic use. For this study, the participants’ spoken interviews were

transcribed into written text. I examined the written text to identify emerging themes for

the data.

Electing to interview participants requires purposive and iterative strategies.

Production of interview data requires awareness of the complexity of self-reports and the

relation between experience and language expression (Baker & Edwards, 2012; Janesick,

2011). In addition, to generate interview data of sufficient breadth and depth, practical

skills and time are necessary. For the purpose of this study, I focused on interpretative

phenomenological analysis data collection and management protocols utilizing interviews

with participants. Smith (2011) ascertained that structured and semi-structured

interviews are the proposed methods for interpretative phenomenological analysis data

collection. I conducted semi-structured interviews with the participants to allow for new

ideas to be brought up during the interview (Smith, 2011).

I conducted all of the interviews using the interview protocol set forth earlier in

this chapter utilizing distance-based electronic methods such as video conferencing

(Amato, 2012; Barker & Langdridge, 2010; Finn, Tunariu, & Lee, 2012; Sheff, 2014).

Using electronic data collection allowed me to interview participants throughout the

United States. According to Salmons and Salmons (2015), electronic interviews provide

more openness and candor to participants than face-to-face interviews.

Individual interviews were conducted with participants in order to understand the

meaning they ascribed to their participation in professional legislative advocacy (Baker &

Edwards, 2012). This approach has been used in other small sample studies because it

helps to derive the richest possible data (Bazeley, 2013; Murtagh, Lopes, & Lyons 2011;

Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins, 2012; Patton, 2015).

All interviews were video recorded via a secured laptop computer (Bryman,

2012). Participants were sent a Zoom link to use for participation. Zoom technology has

features that record the meeting. The recordings were accessed at a later date for

transcribing. I activated a second recording device in case the Zoom recording failed.

Participants were offered an interview by telephone in the event of unforeseen challenges

to using Zoom. Telephone interviews were captured utilizing the secure application

known as HD Audio Recorder Pro. This method records the interview, in real time,

straight to a mobile device. When an interview was conducted by telephone, I utilized a

second recording device in case the first recording device failed.

The interviews were between 30 and 60 minutes to reduce fatigue and to avoid

over-burdening participants (Bryman, 2012; Salmons & Salmons, 2015). Before the

interviews were recorded, participants were provided significant information in the

informed consent document regarding the purpose of the study including the definition of

professional legislative advocacy found in the counseling literature. Participants were

allotted time to ask salient questions prior to conducting the interview. According to

Turner (2010), allowing participants to ask questions prior to the interview helps to

establish rapport. The script which included the protocol for my interviews and the

definition of professional legislative advocacy is included in the interview protocol.

Creswell (2013) said that phenomenological researchers must develop a vigilant

balance between open-ended possibilities and enough contextual structure in the

interview questions to product thought-provoking, rich responses. Hence, open-ended

questioning was employed for this study. In the interview process I followed Crawford’s

(2012) suggestions for effective interview strategies by providing clear explanations and

information; using open-ended questions and probes, balancing rapport and neutrality,

and utilizing appropriate body language. I used active listening, probing, as well as

reflective skills during the interviews, reflecting back what had been stated, allowing the

participants to provide feedback to determine the precision of their statements.

I utilized journal writing to ensure my thoughts were captured throughout the

process. Janesick (2011) noted journal writing has an extensive and reliable history in

long-term qualitative research. Journaling is beneficial in refining and understanding the

researcher’s reflections; understanding the responses of the participants; providing a tool

to communicate between the researcher and participants as a form of triangulation of

data; and serving as a tool for researchers to understand their work as researchers in a

qualitative study since researchers become experts of their own thoughts and reflection

(Shields, 2006). Journal writing was kept in a methodological journal to prevent lost data

and to maintain secure confidential data.

Data Analysis Plan

Data analysis is matched in accordance with the strategy of inquiry. Strategies of

inquiry for phenomenological research are descriptive and interpretive (Creswell, 2013;

Sloan & Bowe, 2014; Turner, 2010). Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA)

(Gill, 2014; Golsworthy & Coyle, 2001; Nel, 2006; Smith et al., 2009) was useful in

uncovering specific themes relayed by participants related to counseling students and

recent graduates being involved in professional legislative advocacy. Using IPA allowed

the study to remain more exploratory in nature, documenting the lived subjective

experiences of the participants, while also helping to create themes from which to

understand counseling students’ motivation and attitudes toward professional legislative

advocacy (Finlay, 2012; Sloan & Bowe, 2014; Smith et al., 2009). Following the

phenomenological writing structure of Smith et al. (2009) added to the quality of the

study by providing a thick description from the lived experiences of the participants and

through triangulating the data with my experiences and the literature (Creswell, 2013;

Patton, 2015). Smith identified a four-step approach to data analysis: (1) individual

transcripts are read and significant phrases are extracted, (2) emerging themes are

extracted from the data, (3) all themes from all transcripts are collected to connect noted

themes, and (4) the researcher checks to ensure that original transcripts support the

themes as evidenced by the participants’ actual responses.

Two methods were employed to analyze the data. I hand coded the data after each

interview. Additionally, I used NVivo (http://www.qsrinternational.com) during the data

analysis process. NVivo is a software program that is utilized to store data, create files

for coding, and formulate patterns. Hard copies of the transcribed interviews and the

jump drive containing the data will be locked in a fireproof safe in my home office for a

period of five years. Once data analysis was complete, the data was removed from the

computer and jump drive. Information that could possibly be used to identify any of the

participants was kept strictly confidential. Themes that emerged from the participants’

data utilizing NVivo was taken into account in this study.

Issues of Trustworthiness

I maintained trustworthiness using several methods. I listened to the interviews,

transcribed each interview verbatim, and had the data available electronically for

additional review. I used member checking, utilized a peer reviewer, provided

selfdisclosure, disclosed discrepant information, provided rich and thick descriptions of

what participants said in their interviews, as well as kept a reflective journal to ensure

trustworthiness was maintained throughout the study.

Member Checking

I cross-analyzed each transcript with the other transcripts in order to derive

common themes among the participants. The aim was to find shared experiences or

common themes starting with narrow themes and eventually combining those into larger

and broader themes (Morrow, 2005; Onwuegbuzie, Leech, & Collins, 2012). Each theme

included rich descriptions of content and included supported excerpts from the

transcripts.

I gave participants the opportunity to verify what they had said in the interview in

two ways. First, sent each participant a summary of his or her interview that I wrote after

the interview was completed and asked participants to respond. Second, after I had

extracted the themes from all of the interviews, I sent the themes to participants and

asked them to respond to the themes and add any additional comments they had. I took

these steps by email correspondence.

Peer Reviewer

I asked a peer to review what I did throughout the research process. This person

reviewed all interview transcripts and asked questions in regards to the qualitative study.

Enlisting the assistance of a peer reviewer allowed me to maintain an objective

standpoint. It also provided an opportunity to have another person review what I had

written so that it would be understood by others who read it (Creswell 2013).

Self-Disclosure

Janesick (2011) and Creswell (2013) posited that reflective journaling is critical in

qualitative research. As a researcher, I am aware of my biases related to this study.

Being a legislative advocate for the counseling profession is considered a bias. For me,

being a legislative advocate is a way of life. For as long as I can remember, I have fought

or stood up for persons who could not speak for themselves or who had been bullied by

others. It has always been my belief that we are all connected on some level. And, it is

our duty to care for and protect those who cannot care for or protect themselves. When

legislation is enacted that prevents people from seeking services that affect their mental

stability, it is my stance that every mental health professional has an obligation to

advocate to repeal laws that cause emotional distress in the population we serve and the

public arena.

I have been a legislative advocate for the counseling profession for the past four

years. In my experience, I have witnessed the positive effects of professional legislative

advocacy. For example, as a result of advocacy by counselors, Licensed Professional

Counselors have been included in the language for reimbursement from Tricare (the

agency that provides healthcare to retired and active military service members) for mental

health services; and continued funding for school counselors to provide services to

children in school settings K-12 have been accomplished.

I anticipated that counseling students and recent graduates who participated in this

study would communicate their knowledge of professional legislative advocacy

involvement, but would not have a clear understanding of the process of legislative

advocacy. I believed that the participants would have only one experience with

professional legislative advocacy. I also believe that the desire to participate in

professional legislative advocacy probably was motived by a faculty member at the

university of the student. Providing details about how my interpretation of legislative

advocacy has been shaped by my background, experience, culture, and social/political

involvement allowed me to bracket my biases as I interviewed participants, and later

summarized and interpreted what they told me.

Discrepant Information

While presenting evidence for themes I identified in this research project, I made

a commitment to acknowledge any information that contradicted the themes I identified.

At times, the different motivations and attitudes can reveal evidence that is contrary to

the themes (Bazeley, 2014). Discussing discrepant information provides trustworthiness

to the study and helps the researcher remain objective and truthful about the results.

Rich and Thick Descriptions

I provided detailed descriptions of settings and what the participants said. I also

provided quotes from some participants that supported each theme I identified. This

helped make the results more realistic (Creswell, 2013) and helped readers decide for

themselves whether my conclusions regarding the data were appropriate.

Reflective Journal

I used reflective journaling to document my thoughts as I conducted this study.

Content included directions, ideas, dilemmas, and decisions. The purpose of this activity

helped me analyze research activities, put ideas into narrative form, as well as clarify and

direct the coding process while elaborating on processes (Flamez, Lenz, Balkin, & Smith,

2017). By keeping a reflective journal, I was able to constantly remind myself to bracket

my biases to the extent possible and avoid imposing my biases during my analysis of the

data.

Ethical Procedures

To ensure the ethical safety of participants, I provided detailed disclosure

statements to potential participants that explained any implications or potential harm to

participants. Potential participants were sent an initial email message stating the purpose

of the study. When potential participants chose to continue with the research process,

then an additional email was sent with a detailed disclosure statement which included a

consent form. The disclosure and consent document included the purpose of the study,

data collection processes, procedures, a statement that this study posed no potential risk

to participants, a statement that withdrawal from the study was possible at any time, and

an electronic signature line (Creswell, 2013).

According to the ACA Code of Ethics (2014), counselors who conduct research

are to ensure the emotional, physical, or social welfare of participants throughout each

research phase (ACA, G.1.e.). To protect the anonymity of participants, I assigned

pseudonyms. When I described participants’ backgrounds, I did that in a way in which

individual participants could not be identified. Electronic communication has the risk of

being breached and I notified participants of that possibility and indicated to them that I

would take precautions to avoid our email correspondence becoming available to anyone

else.

Due to participants being able to be interviewed in their own environments, there

was very little chance that others would overhear my interviews with them. In this study,

participants were asked to discuss their experiences with professional legislative

advocacy and their meaning-making about counselor legislative advocacy. As a result, I

did not anticipate participants being harmed in any way. No participants experienced any

distress as a result of being interviewed. I had a list of resources to give to participants if

they had become distressed.

The laptop that contained data from this research project and written documents

generated were locked in a file cabinet kept within my home office. Recorded interviews

and the corresponding transcriptions were stored on a password-protected computer and

backed-up on two password-protected jump drives after I had transcribed the data

(Salmons & Salmons, 2015). Securely File Shredder was utilized to scrub data stored on

my laptop (i.e., informed consent and confidentiality and transcribes).

Summary

In conducting this qualitative study, I sought to gain an understanding of the

meaning counseling students and recent graduates ascribe to their involvement in

legislative advocacy for the counseling profession. A qualitative inquiry that incorporates

interpretative phenomenological analysis (Gill, 2014; Golsworthy & Coyle, 2001; Nel,

2006; Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009) was useful in uncovering specific themes for the

involvement of counseling students in professional legislative advocacy. The

methodology section began with an introduction to the problem and rationale that led to

this qualitative paradigm. Information on the selection and ethical treatment of the

participants was included, followed by my role as the researcher. Participants’ raw data

was collected utilizing traditional qualitative procedures to gather rich descriptions of the

participants’ lived experiences with the phenomenon through in-depth interview

procedures with consideration to ethical codes, sample size, and saturation, as well as

transferability (Bakers & Edwards, 2012; Dworkin, 2012; Lester, 1999; Mason, 2010;

Morrow, 2005; Morse, 2010; Murtagh et al., 2011; Smith et al., 2009). Finally,

procedures on how the data will be collected, analyzed, and validated were presented.

This qualitative design was chosen because it allowed me to gain an understanding of the

experiences of master’s and doctoral level counseling students or recent graduates who

graduated within the last two years. Student Involvement Theory framed this study in an

effort to uncover the meaning counseling students and recent graduates ascribe to

professional legislative advocacy. In Chapter 4, I present my findings.

Chapter 4: Results

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the lived experiences of

individuals who had been involved with professional legislative advocacy while they

were counseling graduate students. Participants were either current counseling graduate

students or had completed their counseling degree programs in the past 2 years. All but

one of the participants had attended a recent ACA Institute for Leadership Training. One

participant had attended a similar state association institute. The ACA Institute for

Leadership Training is a 4-day training program related to legislative advocacy and

leadership. The institute was designed to train counselors on how to advocate for the

counseling profession (M. Pope, personal communication, December 19, 2016).

Additionally, participants learn legislative terminology that is most useful when

addressing legislators. Furthermore, detailed descriptions of the current bills that

participants are trained to advocate for are disseminated during large sessions by experts

in the field. Moreover, small group sessions allow participants to learn how to justify

their support of bills, define leadership roles, and explain fiduciary responsibilities.

Additionally, the application of knowledge is applied through later face to face meetings

with legislators on Capitol Hill. Furthermore, By the end of the institute, participants

should be able to distinguish the difference between lobbying and professional advocacy,

define legislative terms, advocate for the profession, identify which legislators are in

favor of pending bills, provide a summary of their experience, and discuss follow up

procedures with legislators.

I did not seek to identify, inform, or describe the experience of participants during

the Institute for Leadership Training; instead, I sought to describe the meaning counseling

students ascribed to their experiences of being involved in professional legislative

advocacy. The population was selected based on their involvement in professional

legislative advocacy. I used hermeneutic phenomenology to identify the essence of the

counseling students’ and recent graduates’ lived experiences. I chose hermeneutics, a

subtype of phenomenology (Lester, 1999), so that I could use the current research

literature as a lens to interpret the participants’ lived experiences. I interviewed eight

counseling students and recent graduates using a semistructured interview process as

outlined in Chapter 3. I used the interview protocol that I outlined in in Chapter 3 when I

interviewed the participants. The central interview question was, What meaning do you

ascribe to your experience of professional legislative advocacy as a counseling student?

Interview Protocol

After asking this initial question, I posed several subquestions to participants.

First, I asked participants about the importance to them of legislative advocacy to the

counseling profession (Question 1). After participants had responded to that question, I

asked the remaining questions (Questions 2-13) if they had not already addressed that

question in previous responses.

1. How important to you is legislative advocacy for the counseling profession?

2. What was your level of awareness of the essential elements of legislative

advocacy prior to speaking with legislators?

3. What has been most rewarding during your experiences talking to legislators

or their representatives?

4. What has been most difficult during your experiences talking to legislators or

their representatives?

5. What has been most disappointing during your experiences talking to

legislators or their representatives?

6. To what extent do you believe the time and effort you spent talking to

legislators or their representatives was worthwhile?

7. Did any courses or experiences during your counseling graduate program

prepare you to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators or

their representatives?

8. To what extent do your personal values and beliefs drive your political action

on behalf of the counseling profession?

9. To what do you attribute your passion for being involved in advocating for the

counseling profession?

10. How would you evaluate the preparation you received prior to talking with

legislators or their representatives?

11. Looking back on your experiences, is there anything that could have prepared

you better for talking to legislators or their representatives?

12. What are some of the obstacles to counseling students becoming involved in

professional legislative advocacy and how can those obstacles be overcome?

13. Is there anything else you would like to add?

In Chapter 4, I present the data from my interviews with eight counseling students

and recent graduates who reported having been involved in legislative advocacy activities

for the counseling profession. I also present details about the setting, demographics of

the participants, and the data collection and analysis processes. Evidence of

trustworthiness and the results of this study are also included in the chapter.

Setting

I began sending invitations to potential participants for this study on April 9,

2018, when I received Institutional Review Board approval (No. 04-09-18-0324998)

from Walden University. Data collection began on April 9, 2018, when I sent the initial

round of invitations to the people I knew personally who had attended the ACA Institute

for Leadership Training for whom I had e-mail addresses or telephone numbers; in these

e-mails, I asked them if they would be willing to participate in my study. Within 2 days,

eight individuals responded that they were willing to participate and met the criteria.

After waiting another 7 days, I sent another round of invitations to two individuals who

had not set a date for the interview. One participant had to reschedule 7 days from the

original date due to a scheduling conflict.

I interviewed eight participants. Seven had attended the ACA Institute for

Leadership Training, and one had attended a state-level similar institute. All met the

criteria for the study. I attempted to conduct all the interviews using Zoom

Videoconferencing; however, some interviews were conducted over the telephone due to

complications with technology. Salmons and Salmons (2015) warned qualitative

researchers of the pitfalls of using Internet technologies for qualitative interviews (e.g.

connectivity, Internet towers not being near, etc.). However, using this electronic

interviewing approach allowed participants to complete their interviews where they felt

most comfortable and allowed me to include participants from throughout the United

States. In general, the participants interviewed at their workplace or in their home. One

interview was conducted face to face after we both attended a local meeting. The

interview was recorded using Zoom technology.

A major issue with technology included connectivity to the Internet or

disconnecting to the Internet during the interview process (Salmons & Salmons, 2015).

Internet connectivity or disconnections could be due to random breaks in the quality of

service, service interruptions, or Internet towers not being near. Three interviewees had a

break in the quality of the Internet, and they were disconnected from Zoom

Videoconference. Of the three, two were due to random breaks in the quality of service

and another was because of a loss of Internet connection. According to Salmons and

Salmons (2015), loss of Internet connection is inevitable, even though there could be a

strong Internet connection, calls and Internet service can still be dropped at random

times. As the researcher, I apologized for the Internet disconnection and rebuilt rapport

when the calls were reconnected. Although the calls were disconnected, all three

participants completed their interviews via telephone and recording using Audacity

Recorder on my laptop.

The last obstacle when using technology is the failure to record. The Zoom

program failed to record the first question of one interview, although the Zoom program

indicated it was recording. Thus, the participant had to be asked to repeat responses. The

difficulties were resolved but could have influenced some of the participants’ experiences

and responses at the time of the study, which may also influence interpretations of the

study results.

Demographics

A demographic overview of participants is shown in Table 2. Two participants

were White, two were African American, two were Asian or Pacific Islander, one was

Hispanic/Puerto Rican, and one was Bi-Racial East Asian and Indian. Their ages ranged

from 28-40. Participants included three males and five females who practiced in several

regions of the United States including Idaho, Florida, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio,

Texas, and Virginia. Each participant had a master’s degree in counseling. Three of the

participants were doctoral students. One participant worked in community mental health,

four worked as counselor educators, and three were full-time doctoral students. The

participants who were counselor educators self-reported graduating with their doctoral

degrees within the past year prior to the date of their interviews.

All of the participants were asked to submit the demographic questionnaire prior

to the interview. However, none submitted the questionnaire prior to the interview date.

Thus, I decided to ask my participants the eight demographic questions as part of the

semistructured interview to help establish rapport: (a) Age? (b) Education level? (c)

Gender? (d) Ethnicity? (e) How long have you been practicing counseling? (f) What jobs

have you held other than counseling? (g) Have you participated in any social justice or

lobbying activities for the counseling profession? and (h) Whom do you consider to be

the main target(s) of your advocacy efforts? See Appendix C for a complete list of these

questions.

Table 2

Demographic Overview of Participants

Participant

Race

Gender

Age

Counseling

Setting

State

A Joshua

White

Male

Community

Mental

Health

Michigan

B Amber

White

Female

Doctoral

Student

Michigan

Phillip

Bi Racial East

Asian and

Indian

Male

Doctoral

Student

Virginia

Brandon

Asian or Pacific

Islander

Male

Counselor

Educator

Idaho

Isabelle

Puerto

Rican/Hispanic

Female

Counselor

Educator

New

Jersey

F Justice

African

American/Black

(non-Hispanic)

Female

Counselor

Educator

Texas

Katarina

Asian or Pacific

Islander

Female

Counselor

Educator

Ohio

Monique

African

American/Black

(non-Hispanic)

Female

Doctoral

Student

Florida

Individual Profiles

This section details the individual profiles of each participant. The profiles

include a narrative of the participants’ professional experience and legislative advocacy

involvement(s), and my impressions as the interviewer. The Zoom interview also

allowed for observation of body language and incongruences between the participants’

spoken words and body language. I assigned participants pseudonyms to protect privacy

and ensure confidentiality. To assign pseudonyms, I wrote four male names and four

female names on a slip of paper and folded the slips of paper in four. I placed the male

names in a hat. Then, I drew the names to assign to each male participant. The same

process was followed to assign female participates pseudonyms. I created an Excel

spreadsheet with three columns. The first column identified the participant as a letter of

the alphabet and the name I assigned.

Participant A: Joshua

Profile. Joshua was a 28-year-old White male from Michigan. He has a master’s

degree in counseling. Joshua has worked in the counseling field for three years. He

currently works in a community mental health setting with youth. Additional work

experience includes grocery store produce clerk, pizza place server, youth care worker,

and applied behavioral analyst. Joshua reported that he had no prior legislative

experience outside of attending one ACA Institute for Leadership Training (ILT). His

main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession were comprised of third-party

reimbursement and greater access to mental health care.

Interview and impressions. Joshua was recommended by another participant in

the study due to his having attended an ACA ILT. He accepted the invitation to

participate via email confirmation, and we set a date to conduct the interview on April 13,

2018. Joshua emailed the consent form the same day of the interview. An invitation to

join the recorded Zoom Videoconference was emailed to Joshua 30 minutes before

conducting the interview. The interview began with me asking the eight demographic

questions. Developing rapport was easy as Joshua and I were members and had served

on the executive board for our state’s counseling association. I thanked him for

participating in my study and reviewed the informed consent. He was asked if he had any

questions before we began. There were no questions. We discussed the dissertation

process and the challenges of completing the process. Joshua expressed that he did not

want to pursue a doctoral degree, but applauded me for my efforts. To gain a better

rapport, I decided to ask the demographic questions at the beginning of the interview to

break the ice. Joshua appeared a little anxious at the start of the interview. He reported

that he was at work in his office and had just finished a counseling session. By the end of

the demographic questions, he appeared to be more relaxed as evidenced by a decrease in

his rapid speaking. He answered each question with well thought out responses that were

clear and detailed.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Joshua acknowledged that he

did not have much experience in social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the

counseling profession. His only experience was attending one Institute for Leadership

Training a few years ago. He described the meaning of professional legislative advocacy

as promoting and raising awareness of the benefits of counseling professions. Joshua felt

that professional legislative advocacy provided a platform for counselors to have a voice

to discuss important issues that present barriers to mental health access. Joshua was

candid in expressing his low level of awareness of the essential elements of legislative

advocacy. He discussed how the Institute for Leadership Training offered by ACA to

help with legislative advocacy involvement provided him with skills to discuss bills with

legislators and resources. He explained how Institute for Leadership Training provided

him with basic skills to speak with legislators; Joshua noted that the language legislators

use is different from the language of counselors. Thus, making it challenging to know if

legislators support the bill(s) one is advocating for. Joshua stated, “So, probably the most

difficult part is hearing that they will keep us in their thoughts with these issues; but it’s

hard to have faith that reasonable steps will be taken.” Despite his concern about

knowing whether legislators were willing to support bills he was advocating for, Joshua

still believed the time and effort in speaking with legislators was worthwhile.

Joshua described his drive for advocating for the counseling profession as rooted

in his family upbringing. He recalled his father’s experience as a group home owner and

watching his father advocate for clients. He attributed his passion for being involved in

advocating for the counseling profession to his father and faculty at his university.

Joshua evaluated the learning experience through Institute for Leadership Training as

rewarding and helpful. Joshua described his experiences in this statement:

I really did not get much preparation at all before the conference I attended. It was

mostly just like I said through word of mouth. Hearing about the advocates that we have.

Hearing about them through getting involved through the Michigan Counseling

Association and other organizations. Basically, hearing that we do have people that

advocate on behalf of the counseling profession. But, I did not necessarily get the help in

terms of how to get there, how to connect with them, the usefulness of connecting with

them. Or, how to organize things. I guess I got the message that it was one person that did

it all. As opposed through a collective effort. So, it’s nice to know that through the

Institute for Leadership Training I attended that there are easy ways within my hectic

schedule to connect with others that do advocate on behalf of the counseling profession.

So, that helps.

Thinking back on his experience at the academic level, Joshua recalled not having

any courses that discussed advocating for the profession, only instructors discussing their

advocacy efforts. Those conversations inspired him to get involved with professional

legislative advocacy. Joshua added, “It would have been useful, thinking about it now as

we talk, to just have had someone come into one of our classes just to talk about

advocacy within the profession.”

Joshua concluded the interview by describing time and complacency as two

obstacles counseling students face when getting involved in professional legislative

advocacy.

Participant B: Amber

Profile. Amber was a 40-year-old White female from Michigan. She has a

master’s degree in counseling. Amber has worked in the counseling field for 4 ½ years.

She currently works in a private practice setting with adults and youth. She is also a

doctoral student and adjunct faculty member in counselor education at a local university.

Additional work experience includes retail management, clerk, and cashier. Amber

reported that she had no prior legislative experience outside of attending one ACA

Institute for Leadership Training (ILT). However, she has participated in other social

justice or legislative activities such as writing letters, calling legislators, and advocating

on Capitol Hill. Her main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession focused on

greater access to mental health care.

Interview and impressions. An email invitation to request Amber’s participation

was sent to her personal email on April 10, 2018. She accepted the invitation to

participate via email confirmation, and we set a date to conduct the interview on April 14,

2018. Amber emailed the consent form the same day of the interview. An invitation to

join the recorded Zoom Videoconference was emailed to Amber two days before

conducting the interview; however, the interview was conducted face to face and

recorded via Zoom. Amber and I decided it would save time to conduct the interview

face to face after we attended a local meeting we were both set to attend. Developing

rapport was easy as Amber and I are members and serve on the executive board for our

state’s counseling association. I thanked her for participating in my study and reviewed

the informed consent. She was asked if she had any questions before we began. There

were no questions about the study, but Amber wanted to decompress from a prior meeting

we both had attended. We discussed the new ideas and implications for the state’s

organization. Amber and I took a few deep breaths before beginning the interview.

Rapport was built during the compressing stage. I asked the demographic questions at

the beginning of the interview to transition into the interview process. Amber appeared

relaxed and ready for the interview. She answered each question with well thought out

responses that were clear and detailed.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Amber acknowledged that she

had some experience in social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling

profession. Her experience was attending two ILTs over the past two years. Last year,

she presented one of the learning sessions to attendees. She described the meaning of

professional legislative advocacy as having many layers. She stated, “I think that we are

in a really unique position in terms of being students who advocate because we are

advocating for clients to have access to mental services; but, we are also advocating for

us to have an ability to practice.”

Amber identified the ability to work as counselors and job security as the two

primary meanings she ascribed to professional legislative advocacy. Amber was

passionate about professional legislative advocacy and aware of the essential elements of

legislative advocacy. She said that she learned the essential elements of legislative

advocacy by attending the ILTs. Before attending the first ILT, she said she had no

awareness of the essential elements of legislative advocacy. Amber ruminated on her

experience with the following statement:

So, I got my knowledge from being trained through attending the American

Counseling Association Institute for Leadership Training. My assumptions before

attending that training, honestly, it was kind of intimidating to me. I didn’t

understand the process. I didn’t know how we got in front of a legislator. I heard

that we could call them, but I had no idea what to say. So I did not do that,

because I didn’t feel it was my place. I had no idea. I assumed that you needed

credentials or creditability to speak to legislators. So, prior to attending ILT, I did

not have that knowledge.

She reported feeling intimidated about the idea of speaking with legislators and

not knowing the process. Amber discussed how accessible legislators were and her

excitement in knowing that legislators were interested in what she had to say. While

Institute for Leadership Training provided Amber with basic skills to speak with

legislators, she noted the difficulty of engaging in professional legislative advocacy for

counseling students. She expressed that it can be de-motivating to advocate on behalf of

the counseling profession when counselors do not see the value of legislative advocacy

because other mental health professionals have grown to cultivate a legislative agenda.

Based on her experience of visiting the offices of legislators, Amber stated, “It would be

nice to meet with a legislator instead of a staffer all the time.”

Despite her frustration of not being able to speak with the actual legislator, she

still believed that the time and effort spent in speaking with legislators’ staffers was

worthwhile. Amber said her drive for advocating for the counseling profession was

rooted in her family upbringing. She believed that her personal values and beliefs align

100% with her political action on behalf of the counseling profession. She attributed her

passion for being involved in advocating for the counseling profession to her personality,

her dissertation chair, and her mentors. Amber evaluated the learning experience through

the two ILTs she attendedas having been rewarding and helpful. Thinking back on her

experience at the academic level, she recalled having one social justice course at the

doctoral level. The course focused on developing advocacy competencies, creating a

social justice advocacy package, and writing a letter to a legislator. Looking back at her

experience with professional legislative advocacy, Amber recommended that professional

legislative advocacy be woven into every counseling course and be a part of the Council

for Accreditation of Counseling Education and Related Programs (CACREP) standards.

According to Amber, “If that instruction were woven into every class at the master’s

level, I would have been far better prepared at an earlier stage to become involved in

legislative advocacy.”

Amber expressed not having an awareness of what legislative advocacy meant

prior to attending her first ILT. She stated, “There was not an external assessment

instrument that compared the transferable skills counselors and counseling students

possess for professional legislative advocacy.” She further expressed that the lack of

academic support for professional legislative advocacy as a counseling student is an

obstacle to student involvement in legislative advocacy on behalf of the profession.

Amber concluded the interview pondering why professional legislative advocacy is not

part of the counseling curriculum.

Participant C: Phillip

Profile. Phillip was a 31-year-old Biracial East Asian and Indian male from

Virginia. He had a master’s degree in counseling. Phillip had worked in the counseling

field for five years. He was currently working in a community mental health setting with

youth. His additional work experience included teaching assistant and food services.

Phillip reported that he had no prior professional legislative advocacy experience. His

main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession were comprised of third-party

reimbursement and greater access to mental health care.

Interview and impressions. Phillip accepted the invitation to participate via

email confirmation and we set a date to conduct the interview on April 18, 2018. Phillip

emailed the consent form to me on April 14, 2018. An invitation to join the recorded

Zoom Videoconference was emailed to Phillip one day before conducting the interview.

Developing rapport was easy as Phillip and I were members of three of the same

professional organizations and had served on a leadership and professional advocacy

committee. I thanked him for participating in my study and reviewed the informed

consent. He was asked if he had any questions before we began. There were no

questions about the study. We discussed the last time we were at a conference in Chicago

and how we always had seen each other at conferences, but only had brief conversations.

I asked the demographic questions at the beginning of the interview to break the ice and

develop rapport. Phillip appeared relaxed and ready for the interview.

He answered each question with well thought out responses that were clear and detailed.

His tone of voice was calming.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Phillip ruminated on the time

constraints he had experienced when speaking with legislators. He recalled being in a

meeting room with a state legislator who had a group of people waiting to see him after

their meeting and being escorted through the back door to meet with the legislator. He

reported having five or ten minutes to discuss three bills. The biggest challenge was

having multiple people in the room trying to get the information across to the legislator

and sounding succinct. He also recalled feeling disappointed when one legislator

canceled their meeting due to another meeting. Phillip pondered, “I wonder how much of

that was out of his control and how much was politics.” Phillip’s eyes lowered, and his

smile turned into a slight frown as he discussed his experience. However, he said that the

time and effort spent talking to legislators or their representative was worthwhile.

Phillip attributed his drive for political action on behalf of the counseling profession to

faculty mentors, school colleagues, as well as his personal values and spiritual beliefs.

He was able to identify one course at the doctoral level in leadership and advocacy that

addressed legislative advocacy activities. He did not become interested in advocating for

the counseling profession until he attended a state conference. A group of students

presented on their experience in speaking with legislators. Phillip reported that

counseling conference program was his launching point of becoming involved in

professional legislative advocacy. He evaluated his learning experience through Institute

for Leadership Training as helpful in preparing him to speak with legislators.

Looking back at his experience, Phillip felt he could have been better prepared if

professional organizations dedicated more time and resources preparing counseling

students and professionals in professional legislative advocacy. For example, having

multiple sessions throughout the year instead a few days of training before speaking with

legislators. And he said that including lobbyist or counselors with professional legislative

advocacy experience in the Institute for Leadership Training sessions would be

beneficial. Phillip identified the lack of academic instruction and knowledge in

counseling programs as an obstacle for student involvement in professional legislative

advocacy. He pondered, “Does the leadership (academics) value professional legislative

advocacy?”

Upon concluding the interview, Phillip added that students could benefit more

from having student-led roundtable discussions at conferences on this topic or having live

streaming sessions for students who could not attend conferences.

Participant D: Brandon

Profile. Brandon was a 29-year-old Asian or Pacific Islander male from Idaho.

He had a doctoral degree in counseling. Brandon had worked in the counseling field for

five years. At the time of the interview, he was working at a university as a counseling

faculty member. Additional work experience included admissions counselor and case

manager. He reported having legislative advocacy experience before attending an ACA

Institute for Leadership Training (ILT). Before attending ILT, he organized a day on the

hill for his state professional counseling organization. Other social justice or professional

legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession included letter writing and

protesting. His main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession focused on thirdparty

reimbursement, greater access to mental health care, gun violence, and older adults.

Interview and impressions. Brandon accepted the invitation to participate in my

study via email confirmation. We set a date to conduct the interview on April 19, 2018.

Brandon emailed the consent form to me on April 12, 2018. I invited Brandon to join the

recorded Zoom Videoconference via email one hour before conducting the interview.

Developing rapport was easy as Brandon and I are both members of three professional

organizations and serve together on one committee. I thanked him for participating in my

study and reviewed the informed consent. He was asked if he had any questions before

we began. There were no questions about the study. We discussed the last time we were

at a conference together in Chicago and how we always see each other at conferences but

have had only brief conversations. To gain a better rapport, I decided to ask the

demographic questions at the beginning of the interview to break the ice and develop

rapport. Brandon appeared ready for the interview as evidenced by his excitement.

During the interview process, the Zoom technology was interpreted three times; however,

it did not appear to disrupt the interview process. He answered each question with well

thought out responses that were clear and very detail oriented.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Brandon’s experience with

social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession can be

described as extensive as he has organized a legislative advocacy day for his state

organization and has attended several ILTs. He noted feeling independent in organizing

the event because none of his counseling faculty members or counseling students had

been previously involved in professional legislative advocacy. Brandon said he did not

have anyone to model what a professional legislative advocate looks like in the

counseling profession. He described the meaning of professional legislative advocacy as

empowering. He said that he believed that professional legislative advocacy is important

to distinguish counselors from other mental health professionals. Brandon stated, “If I’m

not fighting for the profession, then what am I doing for others?”

Brandon said that he had little experience in professional legislative advocacy and

was unaware of the essential elements of professional legislative advocacy before

attending ILT. He said he did not have any courses on the topic during his academic

master’s degree program experience. He credited his learning of the essential elements of

legislative advocacy to ACA’s Government Affairs office, to have done it himself, and to

the role modeling of his mentors. Brandon stated, “The most rewarding thing about

talking to legislators is being surprised about what they already know about the bill and

that they are advocating for counselors.”

Brandon found it disappointing when he had to speak with staffers instead of

legislators. He was afraid that staffers would not relay the information he had provided

to the legislator as he had intended. Another disappointment was not having a set

meeting place to discuss issues with the legislators or their staffer. He noted that some

meeting spaces did not provide a confidential setting to discuss sensitive information. He

also thought it was difficult to meet with a legislator for 15 minutes and sound succinct

on the issues with multiple people in the meeting. Brandon detailed one of his

experiences with a legislator in this brief scenario:

I remember once meeting with a congressional representative and the legislative

staff. I would say that I was irked because we were meeting over here; no we’re meeting

over there. It’s harder to meet in the hallway, but, sometimes it happens. And, I have to

get over that. But sometimes the meeting space doesn’t meet the safety requirements to

discuss these issues; especially if they are a bit contentious. So, we have to be a little

courageous in that. I would also say that it is harder when you have a large group of

people. But I know what that means to us. Higher numbers or a mass of people get better

results or a favorable outcome. They are looking for personal accounts and experiences.

It’s hard to have more than five people share their individual story in 15 minutes.

Despite his disappointments and difficulties, Brandon still felt his time and efforts spent

talking to legislators or their staffers had been worthwhile. He stated, “I think that every

moment we spend with our legislators is worthwhile and I hold onto that hope.”

Brandon revealed that he had no courses which focused on professional legislative

advocacy but attributed his personal values, mainly his racial and ethnic identity, for the

drive he had for political action on behalf of the counseling profession.

He attributed his passion for professional legislative advocacy to his counseling mentors.

Brandon stated, “I had mentors who believed in me as a student and I didn’t have to wait

until I became a counselor educator to make that change or that impact on the

profession.”

Brandon evaluated his learning experience through Institute for Leadership

Training as poor but stated that he had acquired some good take away information. He

thought having videos on how to be an advocate, role plays, and more training in the

Institute for Leadership Training curriculum would be useful. He identified counselor

educators and supervisors who do not value legislative advocacy as an obstacle to

counseling students’ involvement in professional legislative advocacy. Brandon stated,

“Many students look to educators and supervisors as models in terms of what I do, who I

advocate for, and what issues do I advocate for.”

In Brandon’s closing remarks, he said, “I think we should be preparing students

and providing more training in regions for professional legislative advocacy. Not just the

training through Institute for Leadership Training a day before the visit.”

Participant E: Isabella

Profile. Isabelle was a 37-year-old Puerto Rican female from Idaho. She had a

doctoral degree in counseling. Isabelle had worked in the counseling field for 13 years.

She was working in a university setting as a counseling faculty member. Additional work

experience included out-patient program manager and care manager supervisor. The only

experience she had with social justice or professional legislative advocacy activities for

the counseling profession included letter writing and attending an ILT. Her main

advocacy efforts for the counseling profession had focused on third-party reimbursement

and professional advocacy.

Interview and impressions. Isabelle accepted the invitation to participate via

email confirmation and we set a date to conduct the interview on May 3, 2018. Isabelle

emailed the consent form to me on May 1, 2018. An invitation to join the recorded Zoom

Videoconference was emailed to Isabelle one hour before conducting the interview.

Developing rapport was easy as Isabelle and I are members of three of the same

professional organizations. I thanked her for participating in my study and reviewed the

informed consent. She was asked if she had any questions before we began. There were

no questions about the study. Isabelle appeared ready for the interview as evidenced by

her relaxed shoulders. She answered each question with a calm, steady tone. Her

responses were brief and straight to the point.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Isabelle’s experiences with

social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession were

comprised of letter writing to legislators and attending one ILT. She described the

meaning of professional legislative advocacy as empowering. She believed professional

legislative advocacy is important and helps to impact the community. Isabelle reported

that she was not aware of the essential elements of professional legislative advocacy

before attending the ILT. Isabelle stated, “…nothing in my classes talked about

advocating for the counseling profession.”

Isabelle believed that having a legislator’s time was her most rewarding

experience in speaking with legislators. She explained that the most difficult thing in

speaking with legislators was explaining who counselors are. She stated, “I felt like I had

to prove myself and my profession.” Her most disappointing experience when talking to

legislators or their representatives was, “Not getting a response after you reach out to

your legislator for help.”

Isabelle expressed that the time and effort she spent talking to legislators or their

representatives was worthwhile. She stated, “I think it's important to inform them about

our profession and the things we provide to the community.”

Isabelle did not have any courses in her counseling graduate program that

prepared her to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators or their

representatives. She said that her drive for political action on behalf of the counseling

profession was due to her being a Christian and her having a strong social justice

obligation. She attributed her passion for being involved in advocating for the counseling

profession to her “passion for leadership and being a leader involves advocacy.”

Isabelle evaluated her learning experience through Institute for Leadership

Training as poor. She stated, “Through the ILT, I received some preparation, however; I

would have liked for it to be more hands on.”

Looking back on her experiences, Isabelle was able to identify several points that

could have prepared her better for talking to legislators or their representatives. Role

plays, background literature, and detailed scripts were identified by Isabelle as steps for

better preparing students for professional legislative advocacy. She also felt legislative

advocacy should be woven into the counseling curriculum. Some of the obstacles

Isabelle noted to counseling students not being involved in professional legislative

advocacy were lack of time, financial obstacles, lack of knowledge, and fear. To get over

these obstacles, Isabelle suggested, “Funding for students to attend advocacy days would

help eliminate these obstacles.”

In conclusion of her interview, Isabelle added, “I would just like to expand the

knowledge of advocacy in our profession.”

Participant F: Justice

Profile. Justice was a 30-year-old African American/Black (non-Hispanic) female

from Texas. She had a doctoral degree in counseling. Justice had worked in the

counseling field for one year. She was working in a university setting as a counseling

faculty member at the time of the interview. Justice had no work experience outside of

being a counseling faculty in a university setting. She had extensive professional

legislative advocacy experience including organizing at the grass-roots level, writing

letters, protesting, calling legislators, and attending Institute for Leadership Training and

state level advocacy meetings. Her main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession

had focused on greater access to mental health care, third-party reimbursement, and

human trafficking.

Interview and impressions. Justice accepted the invitation to participate in this

study via email confirmation. She set a date to conduct the interview on May 4, 2018;

however, the interview was rescheduled by the participant due to having a faculty

emergency. We rescheduled and conducted the interview on May 6, 2018. Justice

emailed the consent form on May 4, 2018. An invitation to join the recorded Zoom

Videoconference was emailed to Justice one hour before conducting the interview.

Developing rapport was easy as Justice and I are members of the same professional

organization. We discussed how we had seen each other in passing during conferences

but never had the time to get to know one another. I thanked her for participating in my

study and reviewed the informed consent. She was asked if she had any questions before

we began. There were no questions about the study. We discussed the last time we were

at a conference and how we had only a brief conversation during a mixer. Justice

appeared relaxed for the interview as evidenced by her calm demeanor and steady

breathing. She answered each question with well thought out responses that were clear.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Justice’s experiences with social

justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession were many and

varied. She described the meaning of professional legislative advocacy as empowering.

She believed professional legislative advocacy is a very important function for counselors

and counseling students. According to Justice:

There is funding available, and by going to advocacy day, we let our legislators

know that we are the people who provide services. We are representatives of individuals

who can't come to you or don't know how to contact you.

Justice discussed her low level of awareness of the essential elements of

professional legislative advocacy before attending ILT. She noted the benefit of acquiring

information on professional legislative advocacy from other counselors and leaders in the

field. Justice recalled her most rewarding experiences talking to legislators or their

representatives as actually having the opportunity to speak directly to the legislator and to

bring other counseling students to ILT. Justice stated, “Being able to speak directly with

my legislators and knowing that my voice was heard and getting personalized feedback

from them and knowing that they actually did follow up based on our conversations.”

Justice ruminated on her most difficult experience in speaking with legislators or

their representatives. She expressed that not having the attention or respect of legislators

was the most difficult experience to which she had to adjust. According to Justice, “I had

attended an advocacy day and spoke with one of our state reps, and you could tell that he

wasn't listening; so from my experience, consideration from legislators is very difficult to

obtain.

Justice spoke with passion and conviction when discussing her most

disappointing experience when speaking with legislators or their representatives. She

stated, “The disregard legislators have for the many people in our state that need services,

which need someone to provide a voice for them; especially because that someone was

elected to be our voice. This is most disappointing for me as a legislative advocate for the

counseling profession.”

Justice believed the time and effort she spent talking to legislators or their

representatives was worthwhile. She said that one visit with legislators or their

representative might not produce results. But, she said that she encourages counseling

students to continue speaking with legislators until someone listens. When asked if she

had any courses or experiences during her counseling graduate program that prepared her

to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators or their representatives.

She responded, “No not really. We had a leadership and diversity class which kind of

spoke about legislative actions and policy. However, it didn't focus on teaching what to

do and how to do it.”

She said she had received better instruction from her state counseling

organization. The training informed her about what professional legislative advocacy

looks like and what to expect from legislators. Justice credits her grandfather’s

contributions to the civil rights movement as her drive toward political action on behalf

of the counseling profession. She said that her grandfather was a reverend at the time

when the clergy was heavy with civil unrest. His political actions helped with civil and

community care. Justice attributed her passion for being involved in advocating for the

counseling profession. She stated, “Definitely my mentors and professors in my graduate

program. All of them were leaders within ACA, and so they all spoke toward our

responsibility as professional counselor advocates.”

Justice evaluated the preparation she received before talking with legislators or

their representatives as good. She described the learning and tools she received as

informative and useful. Looking back on her experiences, she felt having a centralized

place to get to know more about how to learn about a legislator's position on particular

political issues, and being helped to understand policy more could have prepared her

better for talking to legislators or their representatives.

Justice discussed some of the obstacles to counseling students becoming involved

in professional legislative advocacy. She mentioned, “Getting there and getting the

information” as two major obstacles for lack of student involvement in professional

legislative advocacy. She stated, “The financial strain and time strain are obstacles.

Without the support of agencies that will assist in getting students to these meetings;

these obstacles will always be there.”

In her closing remarks, Justice offered this advice:

I think the greatest thing that we could do is lend our voices. I know it takes time;

but, time takes time, and we have to make time. So, I want to keep encouraging

students and other professionals to keep writing those emails and sending those letters.

If you have two minutes out of your day, that will make a world of difference.

Participant G: Katarina

Profile. Katarina was a 40-year-old Asian or Pacific Islander female from Ohio

who held a doctoral degree in counseling. Katarina had worked in the counseling field

for five years. She was working in a university setting as a counselor educator at the time

of the interview. Katarina had no additional work experience outside of being a

counselor educator. Katarina’s participation in social justice or legislative advocacy

activities for the counseling profession in the past had included being a community

organizer and attending both national and state level Institute for Leadership Training

meetings. Her main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession had focused on

thirdparty reimbursement, greater access to mental health care, and portability.

Interview and impressions. Katarina accepted the invitation to participate via

email confirmation and set a date to conduct the interview on May 1, 2018. However, the

interview was rescheduled and conducted on May 4, 2018, due to a scheduling conflict

on behalf of the participant. Katarina emailed the consent form on April 12, 2018. An

invitation to join the recorded Zoom Videoconference was emailed to Katarina one hour

before conducting the interview. Developing rapport was easy as Katarina and I are

members of the same three professional organizations. I thanked her for participating in

my study and reviewed the informed consent. She was asked if she had any questions

before we began. There were no questions about the study. We discussed the last time

we were at a conference in Atlanta and how we always see each other at conferences but

had only brief conversations in passing. Katarina verbalized her excitement about

participating in my study. She was eager to begin the interview. During the interview

process, we had Internet connectivity issues. So, we decided to end the Zoom video

conference and record the interview using Audacity Recorder on my laptop. I did have to

repeat the first sub-question twice for better clarification; however, she answered each

question with well thought out responses that were clear.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Katarina’s experiences with

social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession in the past

had included being a community organizer and attending both national and state-level

meetings. Katarina described the meaning of professional legislative advocacy as a

vehicle for success to position counselors and counselor educators so that they could earn

a livable wage. She stated, “When I think about the meaning of professional legislative

advocacy, I think about anticipating the future needs of the profession.”

Katarina believed professional legislative advocacy is essential to the counseling

profession to increase the reimbursement rate for professional services and to reduce

barriers of clients to counseling services. She discussed the lack of a solid and unified

counselor identity as a barrier in speaking with legislators. She stated, “…it’s important

to meet with our legislators so that they can hear from constituents about our scope of

practice and the services we provide and the way in which we can support our

community.”

Katarina described her level of awareness of the essential elements of legislative

advocacy before beginning to speak with legislators as low. She discussed not knowing

what professional legislative advocacy meant or why it was important. She expressed

feeling intimidated at the thought of meeting with legislators and not knowing what to

say and being afraid that she would not be able to make a difference. She stated, “Going

back to my very first experience, I didn’t know anything about legislative advocacy.”

Katarina’s most rewarding experience in talking to legislators or their representatives was

meeting with the legislator instead of a staffer. She discussed how receptive the legislator

was to hear what she had to say regarding the services counselors provide, the types of

counseling issues we address with clients, and the manner in which we help the

legislators’ constituents in their community. Her most difficult experience in talking to

legislators or their representatives was learning the terminology. She discussed the

mindset counseling students must have to be involved in professional legislative

advocacy. Katarina explained that counseling students are not exposed to the language of

legislators or taught the process of how a bill turned into law. She also noted that

legislative advocacy should be a part of the counseling curriculum and the Council for

Accreditation of Counseling Related Educational Programs (CACREP) standards.

She stated, “It’s not something that is provided in our education or any of the CACREP

Standards.” Actually, the CACREP standards do require that students be exposed to the

process of advocating for the profession, but specifics of how to be an advocate are not

addressed in the standards.

Katarina recalled her most disappointing experience in talking to legislators or

their representatives. She expressed being disappointed when she was set to meet with a

legislator, and an intern showed up instead. When she talked to interns or legislative

interns, she said she was concerned that important information from the meeting would

not be disseminated to the legislator as she presented it. She was also unsure if interns or

legislative assistants cared about the issues discussed during the meeting. However, she

strongly believed the time and effort she spent talking to legislators or their

representatives was worthwhile.

Katarina did not have any courses or experiences during her counseling graduate

program that prepared her to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators

or their representatives. Her drive for political action on behalf of the counseling

profession can be described as self-motivated. In her own words: “I would say my social

values and dedication toward social justice advocacy and a personal mission of wanting

to leave this world better than how I found it.”

Katarina attributed her passion for being involved in advocating for the

counseling profession to having a mentor who was actively involved in advocating for

the counseling profession. She discussed not knowing about legislative advocacy until

she took a two-week one-credit summer course one of her mentors taught. She learned

the importance of professional legislative advocacy, how it impacts the counseling

profession, and how to get involved as a student. Her greatest preparation in speaking

with legislators or their representatives was organizing a day on the hill for her state

organization. She evaluated the preparation she received through Institute for Leadership

Training before talking with legislators or their representatives as supportive. Looking

back on her experiences, she felt she would have been better prepared for talking to

legislators or their representatives if she had more courses that focused on professional

legislative advocacy during her counseling master’s degree program. She stated, “I

would have liked to have seen more courses that integrated these topics in counselor

education programs; both clinical mental health and school counseling programs.”

When asked, what are some of the obstacles to counseling students becoming

involved in professional legislative advocacy she stated:

I think one of the biggest obstacles is refusing responsibility. I think it’s easy for

students to think that someone else can do it or that someone else is currently doing it; so

they don’t have to. And, they think that “Well my voice doesn’t matter.” And also

thinking that other counselors know more than I do. So, they don’t take the time to get

involved. I think that’s the biggest challenge. I think the way to overcome that barrier is

to continue to remind students they are powerful and to continue to expose them to

professional legislative advocacy opportunities. Because if they have more opportunity

to have their voices heard and the more they are exposed to the idea, the more likely they

will be to take action instead of waiting for someone else to do it.

Katarina passionately discussed the importance of students becoming involved in

professional legislative advocacy. She thought students did not get involved in

advocating for the profession because they think someone else should do it, that their

voice does not matter, or they lack interest in advocating for the counseling profession.

Katarina concluded her interview with the following statement: “This is a little off topic,

but I really appreciate that you are doing research on this topic because I don’t think it’s

anything I’ve ever seen before.”

Participant H: Monique

Profile. Monique was a 36-year-old African American/Black (non-Hispanic)

female from Florida. She had a master’s degree in counseling. Monique had worked in

the counseling field for 11 years at the time of the interview and was currently working in

a community mental health setting. She was also a doctoral student and an adjunct

faculty member in counselor education. Additional work experience included direct care

staff for abused and neglected youth, food service, and camp counselor. Prior to

attending ILT, she had participated in other social justice or legislative activities such as

grass-roots organizer, community organizer, letter-writer, and protester, and she had

called legislators. Her main advocacy efforts for the counseling profession had focused

on greater access to mental health care, human trafficking, and gun violence.

Interview and impressions. Monique accepted the invitation to participate via

email confirmation and set a date to conduct the interview on April 22, 2018. However,

the interview was rescheduled and conducted on May 4, 2018, due to time constraints.

Monique emailed the consent form on May 4, 2018. An invitation to join the recorded

Zoom Videoconference was emailed to Monique 30-minutes before conducting the

interview. Developing rapport was easy as Monique and I am members of the same three

professional organizations and have served together on various committees. I thanked

her for participating in my study and reviewed the informed consent. She was asked if

she had any questions before we began. There were no questions about the study.

Monique appeared tired, so I asked if she felt up to conducting the interview. She said

she was tired but willing to do the interview. She answered each question with brief, well

thought out responses.

Professional legislative advocacy involvement. Monique’s experiences with

social justice or legislative advocacy activities for the counseling profession were

extensive. She described the meaning of professional legislative advocacy as

empowering. She said she believed that professional legislative advocacy is important to

bring about change to the counseling profession. She also internalized professional

legislative advocacy as part of who she is as a professional counselor. When asked her

level of awareness of the essential elements of legislative advocacy before speaking with

legislators, she responded: “Pretty solid, but I felt like it became more specific and

directed after attending the ILT and getting some more tips and techniques in ways of

advocating for the counseling profession.”

Monique’s most rewarding experience in speaking with legislators or their

representatives was having her voice heard. She stated, “Having my voice heard and the

ability to educate them about what is important within the counseling profession which

ultimately benefits their constituent as well as their families.”

She described her most difficult experience as speaking with aids or staffers of

legislators and not knowing if they would pass on the information to the legislator. She

described her most disappointing experience in speaking with legislators or their

representative as, “Having to talk to third-parties and navigating through the system

trying to contact a legislator.” However, she still believed the time and effort she spent

talking to legislators or their representatives was worthwhile.

Monique recalled having two courses during her counseling graduate program

that prepared her to be an advocate for the counseling profession with legislators or their

representatives. Her personal values and beliefs drive her to engage in political action on

behalf of the counseling profession. She attributed her passion for being involved in

advocating for the counseling profession as self-motived based on her long family history

of advocating for the voiceless. Monique evaluated the preparation she received before

talking with legislators or their representatives as good. She stated, “I would evaluate it

as insightful and good. It helped me to fine tune my advocacy skills. Also, it helped me

confirm some things I already knew.”

Looking back on her experiences, there was nothing Monique could think of that

could have prepared her better for talking to legislators or their representatives.

However, she did address one obstacle to counseling students involved in professional

legislative advocacy. She noted, “There is not a lot of emphasis on the importance of

professional legislative advocacy.” Monique concluded the interview with these closing

remarks, “Professional legislative advocacy is something I think we all should be

involved in on behalf of bills that we are passionate about; even if you’re not passionate

about legislative advocacy.”

Data Collection

I recruited participants using my personal contact list of individuals who had

attended the ACA Institute for Leadership Training and whose e-mail addresses or

telephone numbers I had. I asked them if they would be willing to participate in my

study. Snowballing was also used in that those who agreed to participate recruited other

participants. The recruitment announcement was emailed to each person.

Each person who responded sent an e-mail message to me. Once I received the

email message, I responded within 24 hours. Nine individuals inquired about the study,

and I sent them consent forms to complete. Each was scheduled for their interview via

Zoom invitation. I sent a follow-up email message to each participant to email their

informed consent prior to the interview. Two participates emailed their consent one or

two days prior to their interview; the other six email their consent the same day of the

interview. One individual was excluded from the study due to not meeting the criteria.

During the screening phase, the individual reported not having attended an ACA ILT;

thus, excluding that person from the study. The individual was thanked for the

willingness to participate in the study.

There were a total of nine people who responded to the initial email or indicated

they had heard about it about the study from other colleagues. A total of five responded

as a result of a personal email from my personal email list and four were recommended

by other participants. Although nine people responded, only eight met the criteria for the

study and were interviewed. The snowballing strategy worked well in that participants

were willing to refer their colleagues to the study.

Recording the Interviews

I attempted to interview the eight participants in this study using Zoom meetings

(Zoom, 2017), a platform that allows individuals to see each other, hear each other, and

record conversations. Four were interviewed in their offices, three in their homes, and

one face to face in her car. Once the interviewee connected on the line, I informed the

participant when I was going to start recording. After each meeting, the Zoom program

automatically downloaded the recorded meeting in a Zoom folder, which is password

protected. Zoom was interrupted during two interviews due to Internet connection

problems, and in those two situations, I completed the interviews by telephone. The

interviews by telephone were recorded using Audacity Recorder on my laptop.

Interviews lasted from 30 to 60 minutes each.

Data Analysis

Data analysis began after I had completed and transcribed the eight interviews

with participants. Transcribing each audio recording took me from 24 to 48 hours per

recorded audio, which was a total of about 480 hours. I used approximately 38 pages of

memo notes which I kept in a composition notebook.

After transcribing the data, I entered the first phase of coding. During this phase

of coding, I identified several words that were repeated throughout the interviews (Sloan

& Bowe, 2014). Line by line coding allowed me to find common words, which led to

themes. I also used my memo notes and the transcriptions to assist with salient words.

The words and phrases I found included empowerment, awareness, mentor, involvement,

preparation, confidence, and culture.

During the second phase, I identified the most frequent codes, sorted and

organized the data with NVivo (QSR, 2018), a qualitative research program, which

supported the data analysis process (Creswell, 2013; Sloan & Bowe, 2014). I used

NVivo's word frequency inquiry to assist with how often words and phrases were used.

During the third phase, I asked participants to review their individual transcripts

and the overall themes that emerged during data analysis. However, none of the

participants responded. Three peer-reviewers were also recruited to review the data I

collected and to discuss my thought processes with me as I developed themes. However,

only one of the three peer–reviewers responded.

Evidence of Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness was maintained throughout this study using several methods. My

first step was listening to the interviews over and over again to immerse myself in the

data. I then transcribed each interview verbatim. I had the data available electronically

for additional review to ensure the accuracy of the transcriptions. I used the following

strategies to ensure trustworthiness was maintained through this study: member checking,

a peer reviewer, self-disclosure of my own biases, the process of presenting discrepant

information, rich thick description, and reflective journaling.

Member Checking

I emailed a summary of the transcribed interview to each of the participants to (a)

check for accuracy, (b) gather additional data if needed, and (c) explore what may have

been undiscovered (Sloan & Bowe, 2014). A summary of my findings from the interview

was also provided to the participants (Creswell, 2009). A list of themes was provided

with a detailed explanation for each theme. All of the participants were given an

opportunity to review the themes that emerged and provide feedback, however, none of

the participants responded.

Peer Reviewer

I asked three peers to review what I was doing throughout the research process.

Of the three, one provided feedback. The peer reviewer reviewed what I wrote and asked

questions in regard to my qualitative study. For example, one question was “Did all the

participants attend a leadership institute?” The peer reviewer and I used email

communication to correspond. The peer reviewer was knowledgeable regarding the topic

and provided good feedback. The reviewer felt the themes presented were good but

encouraged me to think more critically as a researcher. Two pages of notes were

provided by the reviewer. The reviewer noted on May 21, 2018, “Based upon

developments in the aforementioned major themes (work, advocacy, and empowerment),

it is easy to understand the increasing importance of advocacy.” Some candidate themes

were eliminated or merged due to the lack of support found in the interview transcripts.

A total of three email correspondences were exchanged before a consensus of themes was

reached. Additionally, I continued weekly discussions with my dissertation committee

chair to assist with the data collection and analysis process. This process allowed me to

maintain an objective standpoint and eliminate any biases. It also afforded me the

opportunity to present information so that it would be understood by others who will read

what I had written (Creswell, 2014).

Self-Disclosure

At the beginning of each interview, I introduced myself, and I let the participants

know my experience and passion with the idea of advocating for the counseling

profession. Additionally, in chapter three, I summarized my biases so that I could bracket

them. I was aware of my biases during the development of the interview questions

(Baker & Edwards, 2012; Dworkin, 2012). I was cognizant of my bias as a legislative

advocate for the counseling profession. I remained in the role of a student researcher,

which allowed me to eliminate being perceived as an expert in this area. I utilized

member checking strategies such as committee members, informants, and peer reviewer

to ensure my questions and data result interpretations were written in a nonbiased manner

(Creswell, 2013; Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). I also consulted with my dissertation

committee members during the entire dissertation process.

Discrepant Information

Evidence of the themes was presented in my research. The multiple perspectives

uncovered some evidence that was contrary to some of the themes. As a result, I

presented information contradicting some of the themes. For example, according to

Brandon, “Meaning-wise, I not only find it very meaningful, but I also find it

empowering for me and for the profession. So, I think in that regard it is meaningful.”

Joshua said, “I would say that the main meaning is to really promote the profession of

counseling and the skills we provide and the medical benefits that our clients can benefit

from their experience.” In contrast to both Joshua and Brandon, Justice described the

meaning as “just recognizing the importance and magnitude of the voice that I have as

somebody who was studying and intimately tied to providing care for individuals in the

community and consumers in counseling.”

Another example of discrepant information is when the participants all agreed that

there were obstacles for student involvement in legislative advocacy. However, there was

no specific barrier identified. Monique stated, “Having to talk to a third-party and

navigating through the system trying to contact legislators.” Justice stated, “The financial

strain and time strain are obstacles. Without the support of agencies that will assist with

getting students to these meetings, obstacles will always be there.” Katarina said, “I think

one of the biggest obstacles is refusing responsibility. I think it’s easy for students to

think someone else can do it or that someone else is currently doing it, so they don’t have

to.” I discovered that acknowledging discrepant information provided a method for

remaining objective, provided trustworthiness to the study and produced truthful results.

Rich and Thick Descriptions

I provided detailed descriptions of the participants’ interview settings and what

the participants disclosed. I also provided multiple perspectives regarding each theme. I

provided frequent and long direct quotes allowing the participants’ voices to be heard.

This enabled the results to become more robust (Creswell, 2014).

Reflective Journal

I keep a journal of my thoughts in a reflective journal throughout conducting my

study. The content of my journal was comprised of ideas, decisions, directions, and

dilemmas. The journaling process aided me in analyzing the data, clarifying and

directing the coding process while expounding on processes, and putting ideas into a

narrative (Sloan & Bowe, 2015).

Results

The interviews for this study produced several themes. The interviews focused on

gaining an understanding of the meaning counseling students and recent graduates

ascribed to their involvement in professional legislative advocacy for the counseling

profession. The interviews were structured around the research question: What meaning

do counseling graduate students and recent graduates ascribe to their experiences of

involvement in professional legislative advocacy?

The data from the interviews was extensively analyzed to develop thick, rich

descriptions. The following 10 themes emerged from the data:

1. awareness,

2. faculty mentor,

3. involvement,

4. incorporating legislative advocacy into the curriculum,

5. lack of confidence,

6. student learning and personal development,

7. legislative culture,

8. motivation,

9. student obstacles to professional legislative advocacy, and

10. problems in working with other professions.

Theme 1: Awareness

Each participant developed a meaning of professional legislative advocacy

through attending an ACA Institute for Leadership Training (ILT) or a state-level

institute. Amber stated, “I assumed that you needed credentials or creditability to speak

to legislators.” As the participants reflected on the meaning associated with learning new

material related to professional legislative advocacy as well as gaining awareness into the

multiple facets of professional legislative advocacy, it appears that the participants

obtained a minimal understanding of their experience. Brandon and Joshua developed

two very different meanings of the multiple facets of professional legislative advocacy as

a result of attending an ILT. According to Brandon, “Meaning-wise, I not only find it

very meaningful, but I also find it empowering for me and for the profession. So, I think

in that regard it is meaningful.” Joshua said, “I would say that the main meaning is to

really promote the profession of counseling and the skills we provide and the medical

benefits that our clients can benefit from their experience.” In contrast to both Joshua

and Brandon, Justice described the meaning as “just recognizing the importance and

magnitude of the voice that I have as somebody who was studying and intimately tied to

providing care for individuals in the community and consumers in counseling.”

Theme 2: Faculty Mentor

Graduate students often become involved in legislative advocacy activities for the

counseling profession as a result of the influence of faculty members who were role

models and mentors. As participants ruminated on their experiences, they recalled the

influence of counseling faculty members as the most significant factor for becoming

involved in an ACA ILT. Katarina mentioned, “I would attribute it to a mentor that I

have; who instilled in me the value and importance of legislative advocacy.” According

to Phillip, “I had very little awareness of what was involved until I become a doctoral

student. I became more active with faculty and students here at the university as well as

within the state.” Brandon agreed, “I had mentors that believed in me as a student and I

didn’t have to wait until I became a counselor educator to make that change or that

impact.” Having a sense of community with common goals and interests motivated the

participants to continue professional legislative advocacy activities after graduation.

When asked who encouraged her to become involved in advocacy, Justice said,

“Definitely my mentors and professors in my graduate program.”

Theme 3: Involvement

Involvement refers to the investment of physical and psychological energy spent

on professional legislative advocacy. The in-classroom and out-of-classroom experiences

to which students commit their time and energy related to professional legislative

advocacy was a contributing factor to the participants’ learning experiences. While the

participants received little to no classroom knowledge related to legislative advocacy,

involvement in out-of-classroom learning experiences through the American Counseling

Association Institute for Leadership Training (ILT) provided participants with the

necessary skills that prepare students and professionals for professional legislative

advocacy activities. Isabelle stated, “Through the ILT, I received some preparation;

however, I would have liked for it to be more hands on.” Amber concurred, “So, I got

my knowledge from being trained through attending an American Counseling

Association Institute for Leadership Training.” However, Amber expressed during the

interview having one course that mentioned advocating on behave of the counseling

profession. Additionally, Justice and Monique each expressed having at least one course

that touched on the topic. Phillip described his first introduction to professional

legislative advocacy in the following statement:

So, I guess the first introduction I got in a school setting was in my doctoral

program. I went to a state conference with a group of graduate students. At that

conference, I remember meeting students from other universities. The talks they

were presenting on were based on the work they were doing in terms of

legislative advocacy work. I was like, “This is really interesting. How do I get

involved in this?” That really pushed me into learning how to do this. I asked at

the conference what does this involve? They told me. That summer, I attended a

leadership institute (ILT). I think that was the launching point of becoming active

with legislative advocacy.

Theme 4: Incorporating Legislative Advocacy Into the Curriculum

This theme reflected the unified call to action of counseling academic programs to

incorporate professional legislative advocacy into the counseling curriculum.

Participants were unable to identify a single course that provided in-depth knowledge or

skills to prepare students in talking with legislators, even though one participant did say

legislative advocacy was mentioned in a couple of courses. According to Joshua, “No

specific courses or seminars or things like that” prepared him to speak with legislators.

Katarina agreed, “I would have liked to have seen more coursework that integrated these

topics of legislative advocacy in counselor education programs; both clinical mental

health and school counseling programs.” Isabelle stated, “If I had background literature

or had courses on how legislation operates, it would have helped.” Brandon agreed,

“There was no coursework, nothing in the curriculum, no training around professional

legislative advocacy.” Phillip stated and pondered:

I think it could be administrative. What are they valuing? Are they valuing there

should be more instruction related to clients as opposed to professional advocacy

as well? I think that plays into the amount a freedom a faculty member has when

providing instruction. Does the leadership value legislative advocacy? We could

use legislative activities assignment in the class setting to overcome this issue and

being intentional.

Theme 5: Lack of Confidence

As participants reflected on their experience in speaking with legislators, having

limited knowledge and skills related to professional legislative advocacy contributed to

the feeling of being unprepared. Amber stated, “In talking with legislators, at first I was

concerned with remembering facts, what to say. Honestly, it was kind of intimidating to

me. I didn’t really understand the process.” In contrast to Amber and other participants,

Monique was the only participant who expressed feeling confident in speaking with

legislators. Similar to Ambers’ experience, Katarina said, “I was really intimidated at the

thought of meeting with someone and not knowing what to say and afraid that I wouldn’t

be able to make a difference.” Isabelle noted, “I felt like I had to prove myself and my

profession.” Learning new language salient to legislators and resistant legislators were

the primary sources attributing to the diminishment of participants’ confidence level.

Katarina stated:

I think the most difficult part is learning the terminology. It’s a very different way

of thinking and it’s a different set of information that a lot of counselors; no let me speak

for myself, that I had not had any exposure to. So, the political aspect of legislative

advocacy is important. It’s not something that is provided in our education or any of the

CACRP Standards, and I wonder as I’m talking this through if that is something that may

be important to incorporate into our standards as counselor educators? How can we set up

our students to feel more prepared to engage in legislative advocacy? And, one of those

ways might be in teaching those different terms.

Theme 6: Student Learning and Personal Development

A major outcome of participating in professional advocacy activities could be the

facilitation of counseling students developing their strengths and approaches to the

counseling process and strengthening their own professional identity. Brandon stated, “I

think we should be preparing students and ACA regions should be providing more

training for professional legislative advocacy.” Katarina agreed with Brandon in the

following statement:

I think it will be really great for counseling students to see that professional

legislative advocacy is an important topic and hear all the things we can do as a

profession to lay the foundation for this issue; to be able to be more mainstream and for it

to be a part of the profession instead of looking at it as a bonus or an extra piece that

someone else will do.

Theme 7: Legislative Culture

The participants highlighted the need for a culture that includes professional

legislative advocacy. To provide greater access to mental health services, we as

counselors must take a holistic approach to professional legislative advocacy by

cultivating a new behavior and belief. Joshua stated:

Yeah, you mentioned graduate school. It would have been useful, thinking about

it now as we talk, to just have someone come into one of our classes. Just to talk about

advocacy within the profession. Talk about the major issues that are at play. Talking

about some of the advocacy organizations that kind of play a central role in what we do.

Because I feel that no matter what profession you go into, it kind of helps to know the

larger picture of things, larger perspective of things. Especially, when you hear rumors of

stuff. Rumors of what’s happening. It’s good to have someone come in and solidify all

that for us. I would say at the graduate level it would have been nice to have a little bit

more information.

I asked Joshua, “When you say [have someone come to talk to you], would you

prefer a lobbyist, legislator, or someone from the counseling profession to talk to you?”

He responded:

That’s a good question. I think all three would be useful, such as in a panel

format. But if I had to pick one, probably someone in the profession that has experience

with professional legislative advocacy. So that they can give us an honest summary of

what’s happened and what’s about to come. Adapting a legislative culture may influence

counseling students to stick with professional legislative advocacy beyond the academic

setting.

Katarina stated, “I think the most difficult part is learning the terminology… It’s a

very different way of thinking and a different set of information I received within my

counseling programs.” Amber noted, “It should be a part of CACREP standards like

ethics, theories, and interventions.” Brandon said, “Outside of Institute for Leadership

Training if there are videos on how to do this, role plays, and more training in the

curriculum… incorporating it into a classroom setting.”

Theme 8: Motivation

This theme reflects the motivation and passion toward professional legislative

advocacy. To gain a better understanding as to what motivates counseling students

toward advocating for the profession, we must first understand how counseling students’

personal values and beliefs drive their political action. Phillip describes how his personal

values and beliefs drive his political action in the following statement:

Most of my personal values and beliefs drive my professional involvement in

legislative advocacy work. I think if I didn’t value them both equally, that might heavily

influence the amount of time and energy and how much I invest in the work of

advocating for the profession in the first place. My spiritual voice and my parents, who

are both educators, have also influenced my involvement with legislative advocacy. My

parents instilled in me the idea of respecting and valuing all people. I hold to my spiritual

beliefs and the Biblical scripture of taking care of the children and orphanages. Engaging

in legislative advocacy work is a way to help multiple people across the state…across the

nation.

Similar to Phillip’s statement Brandon stated, “My heritage and values have a lot to do

with political action activities.” Isabelle added, “Being Christian is one of my values that

led me to counseling advocacy.” On the other hand, Katarina attributed her motivation

and passion toward professional legislative advocacy to being self-motived.

Theme 9: Student Obstacles to Professional Legislative Advocacy

Even though students are motivated to become involved in legislative advocacy,

there are challenges to doing so that are unique to students. This theme emerged as

students reflected on the barriers to engaging in professional legislative advocacy.

Amber stated, “If that instruction were woven into every class at the master’s level, I

would have been far better prepared at an earlier stage to engage in legislative advocacy.”

Phillip stated, “Getting my master’s in Canada, legislative advocacy was not a huge thing

that was promoted by the faculty.”

The participants identified several obstacles faced by counseling students when

gaining entry into professional legislative advocacy. Monique stated, “Having to talk to a

third-party and navigating through the system trying to contact legislators.” Justice

stated, “The financial strain and time strain are obstacles. Without the support of

agencies that will assist with getting students to these meetings, obstacles will always be

there.” Katarina argued, “I think one of the biggest obstacles is refusing responsibility. I

think it’s easy for students to think someone else can do it or that someone else is

currently doing it, so they don’t have to.”

Theme 10: Problems in Working With Other Professions

This theme reflected how the participants found a lack of community support in

working with other mental health professions to advocate for a common resolution.

Amber stated, “When you keep hearing the same response from other professionals, it

can be de-motivating.” When discussing the advocacy activities of other professions,

Monique agreed that “There is not a lot of emphasis on the importance of advocacy and

working with other mental health providers.” Participants identified who they would like

to collaborate with regarding lobbyists as well as specific actions that took place within

the context of partnerships with other professions. Participants felt having a centralized

database to understand more about legislators’ positions and how to contact local

legislators (technology, social networking sites) could be beneficial to counseling

students and counseling professionals. According to Justice, “Having a centralized place

to get to know more about the legislative efforts that are being put forth and

understanding policy more.” Joshua stated, “It would have been useful to have someone

come into one of our classes to discuss legislative advocacy.” Phillip stated, “Having

lobbyists and maybe some counselors who have actually done this to tell their

experiences.”

Summary

In this chapter, I provided an analysis of the data I collected for this study. I

began with an introduction, then discussed the interview setting, participant

demographics, procedures used for data collection, procedures used for data analysis, and

the results. In this study, I attempted to answer the research question: What meaning do

counseling graduate students and recent graduates ascribe to their experiences of

involvement in professional legislative advocacy?

A summary of the interviews and themes were provided to each of the eight

participants to provide corrections and feedback. Participants were asked to respond with

corrections and feedback promptly. However, none of the participants responded.

As a result of the data analysis, I discovered ten (10) common themes: awareness,

faculty mentor, involvement, lack of academic policies, lack of confidence, student

learning, and personal development,) legislative culture, motivation, student obstacles to

professional legislative advocacy, and problematic issues with collaborative networks.

The interviews and data analysis revealed that counseling students who are

involved in advocating on behalf of the counseling profession acquired their training by

attending either a national or state Institute for Leadership Training. The meaning

ascribed to professional legislative advocacy was unclear as the participants’ perspectives

and understanding of the topic were broad. However, each participant felt professional

legislative was important to the future of the counseling profession.

The participants I interviewed had only one course or no courses that discussed

advocating for the profession. Instead, the participants I interviewed said they had

mentors who encouraged them to become active in professional legislative advocacy.

Multiple obstacles to students’ involvement in professional legislative advocacy were

identified during the interview process. Some of those obstacles noted were financial

constraints, not knowing the importance of advocating on behalf of the profession, and

time. Although the participants attributed different meanings to professional legislative

advocacy, they all agreed that the topic should be woven into the counseling curriculum.

In the next chapter, I will discuss major findings from this research study,

implications from the findings, and recommendations for further research. I will

conclude with a discussion of how my findings related to social change, offer personal

reflections, and a conclusion.

Chapter 5: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations

Introduction

The purpose of this hermeneutic phenomenological study was to gain an

understanding of the process by which counseling students engage in legislative advocacy

for the counseling profession. In this chapter, I include a discussion of major findings as

they relate to the literature on identifying the meaning counseling students ascribe to

advocating for the counseling profession, factors that influence counselors to become

involved in legislative advocacy. I also explored were the ways that counselors gain

entry into legislative advocacy and additional research that helps to answer the research

question: What meaning do counseling graduate students who engaged in the American

Counseling Association Leadership Training Institute ascribe to their experiences? In the

chapter, I also discuss how my research findings connect to motivation theories and

academic policies. The chapter also includes the limitations of this study,

recommendations for future research, and a brief conclusion to the study. What

motivates counseling students to engage in professional legislative advocacy is

multidimensional. In analyzing data, I identified 10 themes:

1. awareness,

2. faculty mentor,

3. involvement,

4. incorporating professional legislative advocacy into the counseling

curriculum,

5. lack of confidence,

6. student learning and personal development,

7. legislative culture,

8. motivation,

9. student obstacles to professional legislative advocacy, and

10. problems in working with other professions.

Some factors related primarily to having a mentor, some to direct involvement with the

ACA Institute for Leadership Training, and some were a combination of the successful

interplay of both. It is my belief that all of the 10 themes I discovered in this study help

contribute to an environment where counseling students involved in professional

legislative advocacy are challenged and can continuously grow.

Interpretation of the Findings

I developed the 10 common themes after interviewing the participants in this

study. Professional legislative advocacy had a variety of meanings for each individual.

These themes describe the motivating factors that contributed to counseling students

becoming involved in professional legislative advocacy.

Theme 1: Awareness

Awareness of professional legislative advocacy was an essential element of

motivation for the participants. This finding was congruent with historical literature that

indicates that counseling students need to understand the importance of social change

advocacy, more specifically professional legislative advocacy as it relates to the

counseling profession, in order for counseling students to promote leadership and to

influence legislators (Calley & Hawley, 2008). Awareness for this study’s participants

was the result of their attending an ACA Institute for Leadership Training. Two

participants were aware of professional legislative advocacy through their academic

experiences prior to attending the ACA Institute for Leadership Training. Both Katarina

and Monique reported having at least one course that briefly discussed advocating for the

counseling profession. As the participants discussed their experiences of attending an

institute, they said that they learned new material related to professional legislative

advocacy and that they gained awareness of the multiple facets of professional legislative

advocacy. Although the participants said that they obtained a greater understanding of

professional legislative advocacy by attending the ACA Institute for Leadership Training,

the participants of this study did not attribute their knowledge of professional legislative

advocacy solely to attending an institute.

Lating et al. (2010) agreed that most counseling students are not privy to

professional legislative advocacy involvement at the academic level; thus, they may not

develop a focus on professional legislative advocacy as a core aspect of their professional

identity. The findings in the Lating et al. study were congruent with the findings of this

study in that most of the participants reported not having any courses that focused

specifically on professional legislative advocacy. Two participants reported having one

or two courses that briefly discussed professional legislative advocacy.

There were several contradictory statements made by the participants. For

example, while some participants said they were exposed to professional legislative

advocacy by someone else, their decision to get involved was their own idea, they stated.

This contrast indicated that students can be exposed to professional legislative advocacy

at the academic level; however, the conscious decision to get involved in the process may

be an individual choice.

Participants invariably described a genuine love for advocating on behalf of the

counseling profession. Participants cited their experiences as empowering the counseling

profession, promoting the profession and the skills counselors provide, and recognizing

the importance and magnitude of having a voice within the legislative process. The

participants expressed moderate satisfaction with information learned through attending

the institute.

Theme 2: Faculty Mentor

Monique expressed ownership of her professional legislative advocacy

involvement, but the other participants referenced direct faculty-student mentorship as an

important factor in their becoming involved in advocating for the counseling profession.

One of the noticeable themes was the significance of mentors. Several scholars have

suggested that course content should focus on counseling graduate students becoming

involved in legislative advocacy (Grothaus et al., 2012; Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005; Reiner

et al., 2013; Singh, 2010). Graduate students often become involved in legislative

advocacy activities for the counseling profession as a result of the influence of faculty

members who are role models and mentors. As participants reflected on their

experiences, they recalled the influence of counseling faculty members as the most

significant factor for becoming involved in an ACA Institute for Leadership Training,

which is consistent with the findings of several studies (Astin, 1993; Astin & Astin, 2000;

Myers et al., 2002). The participants in these studies said that mentors helped them

become involved in professional legislative advocacy. The content of graduate courses

within counseling graduate programs was not often cited in this study as factors that

helped participants move toward advocating on behalf of the counseling profession.

Their direct mentor relationship was a key factor in motivating them to become involved

in professional legislative advocacy.

Having a sense of community with common goals and interests motivated the

participants to continue professional legislative advocacy activities after graduation.

Most of the participants noted they were encouraged to become involved in professional

legislative advocacy by a mentor and by professors in their graduate programs. It is

important for counseling faculty to get to know their students as individuals and to be

able to understand what motivates their students (Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005). Counseling

programs are designed to teach theory, practical applications, and competencies.

Counseling faculty members should also model and mentor students into becoming

professional legislative advocates.

Theme 3: Involvement

Involvement refers to the investment of physical and psychological energy spent

on professional legislative advocacy (Astin, 1993; Astin & Astin, 2000). In-classroom

and out-of-classroom investments of time and energy related to professional legislative

advocacy contributed to the participants’ learning experiences. The participants noted

receiving little to no classroom instruction related to professional legislative advocacy.

Participants’ involvement in the out-of-classroom learning experiences through the

American Counseling Association Institute for Leadership Training provided them with

the only information and skills they gained as graduate students related to becoming

involved in professional legislative advocacy activities.

The literature emphasized that the involvement of students in learning is directly

related to the amount of physical and psychological energy a student devotes to the

academic experience (Astin, 1993). Historically, a student’s growth and development are

dependent on the amount of time spent involved in campus activities and time shared

with faculty (Astin & Astin, 2000). The lack of student involvement in professional

legislative advocacy continues to be prevalent in the counseling profession (Briggs et al.,

2011; Remley & Herlihy, 2016). One participant cited time as a barrier to student

involvement.

The results of this study align with the literature regarding the importance of the

physical and psychological energy a student devotes to the academic experience.

Toporek et al. (2009) suggested that most students are aware of the need to advocate on

behalf of clients/students and school/community. However, the concept of advocating for

the good of the public in general or for the counseling profession is not as obvious to

them. As a result, the shift from the theory to the practice of involvement is often

difficult to achieve.

The findings in this study are consistent with the literature as it relates to a

student’s degree of involvement (Astin, 1993; Astin & Astin, 2000; Myers et al., 2002).

The results of these three studies indicated that a student’s degree of involvement will

develop over time and a student’s involvement is contingent on his or her level of

motivation. Participants said that their involvement in the American Counseling

Association Institute for Leadership Training enhanced their learning and professional

development. The participants indicated the role of a professional legislative advocate

should be a part of a counselor’s identity. The participants in this study agreed that they

had a mentor who had extensive insight into professional legislative advocacy, which

prompted their involvement.

Theme 4: Incorporating Legislative Advocacy Into the Curriculum

The world reported one major structural barrier to gaining knowledge of

professional legislative advocacy was the lack of teaching students how to be advocates

for the profession within the counseling curriculum. In previous literature, a commonly

cited barrier related to professional legislative advocacy was incorporating legislative

advocacy into the curriculum (Bemak et al., 2011). The participants agreed that

counseling academic programs need to incorporate information and skills related to

professional legislative advocacy into the counseling curriculum. Two participants

identified one or two courses that addressed the concept of legislative advocacy but

indicated the courses provided little knowledge or skills to prepare students to dialogue

with legislators as advocates for the counseling profession. The literature indicated that

advocacy concepts should be systematically infused into the counseling graduate program

curriculum to create a positive mindset and attitude toward professional legislative

advocacy (Cooks et al., 2015; Ratts & Pederson, 2014; Ratts & Wayman, 2014). More

specific training on professional legislative advocacy should be added into the

curriculum.

Bemak et al. (2011) suggested that from the time students enter a graduate

counseling program, they are encouraged to think critically and to question all aspects of

counseling theoretical tenets, applied concepts, and research outcomes. Furthermore,

from the inception of their graduate programs, counseling students should also be

exposed to basic tenets of professional legislative advocacy that will help foster an

attitude for service extending beyond clients/students and the school/community. In spite

of the literature citing the need for graduate students’ involvement in advocacy,

counseling programs have been slow to incorporate this learning into the counseling

curriculum (Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005; Toporek et al., 2009).

At one time, the advocacy movement primarily focused on advocating for

clients/students and school/community to reduce barriers inhibiting personal, academic,

and career development (Grothaus et al., 2012; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Toporek et

al., 2009). In recent years, there has been a paradigm shift for counselors to direct their

advocacy efforts toward legislative advocacy that supports the counseling profession.

For example, counselors and counseling students are encouraged to advocate for the

profession of counseling to help impact policy changes (Ratts & Hutchins, 2009; Ratts &

Wayman, 2014). Students entering the profession as well as current professional

counselors are encouraged to advocate for the profession at the government level to

ensure the continuation of the counseling profession as it relates to third-party

reimbursement for their services, increased access to counselors to be able to deliver

mental health care services, and increased funding for school counselors (Nilsson et al.,

2011; Smith et al., 2009).

Lating et al. (2010) agreed that counseling students should be introduced to

professional legislative advocacy and its core beliefs, purposes, and objectives during

orientation. Grothaus et al. (2012) discussed the need to integrate advocacy into

strengthbased counseling interventions. Training counselors to become involved in

professional legislative advocacy is becoming increasingly important in the profession of

counseling. Establishing educational standards across counseling academic programs

provides an opportunity to infuse the topic into the counseling curriculum.

Mallinckrodt et al. (2014) and McClintock (2003) have suggested that adopting a

model similar to the Scientist-Practitioner-Advocacy Training or the Scholar-

PractitionerLeadership Model at the academic level could be beneficial in assisting

counseling students and counseling programs in fostering a life-long commitment to

leadership and advocacy; more specifically, professional legislative advocacy.

Participants in this study indicated that counseling programs should integrate more

coursework on the topic of professional legislative advocacy and provide legislative

activities assignments in the classroom setting.

Theme 5: Lack of Confidence

The theme, lack of confidence, emerged as participants reflected on their

experiences in speaking with legislators. Having limited knowledge and skills related to

professional legislative advocacy contributed to their feelings of being unprepared. The

participants cited “learning a new language” salient to legislators and “resistant

legislators” as two primary causes attributed to the participants’ low confidence level.

The findings are congruent with the views expressed by Dollarhide, Clevenger, Dogan,

and Edwards (2016) and Toporek et al. (2009). For example, Amber stated, “In talking

with legislators, at first I was only concerned with remembering facts, what to say.

Honestly, it was kind of intimidating to me. I didn’t really understand the process.”

Similar to Amber’s experience, Katarina said, “I was really intimidated at the thought of

meeting with someone and not knowing what to say and afraid that I wouldn’t be able to

make a difference.”

According to Toporek et al. (2009), “…human relations, group dynamics,

assessment, multicultural issues, and lifespan development…” (p. 265) courses teach

counseling students skills that are transferable; making counselors great potential

advocates for the profession. Yet, counseling programs and counselor educators have

been reluctant to infuse professional legislative advocacy into the curriculum which could

lead to a greater confidence in counseling students’ ability to advocate on behalf of the

profession.

As professional legislative advocacy has become a realization of a counselor’s

identity, counseling students must see counseling faculty model what a professional

legislative advocate/social change agent looks like. Toporek and colleagues (2009) noted

that counselors possess key skills such as critical thinking, active listening, ability to

assess and dialogue, as well as other skills that could provide a sound foundation for

legislative advocacy. Connecting skills that students are already learning to professional

legislative advocacy in the classroom setting could increase counseling students’

confidence when speaking with legislators or their staff members.

Cook et al. (2015) said that counseling technique courses emphasize various

interventions that could be used to prepare counseling graduate students for legislative

involvement. Brubaker et al. (2010) agreed that the skills that students learn can help

prepare them for advocating for the counseling profession. Yet, no one has tied course

content to legislative advocacy. In a study by Pieterse and colleagues (2008), it was

determined that most counseling program syllabi focused extensively on multicultural

training, but put little emphasis on advocacy for the profession. The researchers found

that 59% of the syllabi stated goals related to social justice and 48% included content

matter related to social inequity. The raters of the data determined that 92% of the syllabi

infused multiculturalism and/or social justice. However, none of the syllabi included

content related to advocating for the counseling profession. The participants in this study

agreed that infusing professional legislative advocacy into the counseling curriculum is a

solution to developing counseling students’ attitudes toward professional legislative

advocacy.

Theme 6: Student Learning and Personal Development

Professional ethical codes and CACREP Standards (2017) mandate that

counseling programs incorporate advocating for the profession into the curriculum (ACA,

2017); yet, they do not provide guidelines as to how to incorporate such learning. A

major theme that emerged from this study was how the participants learned about

advocating for the counseling profession and how it impacted their personal development

and their professional identity. Brubaker et al. (2010) provided a case example of how

counselor educators can integrate social justice into a counseling theories course to

increase social and counseling awareness and for students to acquire knowledge and

skills necessary to become social change advocates. However, the participants in this

study discussed the need for more experiential learning and personal development;

specifically focusing on professional legislative advocacy. Brandon stated, “I think we

should be preparing students and ACA regions should be providing more training for

professional legislative advocacy.”

Dollarhide et al. (2016) described how participants developed their social justice

identity. However, the literature does not describe or offer suggestions on how to prepare

participants for professional legislative advocacy activities. Participants of this study

suggested that experiential activities should be used to engage student learning and

personal development. The participants were able to identify several professional

legislative advocacy experiential activities to promote student learning and personal

development. Examples included assignments, demonstration videos, lectures, roleplays,

and workshops. Joshua suggested, “…having someone come into one of our classes to

discuss legislative advocacy.” Astin (1993) agreed that the more time and energy a

student spends on an activity, the more they are apt to stay involved. A deeper indication

is the need for counselor educators to assess the personal development desires of their

students. More research is needed to determine if the amount of in-classroom activities

or experiential learning increases student involvement in professional legislative

advocacy.

Theme 7: Legislative Culture

The participants of this study expressed a need for a culture within the counseling

profession that encourages legislative advocacy. As stated by one participant, Katarina,

“I think the most difficult part is learning the terminology. It’s a very different way of

thinking and a different set of information I received within my counseling programs.”

Joshua expressed, “Adapting a legislative culture may influence counseling students to

stick with professional legislative advocacy beyond the academic setting.” An example

of creating a legislative culture within the academic setting was illustrated at George

Mason University (Bemak et al., 2011). Students there were required to attend an

orientation and agree to the mission of George Mason University which included

professional social justice advocacy through course content and mentorship.

Counselors and counseling students are encouraged to advocate for the profession

of counseling to help impact policy changes salient to the profession (Ratts & Hutchins,

2009; Ratts & Wayman, 2014). Lating et al. (2010) agreed that counseling students

should be introduced to advocacy and its core beliefs, purpose, and objectives during

orientation. In addition, advocacy concepts should be systematically infused into the

counseling graduate program curriculum to create a positive mindset and attitude toward

legislative advocacy (Cooks et al., 2015; Ratts & Pederson, 2014; Ratts & Wayman,

2014). At the inception of their graduate programs, counseling students should be

exposed to basic tenets of legislative advocacy that will help foster in them an attitude for

service extending beyond clients/students and the school/community (Nilsson &

Schmidt, 2005; Toporek et al., 2009). In spite of the growing literature for an increased

need for graduate students’ involvement in professional legislative advocacy, counseling

programs, and counselor educators have been slow to develop a legislative culture that

promotes professional legislative activity for counseling students.

Thus, indicating a greater need for counseling programs and counselor educators

to develop a legislative culture both in and out of the classroom setting. Educating

counseling students on how legislation is passed and how it impacts the counseling

profession might encourage students to get involved as students, as well as carry that

attitude beyond graduation. In an interview, Sweeny advised that preparing counselorsin-

training at the academic level increases social justice awareness, makes students better

advocates, and promotes an affinity for professional legislative advocacy beyond

graduation (Kress & Barrio-Minton, 2015).

Theme 8: Motivation

To gain a better understanding as to what motivates counseling student toward

advocating for the profession, counselor educators must first understand how counseling

students’ personal values and beliefs drive their political action. According to Astin’s

Student Involvement Theory (1984), a student’s degree of involvement will develop over

time and a student’s involvement is determined based on his or her level of motivation.

Using Astin’s Student Involvement Theory, Burch et al., (2015) explored themes related

to social justice involvement to develop and psychometrically test a student involvement

survey (four-factor model of student involvement). The author’s hypothesis was

congruent with the findings that student involvement consists of the separate constructs

of emotional involvement, physical involvement, cognitive involvement in class, and

cognitive involvement out of class. Although these findings are generally compatible

with ideas expressed by Astin (1984) and Burch et al. (2015), there are several areas in

which they differ from the findings in this study.

The participants attributed their involvement in advocating on behalf of the

counseling profession to the encouragement or guidance of a mentor, out-of-class

involvement, and personal values. Some participants attended regional training, state

training, or the annual American Counseling Association’s Institute for Leadership

Training. Of the eight participants interviewed for this study, only one participant,

Katrina, indicated her motivation was self-motived as illustrated in Table 3. The issues

that drove the participants toward professional legislative advocacy involvement varied in

nature. When participants spoke with legislators during the Institute for Leadership

Training, the issues addressed were developed by the Institute for Leadership Training

team and did not deviate from the institute’s primary issues for the current year. All of

the participants, except one, stated that the primary issue that led them to advocate on

behalf of the profession was greater access to mental health care. It is expected that the

student’s motivation will change over time as will their level of involvement (Astin,

1984, 1999; Burch et al., 2015).

Table 3

Participants’ Motivation

Participant

Issues/Drive

Motivation(s)

A Joshua

promote the profession;

skills we provide; access

to mental health care;

medical benefits

family values; mentor

B Amber

access to mental health

care; ability to work;

security

family values; mentor

Phillip

recognition; mental

health access;

reimbursement; ensure

the longevity of the

counseling profession

family values, religion;

mentor

Brandon

empowerment;

reimbursement; gun

violence, mental health

access

heritage; family values;

mentor

Isabelle

Empowerment

religion; mentor

F Justice

promoting the

profession; ability to

work; recognition;

empowering; human

trafficking;

reimbursement; mental

health access

heritage; mentor

Katarina

mental health access;

reimbursement;

empowering the

profession

self-motivated; mentor

H Monique

mental health access;

reimbursement; human

trafficking

heritage; self-motivated

These findings are consistent with previous research (Burch et al., 2015). Hence,

counseling students might be more likely to get involved in professional legislative

advocacy if they see faculty involvement, if it is incorporated in the classroom

curriculum, or if they are self-motivated. However, interacting with faculty appears to be

the more significant predictor of a counseling student’s motivation to become involved in

professional legislative advocacy activities.

Theme 9: Student Obstacles to Professional Legislative Advocacy

When students are motivated to become involved in legislative advocacy, there

are obstacles that are inevitable. The participants identified several obstacles faced by

counseling students when gaining entry into professional legislative advocacy. However,

the literature does not focus on the specific obstacles students face when getting involved

in professional legislative advocacy. Instead, much of the literature has focused on

advocating for clients/students and school/community to reduce barriers that stunt

personal, academic, and career development of the clients served by counselors

(Grothaus et al., 2012; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Toporek et al., 2009). However,

counselors and counseling students have been encouraged by Ratts and Hutchins (2009)

and Ratts and Wayman (2014) to advocate for the profession of counseling to help impact

policy changes salient to the profession. But, there is no roadmap on how to gain entry

into professional legislative advocacy. Monique stated, “Having to talk to a third-parties

and navigating through the system to try to contact legislators” as a barrier to professional

legislative advocacy. Justice stated, “The financial strain and time strain are obstacles.

Without the support of agencies that will assist with getting students to these meetings,

obstacles will always be there.” Katarina said, “I think one of the biggest obstacles is

refusing responsibility. I think it’s easy for students to think someone else can do it or

that someone else is currently doing it, so they don’t have to.”

This theme uncovered several obstacles that students face when it comes to

gaining entry into professional legislative advocacy. The participants were not able to

agree upon one single obstacle that inhibits counseling students to become involved in

advocating on behalf of the counseling profession. Three overriding factors identified in

this study included “lack of professional legislative advocacy awareness,” “financial

strain,” and “time constraints.” More research is needed to determine which obstacles

deter counseling students from getting involved in professional legislative advocacy.

Theme 10: Problems in Working With Other Professions

According to Reiner et al. (2013), the Joint Commission on Interprofessional

Affairs (JCIA) comprised of the American Psychiatric Association, the American

Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and the American

Nursing Association was established in 1982 to develop common goals among the four

major professions. Reiner et al. (2013) indicated that the four organizations deliberately

and inadvertently kept professional counselors from contributing to the dialogue.

However, the JCIA no longer exists. At the present time, there is little or no coordination

among mental health professional organizations related to legislative advocacy.

In a study by Myers et al. (2002), the authors highlighted the continued lack of

understanding of counseling credentials and the importance of educating other mental

health professionals about the roles and competencies of professional counselors. The

authors suggested that counselors can be more effective advocates for clients and the

counseling profession when the profession is recognized by other mental health

professions, as well as by legislators and policymakers. The participants in this study

found a lack of community support in working with other mental health professionals to

advocate for common goals. For example, participants noted that other mental health

professionals have said that “counselors are not important.” Additionally, they expressed

that “counselors are not respected by other mental health professionals.” Several

participants discussed their frustration about having to educate legislators on the

distinctions among the various mental health professionals and how counselors provide

relief to the community. Participants also noted the total disregard for the counseling

profession by other mental health professionals as a problem in working with other

professions on legislative issues.

If other mental health professionals do not view the counseling profession as a

reputable profession, this might sway how legislators interact with counselors or the

decisions by legislators not to pass legislation that positively impacts the counseling

profession as a whole. Collaborating with other mental health professionals could

minimize confusion and build an alliance. Multiple perspectives, skills, and backgrounds

represented in a professionally diverse group could facilitate critical analysis of best

practices and could lead to creative and positive involvement with legislators.

Limitations of the Study

Chapter 1 highlighted the limitations of this study. This section will discuss the

ramifications of these limitations on the study. All participants had a different

preconceived meaning of the operational definitions that may have affected their input;

thus making it difficult to replicate this study. Another limitation was that participants

appeared to not be engaged in the research process. For example, none of the participants

completed and returned the demographic surveys I asked them to complete prior to the

interviews, and none of them reviewed the interview summaries or proposed themes that

I provided them with. This suggested that the participants were not committed to the

research project, even though they did participate in the interviews.

Transferability is another limitation of this study. It may be difficult to apply the

data of this study to another study or setting and produce similar results. Technology was

another limitation to the study as problems arose with connectivity during the interviews

with two of the participants. Interview bias was another limitation. To avoid interview

bias, I remained in the role of a student, utilized a semi-structured interview protocol, and

used non-judgmental language throughout the process.

The next step in studying the phenomenon of graduate counseling students

becoming involved in legislative advocacy would be to build a stronger overall evidence

base that legislative advocacy is effective. There are still gaps in the knowledge base that

need to be filled to truly understand the development of professional advocacy. The next

section addresses recommendations for further research on legislative advocacy in the

counseling profession.

Recommendations

Advocacy in the counseling profession dates back to the inception of the

counseling field. However, the application of professional legislative advocacy has not

been fully conceptualized; thus, providing many opportunities for further research

exploring professional legislative advocacy involvement. For example, there is a need

for further research examining how variations of professional legislative advocacy may

influence counseling faculty, educational settings, and CACREP standards. Therefore, a

quantitative study measuring the attitudes of counselor educators toward becoming

involved in legislative advocacy may be insightful. Researchers could create a new

instrument measuring professional legislative advocacy readiness to evaluate counselor

educators’ readiness to engage in legislative advocacy. I also recommend exploring

whether mentoring and modeling professional legislative advocacy influence students’

engagement in legislative advocacy activities. A phenomenological study on counselor

educators’ lived experiences when advocating for the counseling profession with

legislators could provide further insight into their stand on professional advocacy.

Further research analyzing the lived experiences of counseling graduate students when

advocating for the counseling profession with legislators is needed. Participants in this

study revealed variations in how much training n professional legislative advocacy they

received. Defining and exploring what it means to be competent in professional

legislative advocacy is recommended.

All participants in this study noted the importance of having professional

legislative advocacy incorporated into the counseling graduate curriculum. Students need

to learn about the historical roots of professional legislative advocacy, how to gain entry

into professional legislative advocacy, and its importance to the counseling profession. I

recommend exploring whether the pedagogy of professional legislative advocacy from a

historical context supports students being involved in professional legislative advocacy or

whether course content in legislative advocacy results in students becoming involved in

the process.

All of the participants in this study noted their desire to have professional

legislative advocacy in their graduate courses to better prepare them for professional

legislative advocacy involvement. It may be valuable to examine whether counseling

academic programs adopting a model for professional legislative advocacy is beneficial.

As stated in chapter 2, adopting a model similar to the Scientist-Practitioner-Advocacy

Training Model (Mallinckrodt et al., 2014) or the Scholar-Practitioner-Leadership Model

(McClintock, 2003) at the academic level might be beneficial in assisting counseling

students and counseling programs foster a life-long commitment to leadership and

advocacy. I also recommend conducting a study using an instrument to examine

legislative advocacy awareness, comfort level, and values toward legislative involvement

among counseling students.

Two of the participants in this study recommended including professional

legislative advocacy as a CACREP Standard. CACREP Standards (2016) state: (a)

“advocacy processes needed to address institutional and social barriers that impede

access, equity, and success for clients” (p. 9); (b) “current topical and political issues in

counseling and how those issues affect the daily work of counselors and the counseling

profession” (p. 36); and (c) “the role of counselors and counselor educators advocating on

behalf of the profession and professional identity” (p. 37). As such, CACREP Standards

provide the counseling field professionals with theoretical guidelines, however, all of the

participants in this study noted experiential components of implementing these CACREP

Standards are lacking. I recommend that counseling graduate programs incorporate

experiential activities such as letter writing, legislative role plays, video demonstrations,

and inviting experienced legislative advocates as guest speakers in the classroom.

Providing experiential activities in counselor education classrooms could help counselor

educators prepare counseling students to speak with legislators, understand how

legislative advocacy looks, and increase counseling students’ confidence levels when

speaking with legislators. The effectiveness of these activities could be measured in

quantitative studies.

Implications

Individual Implications

My study offers evidence for increased training in professional legislative

advocacy at the academic level (Toporek et al., 2009). The study appears to support the

argument for a change in preparing counseling graduate students for professional

legislative advocacy while they are graduate students, helping them to develop their skills

to organize rallies; provide ways to protest; create grass-roots organizations;

communicate effectively with legislators, and learn how to collaborate with other

stakeholders (Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005). Awareness of legislative trends helps students

identify issues that impact the counseling profession and promotes social justice

advocacy competencies inherent to ACA’s Code of Ethics, Section F.7.e. This section

states that counselor educators are to inform counseling students and supervisees of their

ethical obligations (ACA, 2014). According to Stylianos and Kehyayan (2012),

legislative advocacy promotes “substantive systemic gains” (p. 116). Counselors may

begin to incorporate professional legislative advocacy as a part of their counselor identity.

Moreover, counselors might realize the valuable role they can make in implementing

systematic change for the counseling profession and the clients they serve. Additionally,

professional legislative advocacy provides a new area for continuing education.

Continuing education provides counselors with skills to enhance their knowledge base,

while simultaneously offering continuing education hours needed for licensure.

Organizational Implications

If the tentative conclusions of my study are confirmed by further research, there

will be a case for adopting a legislative advocacy model or legislative advocacy

guidelines to mobilize change. Attention to macro and policy practice, as well as effects

of proposed legislative bills on practice, provides a rationale for the adaptation of a

legislative advocacy model (Stylianos & Kehyayab, 2012). I believe that the divisions

of the American Counseling Association and the Public Policy and Legislation

Committee should establish a task force to develop a professional legislative advocacy

model for the counseling profession.

Implications for Counseling Graduate Programs

Educating students on the importance and history of the counseling profession

may help students develop a passion and commitment to professional legislative

advocacy. Professional legislative advocacy is vital in the development of policies and

laws that impact the mental health of our nation. My study offers supportive evidence for

empowering students with the knowledge and training that would allow them to become

better-informed legislative advocates for the counseling profession. Students can develop

skills to both counsel client and become professional advocates. Students who engage in

legislative advocacy will develop a sense for new legislative trends that extend beyond

graduation. Students who develop a passion for professional legislative advocacy may

become practitioners with a passion for professional legislative advocacy. Incorporating

professional legislative advocacy into the curriculum of counseling graduate programs

could ensure counseling programs adhere to professional standards and ethical codes.

Counselor educators will need to research best practices for incorporating professional

legislative advocacy into their programs.

Societal Implications

Professional legislative advocacy is one component of social justice with the

perspective that emphasizes societal concerns, including issues of equity,

selfdetermination, interdependence, and social responsibility (Vera & Speight, 2003).

Counselors are expected to be aware of how their negative reactions toward persons from

racial and ethnic groups other than their own may prove detrimental to the counseling

relationship and have knowledge of how sociopolitical influences (e.g., poverty, racism,

and stereotyping) may affect the self-esteem and self-concept of racial and ethnic

minority clients.

According to Johnson, Epp, Culp, Williams, and McAllister (2013), professional

counselors are more accessible in rural and minority areas as compared to psychologists

and psychiatrists. The bipartisan legislation, S. 562 (addendum to S. 604), covers

medically-necessary outpatient mental health services for licensed professional

counselors and marriage and family therapists under the same terms, conditions, and

reimbursement rates of clinical social workers. When professional counselors, counselor

educators, and counseling students advocate on behalf of the profession, they increase

access to mental health services to the general public, thus, increasing the viability of the

counseling profession.

Conclusion

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the lived experiences of

graduate students and recent graduates who have been involved in professional legislative

advocacy. I utilized a phenomenological design and semi-structured interviews to

uncover themes associated with professional legislative advocacy involvement of

counseling master’s and doctoral level students or recent professionals who had

graduated within the last two years (Bryman, 2015). I incorporated a hermeneutic

phenomenological approach to increase the understanding of counseling students’

motivation and attitudes regarding legislative advocacy. Ratts and Hutchins (2009) noted

the importance of political action and legislation, particularly advocacy efforts, becoming

a real part of the counselor’s existence. This study contributed to the growing body of

literature of this new phenomenon. Based on my findings, I suggested that counselor

educators incorporate professional legislative advocacy into the counseling curriculum to

help counseling students develop a mindset toward social justice involvement, foster

skills to speak with legislators, and promote the counseling profession as a whole. The

results of this study suggested that direct faculty-student mentoring and modeling foster

greater potential for students later becoming involved in legislative advocacy for the

counseling profession.

In this study, counseling students emphasized the multi-faceted necessities of

professional legislative advocacy. Even those participants in the study who did not have

a clear understanding of the essential elements of professional legislative advocacy felt

that the learning materials from American Counseling Association Institute for

Leadership Training were beneficial in helping them speak with legislators. Throughout

most interviews, the participants said that their involvement in professional legislative

advocacy was empowering. While some participants admitted to feeling intimidated

prior to attending an American Counseling Association Institute for Leadership Training,

participants still felt their time and effort in speaking with legislators or their staff

members was worthwhile.

Although advocating for the profession is essential for the future of the counseling

profession, professional legislative advocacy has received little systematic attention

(Myers et al., 2002). Despite the findings in this study, there still is much to understand

related to legislative advocacy in the counseling profession. As Haight stated in 1982,

which still is true today, “If we as a profession are to continue to have an impact on the

passage of helpful legislation and the modification of oversights of laws, then individual

counselors have to be knowledgeable, skillful, and active in the political arena” (p. 605).

Students also viewed