Equity of Access to Comprehensive School Counseling: Examining Arkansas' School Counseling Improvement Act of 2019

• In Event: Exploring the Role of School Counselors and Principals to Promote Equity and Inclusion in Schools

Abstract

Objectives
The School Counseling Improvement Act of 2019 mandated that each public school district in Arkansas implement a comprehensive school counseling program that systemically aligns programs and services for students, K-12. However, investigation into the law’s effects has yet been published.
The statute enumerates the various direct and indirect services to students that should occupy “at least ninety percent (90%)” of each school counselor’s “working time during student contact days” (A.C.A. § 6-18-2003). Similarly, it delineates the “administrative activities [that] shall not exceed more than ten percent (10%) of the school counselor’s time.” In a study predating this law, Harless (2015) found that, while all participating school counselors in Arkansas expressed dissatisfaction at the amount of time they were required to engage in non-counseling-related activities, counselors from low-poverty school districts were more likely than ones from higher poverty districts to report having opportunities to work directly and indirectly with students.

Theoretical Framework
We employ critical theory in this investigation. More specifically, we acknowledge the importance of “the original project of a critical theory in society” – namely, that it incorporates not only social critique, but also knowledge of the particular aspect of society being scrutinized (Renault, 2020, p. 190).

Methods
This qualitative study addresses two research questions pertaining to the School Counseling Improvement Act of 2019. We explore whether the law has fostered greater collaboration between school counselors and administrators, and to what degree the law has served to address longstanding racial and socioeconomic disparities in students' educational opportunities and access to comprehensive school counseling.

Data Sources
Data for this investigation come from responses to a research-designed, open-ended survey administered electronically to Arkansas school counselors and administrators; and administrative data available from the state’s department of education.

Results
Harless’ (2015) finding that school counselors in low-poverty districts had greater opportunities than their peers in higher-poverty locales to work directly with students is not surprising, given Arkansas’ long history of opportunity/achievement gaps. Hester et al.’s (2022) examination revealed “substantial differences in attaining academic indicators of postsecondary readiness and success between Black and White students, [and] between students eligible for the National School Lunch program and students not eligible” (p. 5). Our results delineate the limited impacts that this well-intended legislation has had on improving circumstances for students in Arkansas through comprehensive school counseling programs and school counselor-administrator collaboration.

Scholarly Significance
Disparities have long existed nationwide between schools and districts serving high percentages of students from low versus higher socioeconomic status – disparities that have disproportionately impacted Black and brown students (Ladson-Billings, 2021; Mehta, 2019). Arkansas is no exception to this reality, given that it ranks 39th in economic well-being, 34th in education, and 46th in health nationally (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2022). This study identifies the limited degree to which the School Counseling Improvement Act of 2019 has begun to correct these inequities, as well as the degree to which it has promoted greater collaboration between school counselors and administrators.
Word count= 487

Authors

• Christopher E. Trombly, Southern Connecticut State University

• Pam Dixon, Arkansas Tech University