Students' Perspectives on Gatekeeping in Counselor Education: A Case Study

Abstract

Through in-depth interviews, the authors examined 10 master's-level counseling students' perceptions of gatekeeping. Case analysis resulted in 3 major themes pertaining to the necessity of gatekeeping, vital components, and counseling student characteristics. Implications of the findings are also discussed.

Am I My Peers’ Keeper? Problems of Professional Competency in Doctoral Students

“…The findings from this study show that the majority (68.1%) of doctoral students reported that they had observed peers with PPC in their training programs and that they were likely to be influenced by peers' nonacademic characteristics (e.g., inability to regulate emotions, unprofessional behaviors). The results of this study mirror other studies on counseling students with PPC (Brown-Rice & Furr, 2013Foster, Leppma, & Hutchinson, 2014), in which PPC was identified as a major concern among master's-level students. This is the first study to extensively examine this issue among doctoral students.…”

“…Furthermore, students wanted additional information regarding how to identify a peer with PPC (75%) and how to respond to a peer with PPC (83.9%). However, other research findings support the need for the gatekeeping process to be discussed with students beginning at entrance interviews and continuing throughout the program (Foster et al, 2014).…”

Ward v. Wilbanks: Counselor Educators Respond

“…This inconsistency reflected the mixed messages counseling students have previously reported on referrals (Burkholder & Hall, 2014). Participants underscored the role counselor educators play as gatekeepers as well as the importance of addressing student concerns early (Burkholder & Hall, 2014;Foster et al, 2014;McAdams et al, 2007;Ziomek-Daigle & Christensen, 2010). Themes illuminating counselor educators' perspectives and pedagogical practices on Ward v. Wilbanks are unique within the counseling literature.…”

“…Similar to Lumadue and Duffey () and Foster and McAdams (), Parker et al also stressed clear and consistent communication of program policies to students. Foster, Leppma, and Hutchinson () used case analysis to illuminate counseling students' perceptions of gatekeeping. Interviews with 10 counseling students found that students affirmed the importance of gatekeeping, identified core components of the gatekeeping process (robust admissions process, explicit parameters communicated to students), and should possess certain traits to be counselors (self‐awareness, concern for others).…”

A Phenomenological Investigation of Doctoral Students’ Gatekeeping Experiences

“…Dismissing a student during practicum or internship becomes increasingly challenging, as the student has previously advanced through a large portion of the training curriculum (Bemak et al, 1999). Researchers indicate that while master's students believe faculty members are responsible for intervening, faculty and students are often aware of deficient students within their programs who graduate with no remediation (Foster, Leppma, & Hutchinson, 2014;Gaubatz & Vera, 2006). Negative consequences, such as litigation, student backlash, and disagreement with colleagues or university officials, may deter faculty from responding to gatekeeping concerns (Schuermann, Avent, & Lloyd-Hazlett, 2018).…”