Here is a statement of one of my guiding principles in my counselling practice. If you want to be entertained, don't bother reading it. If you are curious about what counsellors obsess about, this is one item that you can put your collection. If you want to know more about testing in counsellling, this may be the nugget you've lived for.
I have an admitted bias against quantifying soft psychological constructs in the counselling process. I feel that quantifying parts of a person, for example interests, can raise barriers to integration of identity and locus of control. It is for this reason that I feel ambivalent. Although it may seem like a minor distinction, this is not the same as a bias against the tools themselves. I use the tools often because most clients I see espouse value in getting this feedback. Sometimes the tool fills a desire for a concrete outcome such as a written report, and sometimes we are convinced that the tool simply is the best source of information to help inform a decision about livelihood. I want to believe that the client and I work with whatever motivations he/she comes with, not whatever method I have least ambivalence. Most clients I see indicate an interest in a "test" at some point. While I do use the the tools I most concerned whether he or she has a critical perspective when the client leaves with the results.
In spite of my concern about locus of control and integration of identity, most people who do normed vocational tests find that she or he is affirmed which I'm thinking is about as far away from disintegrated identity as you can get.
No comments:
Post a Comment