CDSCPCell Directory Service Command Program
Copyright 1988-2018, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
In addition to their beliefs that implementing a CDSCP led to desired outcomes, participants' statements reflected their beliefs in their abilities to do what was necessary to implement a CDSCP.
The participants believed that their ability to best serve students (through the implementation of a CDSCP) was ultimately tied to the acceptance of themselves and the program within the school.
The intervening conditions were those conditions within the school that both deterred and facilitated the implementation of a CDSCP. Participants discussed a relatively equal number of facilitating and deterring conditions.
Deterring conditions included the school's history of not having a CDSCP, lack of administrative support, differing stakeholder visions, obstructive colleagues, multiple demands, and non-CDSCP school counselor duties.
Of note is that the same types of conditions when present in a negative form became facilitating conditions when present in a positive form (e.g., school's history of having a CDSCP, administrative support, shared stakeholder visions, collaborative colleagues, lack of multiple demands, and school counselor duties aligned with CDSCP implementation).
There were three overarching actions employed to carry out the implementation of a CDSCP within the contexts of school counselor self-efficacy and systemic thinking and integration and under the facilitating and deterring conditions within the school.
Participants described the "big picture" of their vision of a CDSCP as well as how to implement and manage the "details." Spartan indicated that planning provided a "road map and directional piece." Each participant also discussed the importance of what Bob stated, "You've got to figure out where the priority is." Participants described a process of determining priorities that was setting specific but that included considering the most "visible" activities, activities that reached the largest group of students (i.e., classroom guidance, large-group activities), and those that served the needs of the school as identified by the constituents and through school and intervention data.
An overarching theme reflected in the ongoing process of planning and implementing a CDSCP was, as Bob stated, "a work in progress." He went on to add, "We're headed in the right direction and better than what we were doing 5 years ago."
Although the participants engaged in evaluation to varying degrees, all participants spoke about evaluation of services and their CDSCP. For instance, all participants conducted formal and/or informal needs assessments to determine priorities and plan interventions.
There was a reciprocal nature between the actions utilized to implement a CDSCP. For example, a common practice among participants was the formation of program advisory committees, composed of various school stakeholders (i.e., administrators, teachers, parents, students, community members).
This consequence was reflected in positive terms by both Anna, "We know that CDSCP is the best way to meet the needs of all students in the school," and Spartan, "Now we work with all students in all domains." Additionally, Leigh succinctly stated, "I'd like to make the school a place where all kids can learn and all kids want to learn and that it is a safe place for them."
All participants noted that should all of their actions toward implementation of a CDSCP ultimately fail and therefore they perceived they would not have opportunities to implement plans and processes to serve all students, they would leave that system rather than compromise what they believed to be in the best interest of students.