Tests and Assessments in Counseling

A Case by Case Exploration

Bill McHenry, Kathryn C. MacCluskie, Jim McHenry, Bill McHenry, Kathryn C. MacCluskie, Jim McHenry

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781315279510
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psicologia
• Subtopic: Consulenza psicoterapeutica

Tests and Assessments in Counseling provides students with current information on assessment tools and techniques through detailed case scenarios and vignettes. Going beyond basic information about a multitude of assessments, the authors focus on the use of instruments in individual cases to allow readers to more fully grasp the integral relationship between tests and assessment data and the counseling process. Chapters guide students through choosing the most effective assessment tool, successfully administering the assessment, and making meaningful and useful results of the data with the client. Test questions are also included at the end of each chapter.

1 Introduction

Bill McHenry

Introduction

Humans are the most complex, dynamic, and sophisticated creatures in the universe. Consequently, assessing, appraising, attempting to measure ourselves is an incredibly complex task (Camara, 2014), a task so daunting that the tools, techniques and processes our field has developed over the past hundred-or-so years, as valuable as they might presently be, only begin to give us a glimpse into the world of the client.

Imperfect as they are, however, if used in conjunction with other salient pieces of information, such tools can greatly aid counselor-client progress (Hood & Johnson, 2007). Unfortunately, ineffectively utilized assessment can impede the counseling process and result in negative client outcomes (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997).

Assessment—which includes both formal and informal tests, instruments, observations, self-reports, etc.—requires expert knowledge of the tools, techniques and standards by which an individual’s results are being measured/compared (Drummond & Jones, 2010). (Please note carefully the use of the phrase “an individual’s results” in the last sentence). All assessment is individual based. n=1. Period. Even in cases in which we are administering group tests/assessments, as we will present later in this book, the actual assessment still takes place at the individual level.

Certainly then, it follows that no matter what instrumentation we are utilizing, the data belong to the person with whom we are working. This book is framed with that basic construct at its core.

Data

One of the assessments we will cover in a later chapter is a very widely used inventory, Holland’s Self-Directed Search (SDS). The SDS provides a quick self-report of skills, interests and aptitudes of the client that can then be used to help the client identify job clusters he/she might want to consider. Clients are asked to self-report their likes and dislikes in relation to a number of prompts such as “practice a musical instrument.” Then they are asked to attest to things that they do well or competently (e.g., “I can repair furniture”). They are also asked to self-rate on a scale from 7–1 (high to low) in six domains (e.g., “clerical ability”) (Dozier, Sampson, & Reardon, 2015).

One of your authors was part of a project that encouraged local Latino high school students to consider attending college. The program provided college-based experiences and included the SDS as a part of a battery of assessments to aid students in their possible choice of majors. Master’s-level counseling students were used to proctor and score the SDS. Although the SDS is self-scorable, in this particular case we decided to use several instruments and then try to combine the results for the students to acquire an even greater understanding of self. When one of the master’s students was scoring the SDS for one of the participants, something very peculiar was noticed.

One particular participant had indicated that he had no interest in anything on the SDS and possessed no skills/abilities/aptitudes. Considering the data in hand, with no other data yet, the counseling student consulted with me on how to proceed. Her hypotheses ranged from “maybe he’s depressed and suicidal” to “maybe he didn’t understand, he is ESL.” She then guessed that even though each of the participants had been offered English or Spanish versions of the instrument (he had chosen English), possibly he had not understood the prompts. She then returned to other data she had observed. Since he had presented very quiet and reserved, her lean went back to depression. Finally, she offered a developmentally based guess, suggesting that since he was at a stage of non-compliance as a teen, maybe he was just presenting as defiant and resistant.

Of course, the most important thing to do in this case was to sit and talk with the participant to hear his perspective on how he answered the SDS. The counseling student was encouraged to do this and learned quite a bit from the process. In this case, it was very easy to assume that the data received through the SDS was inaccurate and there must be a reason he completed it incorrectly. The truth turned out to be far more compelling than our conjecture and assumptions were.

When asked to help her understand his answers on the SDS, the young man politely and clearly stated that he was going to be a professional soccer player. Exhibiting no braggadocio, he reported that he was the best player on his school team, and had already received offers in his home country to join a professional team. He further stated that he had no other interests in working at anything but being a soccer player. He also allowed that he was “ok” at some of the things on the SDS, but when compared to how good he was at soccer, he was “bad” at them. We find it very interesting that, from his perspective, his worldview, he had filled out the SDS as accurately as possible. However, for our understanding and clarification, we felt more data and discussion was needed to really do justice to these results. Thus, we will encourage you throughout the book to use more than one data source for assessment purposes. Multi-method assessment provides a much more 3D view of the client. In almost all cases, more data is better.

A second important lesson from this case is that results of any assessment should be corroborated as best possible with the client (Bram, 2015). As we will discuss throughout the remaining chapters, consensus building with the client is critical in helping him/her make meaning from results. For example, when considering the SDS, if a client scored very high on the artistic and very low on the conventional, results delivered in a format that was regimented, directive and orderly (e.g., a list of occupations they might consider) might not fit well with the client’s overall way of looking at the world. Rather an approach that used some forms of artistic representation of the results might be better received (e.g., a mosaic word art representation of the results).

Returning to the case described so far, the counseling student was still a bit perplexed as to what to do with the SDS results. She was also interested to find out why he chose to attend this event when he had no real desire to attend college. His response was that he wanted to be with his friends. As the day went on, it became clear that had a strong social interest and was well respected by his peers. So what to do with the results?

The student was encouraged to retake the assessment, this time from the perspective of ranking and rating his skills without comparing them to his soccer ability and interest. He was also encouraged to think about the results as a good tool to consider when he eventually retired from soccer and as possible hobbies. He followed the new instructions, leading to a significant change in the results.

In hindsight, what could the counselor have done differently? Of course, she could have done more preparation upfront. She could have sat with each of the participants and had an introductory “session” to get to know them better. Unfortunately, time constraints are always a pressing issue for counselors. In this case, the most important thing that happened in the end was that the counselor and client went over the results and then reassessed under better circumstances (his view of the questions and prompts being different).

There will always be variables that mitigate the certainty of test and assessment results (Chiu, 2014). Any of the hypotheses this counseling student forwarded could have been true. A deeply depressed person might not have any interests and he/she may hold a life view that he or she is incapable of achieving many things. In the case presented previously, however, James Marcia’s developmental theory might suggest that this client most likely had foreclosed on his identity and, thus, any other career options (Marcia, 1980).

The Testing Conditions

Sophisticated assessments can shed great amounts of light onto an individual’s personality, can determine a client’s level of development, and can even detect whether or not a client is being honest, genuine and real in his or her responses, etc. Under ideal conditions, test error can be minimal and the results of the process can hold a high degree of validity. For most tests and assessments, optimal conditions are similar and should be common sense.

Testing should take place in an environment free of obstructions (visual, auditory, mechanical, internal noise, etc.). If you are proctoring an IQ test to a student, and there is a terribly loud thunderstorm with heavy rain hitting the metal roof of the building you are in, and, if the student happens to have PTSD, it would be readily recognized that the results may not detect the student’s true IQ. So, in this case, do we turn around and retest the student the next day or maybe a couple of days later? Hopefully not. In many tests, especially instruments that call for the client to demonstrate knowledge and/or learning, for up to two weeks after the assessment, the brain is still actively attempting to solve the problems from the test. Therefore, we would expect that if we immediately retest this student, the test score would actually go from being lowered (due to the impact of the loud noise during the first examination) to elevated (due to prior test knowledge) (Drummond & Jones, 2010; Hood & Johnson, 2007).

Ideal environmental conditions (low noise pollution, limited visual stimulation, etc.) are very important in the testing process. However, another significant variable that will determine the degree of validity of results lays within the client. Factors that may influence (minimally or greatly) test results include mood, current state of health, recent sleep pattern, medications and diet. Such influences are rarely optimized to allow for peak performance during a test. However, awareness on the part of the counselor and client as to the potential implications of internal and external factors on the test results is important (Bram, 2015). One way we like to consider assessment results is to remember that the results are based on all of the possible influences on the client during that one particular time in that one particular place while they were in that one particular state. This doesn’t mean that results are typically not reliable. In actuality, many good instruments have high levels of reliability (consistency).

Meaning-Making

In many cases, counselors and clients are best served when they allow time to consider the results, what the results mean for the client, and how the data might be used to help the client move forward on a topic or issue. This is an extremely important part of the process that requires professional skill on the part of the counselor to help the client fit what may be new information into his or her personal world (Wong, 2015).

When it comes to helping a client make meaning from assessment results, the clinician becomes a very important variable as well. Consider the case example that follows. In this case, how might the variability across different styles by clinicians impact the way the results are conferred, shared, communicated, described, and, in the end, how the counselor will help the client make meaning from the data?

Case Example: The Case of John

John, 58, a Caucasian male, is coming to counseling for help with dealing with what he describes as an “overbearing” boss. Dealing with his new boss, John experiences anxiety, frustration and uncertainty, and has been considering, reconsidering and considering again, “What is wrong with me?”

He has been administered the following instruments (with the associated outcomes/results/assessment data):

• Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator (MBTI). The ISFJ code provided through the MBTI indicates several significant characteristics that the counselors attend to. Specifically, John may have personality characteristics that lead him to complain and feel resentful and unappreciated while he struggles to actually assert his needs. Interestingly, this personality type also may lead a counselor to understand that John has a tendency to hold a rigid outlook on hierarchy, structure, and procedures. Further characteristics of this personality type include being practical, realistic, concrete, and specific.
• Coping Responses Inventory (CRI). Results from this instrument allow a client to better understand his way of dealing/coping with a challenging life stressor. There are eight scales that help determine the style being used by the client in a particular scenario. Of the eight scales, four are identified as being approach styles (meaning that the client is moving toward the problem cognitively and/or behaviorally). The remaining four scales identify coping responses that a client may use to avoid the life issue. The scales are not identified as being isolated and often it is discovered that a client uses both approach and avoidance responses.

John’s results indicate that he scored highest on the following scales: Seeking Guidance and Support (SG) and Emotional Discharge (ED). The SG function allows him to seek counseling, talk to friends and family about the issue, and specifically includes behavioral strategies that have the client gather more information about the problem through discussing it with others seeking guidance, support and new information. The ED response specifically allows John to disperse some of the energy associated with the issue by expressing his emotions to others.

Now consider two counselors, and their unique perspectives, approaches and theoretical underpinnings.

Counselor #1 is a cognitive-behavioral therapist. She specifically uses Rational-Emotive Behavioral Therapy (REBT) in her approach.

Counselor #2 is a Narrative Therapist. He also incorporates Solution-Focused Brief Therapy into his counseling style.

Both counselors share the results factually with the client. They report the data in a similar manner. The client reacts negatively to the results. John responds by saying the following: “Are there any other tests you can give me? These don’t seem right.” Then after a pause, he continues: “I’ve been at this company for over 30 years, and really never had any problems with my boss. It sounds to me like you are now saying I have always had these problems of avoiding emotions and stuff.”

Each of these counselors has a specific dominant theory base from which she or he operates in focusing on the client’s responses and reactions. These theories, and their unique theoretical lens, in turn then affect the counselor’s responses back to the client (Shapiro, 2012).

Counselor #1 may respond by challenging the client to consider what beliefs he has that may be preventing him from even hearing the results. She may want to challenge the client (gently or firmly) to help him understand how his emotionally discharged reaction to the results seems to corroborate them. Not a bad therapeutic approach. Perhaps, from it, she may be able to help him come to better understand himself and how the new boss’s presence surfaces certain reactions from him (that are both rational and sometimes irrational).

Counselor #2 may approach the client’s responses from a perspective of asking him to share a story or example of when he struggled with the decision of a boss, or didn’t like how the boss was coming across, but handled it well. This counselor, using his particular theory base, can focus on the exceptions to the dominant story (and the client’s reaction to the feedback) while surfacing unique moments when the client used a different response approach.

One really important aspect to this case example is the fact that the client had an immediate, st...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• About the Authors/Editors
• Contributing Authors
• Acknowledgments
• Preface
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Measurement Concepts
• 3 Ethical and Legal Issues in Psychological Assessment and Testing
• 4 Mental Status Examinations and Intake Assessments
• 5 Career Assessments and Personality Inventories
• 6 Assessment Techniques in Substance Use Disorders in Counseling
• 7 Utilizing Assessment in Counseling with Children
• 8 Assessment of Psychological Conditions
• 9 Intelligence Testing: WISC-V
• 10 Assessments in Rehabilitation Counseling
• 11 Suicide Assessment
• 12 Assessment in K-12 School Counseling
• Concluding Thoughts
• References
• Answer Key to End-of-Chapter Questions
• Index