Abstract
Rural Appalachia encompasses a region of the United States represented by unique cultural strengths and systemic challenges. To meet their students’ career and college needs, school counselors working in rural Appalachia must understand the cultural nuances of the region. Consensual qualitative research (CQR) methodology revealed five domains and 20 categories describing how rural Appalachian high school counselors address career and college readiness. We provide implications for career and college programming for use by high school counselors in rural Appalachia.
Keywords
High school counselors are uniquely positioned to promote career and college readiness (CCR) because of their significant role in providing mental health, academic, and postsecondary services to students (Gilfillan, 2018; Green et al., 2023). However, many contextual factors and role demands, such as school rurality, can influence school counselors’ ability to carry out CCR programming. Compared to suburban and urban schools, rural high school counselors report fewer students seeking postsecondary information and a lower likelihood of hosting or participating in college fairs (Radford et al., 2015). Rural students desire to attend college and pursue careers but face barriers that impede goal attainment, including lack of academic preparation, financial constraints, and limited school resources (Morton et al., 2018). Given the unique barriers presented to students in the rural Appalachian region, school counselors may navigate challenges by providing culturally appropriate CCR programming. To date, no research specifically highlights the experiences of rural Appalachian school counselors providing CCR programming.
Career and College Readiness
Career and College Readiness (CCR) is a broad concept used to describe students’ characteristics or abilities necessary to perform skills for work or academic programs following high school (Roberts & Grant, 2021). CCR can focus on cognitive skills, academic content knowledge, self-management strategies, and social skills (Conley, 2012; American School Counselor Association [ASCA], 2022). Martinez et al. (2017) highlighted how increasing aspirations and self-efficacy for postsecondary education is another important piece to developing students' readiness for postsecondary planning. Best practices in addressing CCR span a variety of interventions and approaches aimed at increasing college knowledge, exposing students to career options, and creating plans for postsecondary transitions. To increase knowledge about the college-going process, schools can plan college visits, provide opportunities for students to earn college credits, and connect students with admission representatives (Hooker & Brand, 2010; Li et al., 2017). Career exploration can occur through career mentoring, job shadowing, guest speakers, and soft skills training (Detgen et al., 2021). Last, having an individualized plan based on student values, interests, and skills can be essential for helping students transition to their career and college goals (Lindstrom et al., 2022).
Many factors influence CCR programming in schools with underserved populations (e.g., low income, low performing) including counselors’ use of time (Brookover & Johnson, 2022), students’ unpredictable life experiences, and access to career preparation experiences (Lindstrom et al., 2022). Brookover and Johnson (2022) identified that school counselors needed to spend at least 21% of their time on CCR to be impactful on college attendance and persistence. However, only school counselors with less than 26% of students qualifying for free and reduced lunch reported meeting this threshold by spending 26.5% of their time on postsecondary admissions counseling (Clinedinst, 2019). Further, a positive relationship exists between the percent of students eligible for free and reduced lunch and time spent on personal needs counseling (Clinedinst, 2019). Life experiences such as poverty, generational trauma, or prospective first-generation status can require more mental health support from school counselors and inhibit students’ ability to see their postsecondary potential (Lindstrom et al., 2022). Supporting students through personal challenges can create barriers for school counselors providing comprehensive information about college and career options and developing career-related learning experiences (Lindstrom et al., 2022). Underserved communities can be found across the United States, but one area that frequently experiences regional hardships is rural Appalachia.
CCR in Rural Appalachia
The Appalachian region consists of 205,000 square miles of land stretching from southern New York to northern Mississippi, and nearly one fourth of the counties are considered rural (Pollard et al., 2023). Rural counties exist all across the United States and are categorized by sparse population, low housing density, and distance from urban centers that provide access to jobs, utility services, and technology (Randolph et al., 2023; Ratcliffe et al., 2016). These characteristics create challenges in terms of lower average household income, higher unemployment, and reduced access to health care (Randolph et al., 2023). Many of the rural communities within the Appalachian region share the same challenges as rural areas across the United States, with some unique differences. Compared to non-Appalachian rural counties, the rural Appalachian population is decreasing at a higher rate (3.5% vs. 0.4%), poverty rates are higher (19.7% vs. 15.1%), and more families lack access to the internet (19.9% vs. 15.8%; Pollard et al., 2023). These social and economic factors suggest additional attention is needed to understand CCR programming for rural Appalachia.
Another relevant factor in rural Appalachia is cultural values distinct from the larger country. Despite the United States being regarded as one of the most individualistic cultures, Appalachian communities are often reported as embracing a more collectivist subculture (Denham, 2016). Collectivism in Appalachia is described as a deep sense of family and kinship, strong ties to the community, attachment to the geographic region, commitment to personal and religious values, and resistance to conflict or change (Foster et al., 2021; Gore et al., 2011; Hlinka, 2017; Keefe, 2005). These cultural factors can impact career exposure, limit potential consideration of opportunities to those that are geographically close, and reduce college self-efficacy beliefs (Hlinka, 2017; Tang & Russ, 2007).
Unfortunately, the long history of systemic exploitation of the region and pervasive negative stereotypes have caused significant educational and economic inequities in rural Appalachia, increasing the need for targeted CCR support. Koricich and colleagues (2018) identified differences in postsecondary enrollment rates for students from rural communities (.663) compared to non-rural students (.745). Further, fewer adults in rural Appalachia have bachelor’s degrees (18.5%) compared to adults from non-Appalachian rural communities (23.1%; Pollard et al., 2023). These differences in postsecondary enrollment and attainment may impact high school students’ career choice pathways or academic aspirations (Ali & Saunders, 2009; Carrico et al., 2019; Rieder Bennett, 2008). Although the rural Appalachian region has recently seen growth in terms of employment (Pollard et al., 2023), many industries historically have not prioritized developing in the area due to the expansive, mountainous landscape (Chenoweth & Galliher, 2004; Rieder Bennett, 2008), and nearly one third of rural Appalachian residents must commute to work for a minimum of 30 minutes outside of their community (Pollard et al., 2023). Rural students tend to consider their geographic contexts and the availability of jobs when developing their postsecondary aspirations (Agger et al., 2018). If a wide range of career fields is not readily visible to students, students may not be aware that a particular career exists, may not have an interest in pursuing the career, or may not have information regarding steps to achieve the career.
Caregivers frequently serve as role models in adolescents’ career and college decision making (Ali & Saunders, 2006; Kantamneni et al., 2018; Slocum et al., 2020), and the influence of family in postsecondary plans is just as salient within rural Appalachia (Agger et al., 2018; Carrico et al., 2019). Adult mentors can increase academic success and overall college adjustment (Dika & D’Amico, 2016; Gibbons et al., 2022). However, because adults in rural Appalachia are less likely to hold college degrees compared to those in other regions (Pollard et al., 2023), rural students may have less access to college-going information and may be more likely to explore careers that do not require postsecondary education (Ali & Saunders, 2006, 2009). Although many rural Appalachian caregivers desire for their children to pursue careers that require a college degree to achieve financial stability, caregivers without a college degree may lack the practical knowledge necessary to help their students navigate the transition to postsecondary education (Slocum et al., 2020). The inaccessibility of concrete information and role models with college-going experience can serve as barriers to postsecondary success for rural Appalachian high school students (Gibbons et al., 2020). In turn, family members often rely on extended family, high school teachers and counselors, and college preparation presentations to assist in the postsecondary exploration process (Sowl & Crain, 2021).
Rural Appalachian School Counselors
In this vast region, many school counselors are working to promote CCR and must tailor their CCR programming to meet unique cultural strengths and challenges. Past research has investigated how rural schools may use community partnerships, promote a college-going atmosphere, and talk with students about postsecondary options for CCR programming (Byun et al., 2017; Griffin et al., 2011). Li et al. (2017) found a majority of rural high school counselors utilized online career information, career planning assessments, dedicated career exploration activities, presentations from community employers or college representatives, and experiential opportunities (e.g., job shadowing, co-op programs, internships). However, research has not made clear how school counselors within rural Appalachia implement CCR programming to address the specific challenges experienced by their students and families.
Because school counselors develop programming based on student developmental needs, school counselors’ processes for developing CCR programming in rural Appalachia may be distinct from those of school counselors broadly. The purpose of this study was to understand school counselors’ experiences with providing CCR programming to high school students in rural Appalachia. Our primary research question was: “How do rural Appalachian high school counselors attend to CCR?” with two sub-questions: (a) “What is the process for developing and delivering CCR programming?” and (b) “What are the supports and barriers to delivering CCR programming in rural communities?”
Method
We utilized the consensual qualitative research method (CQR; Hill et al., 2005; Hill et al., 1997) given its effectiveness in generating knowledge about novel, under-researched topics and exploring individuals’ unique and shared inner experiences, beliefs, and attitudes (Hill, 2012). This method allowed for the investigation of both the subjective experience and the broader phenomenon of CCR programming among rural Appalachian high school counselors. CQR uses an iterative process wherein the research team works collaboratively to confirm, debate, and revise codes (i.e., brief descriptions of the data) until reaching a shared agreement. As recommended, our research team discussed expectations and/or personal biases related to the data to deepen the meaning-making process (Hill, 2012).
Participants
Participant Demographics and CQR Definitions.
aParticipant reported working in a school with a relatively high postsecondary rate compared to other schools in the area. NR: Information was not reported in the interview transcript.
Research Team
The team consisted of five members: the primary researcher (first author), three additional research team members, and one auditor. All research team members identify as White and cisgender, with two men and three women. All had prior experience in school counseling and/or career advising and outreach in both rural and nonrural settings. Further, all team members expressed a vested interest in supporting rural high school counselors given our knowledge of relevant barriers and supports in rural schools. We anticipated that participants’ CCR experiences might relate to the systemic inequities experienced in rural Appalachia in general and rural schools in particular. We remained aware of our assumptions and held each other accountable to not presume the salience of rurality.
Procedure
After obtaining Institutional Review Board approval, we recruited participants using state and national counseling email lists and direct emails to school counselors in the targeted area. These methods resulted in responses from 12 eligible and one ineligible participant. All 12 eligible participants were selected to participate and completed all aspects of the study. Before each interview, a team member gave an oral description of the research to the participant and obtained confirmation of the signed consent. All interviews were audio and video recorded for transcription purposes, with identifying information removed before data analysis. Each member of the research team, including the auditor, engaged in at least one interview. Interviewers aimed to spend about an hour interviewing each school counselor, consistent with prior CQR studies focused on school counselors (Merlin-Knoblich et al., 2020); thus, the interview lengths ranged from 27 to 75 minutes with an average length of 48 minutes. Participants were asked to create a pseudonym used for data analysis and reporting procedures. Each participant received a gift card for their participation and time.
Consistent with CQR methods, the interview protocol was semistructured with 10 open-ended questions relating to the research questions in the study (Hill, 2012). Following rapport-building questions, participants were asked to describe their CCR programming and how it was developed. They were also asked about their aspirations for CCR and what their students typically do after high school. The first and third authors developed the interview protocol questions and the research team reviewed the questions for clarity. Interviewers used common probes to encourage participants to provide more detailed responses and ensure consistency among what was being asked of participants across interviews.
Data Analysis
This study utilized a standard CQR coding protocol (Hill et al., 1997). Before beginning data analysis, the research team met to review the CQR methodology and protocol (Hill et al., 1997, 2005). To start, we used an a priori list of domains (i.e., topic areas) created by the first author and the team’s auditor to individually code one portion of the first transcript. Next, we reviewed domain codes and discussed discrepancies, which we resolved via discussion about how we were making sense of the data and our potential biases in doing so (Hill et al., 2005). We revised the a priori domain list to better capture the emergent topic areas, then began generating core ideas for the entire first transcript. Hill (2012) described core ideas as brief and concise summaries of participants’ narratives. We met to review each member’s domains and core ideas, debating what best fit the data until we reached a consensus. Our discussions resulted in further refining our domain descriptions. Then, the external auditor coded the first transcript using the revised domain list. We compared the auditor’s codes to the group’s consensus codes, resolved the few remaining discrepancies, and proceeded to within-case analysis.
CCR Domains and Categories and Associated Frequencies.
Note. Frequency categories are as described by Hill et al. (2005). General: supported by all participants; Typical: supported by more than half of participants; Variant: supported by half or fewer participants.
Trustworthiness
Our team employed several trustworthiness protocols during data collection and data analysis. Per CQR best practices (Hill et al., 2005), we maintained awareness during the recruitment process to ensure that the composition of our sample was as heterogeneous as possible, allowing us to explore similarities and differences in participants’ experiences. We also ensured that interviews followed a standardized set of questions and probes. Throughout data analysis, we independently reviewed the data before meeting as a group. This process is a defining feature of CQR (Hill et al., 2005), allowing for rigor in the coding process. Moreover, although we practiced the coding process using an initial domain list, we were careful to allow domains to emerge naturally and actively revised the domains as needed. Our use of the auditor also was consistent with CQR recommendations (Hill et al., 2005). With extensive experience as a counselor educator and qualitative researcher, the auditor provided another means of ensuring consistency throughout our coding progress and assisted in confirming the representativeness of our data to the empirical literature. The shared expertise of the team members also enhanced the trustworthiness of this study. All members had training in CCR programming and prior counseling experience. Last, our use of direct quotes in this study was an intentional effort to highlight participants’ verbatim narratives without researcher biases or interpretations.
Results
Twelve rural Appalachian high school counselors described their experiences with planning and delivering CCR programming. Before answering questions directly tied to the research questions, we invited participants to share their personal definitions of CCR. Many described CCR as helping students learn about themselves, expand their options after high school, and determine a path that fits their interests and purpose. They also mentioned building students’ academic, communication, and relationship skills. Full CCR definitions from participants are included in Table 1.
We identified five domains and 20 categories. The five domains were: (a) process and intended outcomes, (b) career and college activities, (c) counselor knowledge of students, (d) school counselor’s experience, and (e) contextual factors. According to CQR methodology (Hill et al., 2005), the frequency of categories is described using the designations of general (supported by all participants), typical (supported by more than half of participants), and variant (supported by half or fewer participants). Although most of our domains and categories were supported by nearly all participants, the frequency of this support differed greatly. In the following sections, we focus our description on the most frequently endorsed categories across participants. Table 2 presents a full list of resulting domains and categories.
Process and Intended Outcomes
All participants described procedural considerations and intended outcomes. Descriptions included both how they decided what to include and what they hoped for as a result of programming. The overarching CCR goal was to increase students’ awareness of self and the world of work. The school counselors accomplished this by doing all they could to meet student needs and using creativity to help navigate challenges while providing grade-level and career-relevant activities that were developmentally appropriate. Within this large domain, five categories, three typical and two general, emerged.
The most frequently endorsed category within this domain was titled increase awareness. These school counselors described how they provided concrete exposure to postsecondary and career options and tried to make these activities encouraging for students. As Joseph explained: We try and give students the idea of postsecondary options . . . and we even try and tell them why it is important to plan and prepare for college . . . creating awareness to students that it's not a must that you make a lot of money from college. The higher the degree you obtain, the more money you will earn, but many jobs, they also pay well, but you just need training beyond high school.
BB noted that bringing in guest speakers and offering tours were ways she increased awareness. These school counselors also utilized online career assessments, social media, and federally and state-produced videos to share information about career and college opportunities. M. DuBois spoke about “encouraging them to have relationships with their teachers, their mentors, with exploring the different people in the school” to learn about various careers. BB summed up this category, stating “communication, just telling the students and you never know what is going to touch you or is going to affect you.”
The other category most endorsed in this domain was exercising persistence, flexibility, and innovation. Participants described their need to be creative and try anything and everything to meet students’ CCR needs. Leigh stated, “We all do our best with what we’re given, and we make the biggest splash we can” and Susan noted: I think that, although it is challenging considering where we are, what our community is like, that we still show up every day. We try to present our students with every possible opportunity to explore and really try to determine what careers best meet their interests, aptitudes, work values.
Several participants explained how they learned from past experiences. For example, Thea indicated that her CCR program was still “developing. . . . We add things every year to try to help our students.” Similarly, Chiara described trying Saturday events, admitting “well, do you think people will come in on Saturdays? No, not really. . . . But it's about creating a phenomenon, an interest.” The willingness to be flexible and persist even when unsuccessful characterized our rural Appalachian school counselors.
The remaining three categories in this domain were differentiation, collecting data, and meeting requirements. Participants described the need for variation when presenting CCR information, referring to grade-level tasks and requirements and the need to present developmentally appropriate information to students. As Leigh described: “I have four . . . slightly different trainings for each of those grade levels [9–12].” Collecting data referred to how they used data to inform their CCR activities. Thea highlighted her use of needs assessments to learn “What kind of information are you looking for? What do we need? What are the interests within our school right now?” and then used that information to develop programming. Last, participants mapped CCR activities to state-based career clusters and career readiness requirements. Jan described the personalized education plans required for every student and how she uses them to help students “pick . . . classes that belong to your area of career.”
Career and College Activities
All participants described specific CCR activities implemented in their schools. These ranged from working individually with students to make plans for their future to providing group instruction through classroom lessons and schoolwide presentations. Often, these school counselors developed experiential activities in which students could have firsthand experiences with experts from the world of work. With their descriptions of activities they successfully implemented, many participants discussed their hopes for CCR activities they might implement in the future. Within this domain, one general category and three typical categories emerged.
All 12 participants spoke about individual student advising. This category included multiple ways the school counselors individualize their approach to CCR based on students’ unique needs and attributes. This often occurred through one-on-one meetings between the school counselor and the student to determine class options and other opportunities that might align with the student’s goals after high school. Jada attributed her school’s course registration process as helpful in providing individual student advising: When students register for classes the following year, we sit down with them one-on-one and we'll walk them through their program of study. . . . A lot of kids will use that as what they're wanting to do after they graduate. . . . We've got students coming in with a certain track in mind and a certain goal in mind already. . . . That's been really fun to see.
Others discussed various tools used in these individual student meetings such as career assessments or postsecondary transition plans. They used online career programs to identify student interests and track tentative postsecondary goals. Thea noted: “We can pull it out within each level to talk about, okay, what should you be doing this year for this interest? What should you be doing next year?” Further, Jan discussed how the state’s required personalized education plan helps school counselors prepare students for each year of coursework: They can personalize their classes. . . . So if I'm going to be in nursing, I'm going to sit down with this kid and I'm going to say, "Okay, let's put as your four career classes, let's put anatomy as one of them because you're going to need that. Let's put chemistry."
The next most-endorsed category was experiential activities, briefly mentioned by most participants. These school counselors described the importance of giving students practical opportunities to engage in CCR experiences. Doris described how her school coordinates a career fair with “local vendors” that “represent every state CTE program and jobs . . . so they know opportunities in town and opportunities.” BB also supported inviting speakers to talk with students, saying, “If it comes from an outsider, it's so much more meaningful.” Nora shared that, in addition to college and career representatives, her school plans a “college planning night” in which a financial advisor talks “with families about how to afford college, and he does mention FAFSA.” These experiential activities help allow students and families to experience what life might look like after high school.
The categories endorsed but infrequently discussed were group instruction and aspirations. The school counselors shared various activities and information presented to students through classroom or large-group formats. Many discussed coordinating with different classroom teachers to present this information. Vanessa described: Our English teachers are really good about letting us come . . . and do presentations or talk with their students during College App Week. . . . So in September we . . . do a presentation or talk with the students about postsecondary options or about scholarships.
Most also described aspirational activities, or activities they wished they could do. Although these activities are not currently included in the CCR programming, the school counselors saw these activities as potentially beneficial for their students’ postsecondary development. Examples included wanting to start a small group for potential first-generation college students or wanting more career mentoring for students.
School Counselor Knowledge of Students
The third most endorsed domain, counselor knowledge of students, was supported by all 12 participants and included how various student factors informed the school counselors’ process for CCR programming. These factors included the student’s developmental readiness to engage in postsecondary development activities, their expressed interests and goals for after high school, and their family’s influence. Within this domain, three general categories emerged.
The largest category in this domain was readiness for career and college programming. Participants described how their students have personal or developmental characteristics or experiences that influence readiness to engage in college and career planning. Jada shared how her “career counseling” is integrated with her academic and social/emotional counseling: “Yes, we're trying to get them academically focused, but there is all this other stuff they're dealing with. . . . When they come in with academics, there's so much more to unearth and to talk about with them.” Often, these other obstacles influenced students’ beliefs about postsecondary goals. Leigh described students having “the mindset of just wanting to go the easy road and no more school.” Working to challenge these beliefs, Thea stated, “I think sometimes it's hard for students to really connect that with the real world and what that is actually going to look like. I think that's something that we can really improve upon is really connecting.”
The other categories in this domain were postsecondary interests and plans and family influence. Participants discussed how every student was on a unique path with varied interests and plans. Joseph described how he works to help students “understand their qualities and how education will relate to their personal qualities.” Chiara shared that although 4-year degrees previously were more favored by students, “Now I'm seeing a lot of people saying professional certification and 2-year college,” which has required a shift in programming. Although less frequently endorsed, family influence also was supported by all. The school counselors shared a range of experiences of how family members’ experiences and preferences influence how students engage with CCR. For example, Jan remarked: “We do not get a lot of family involvement. We are working on building that and increasing that. A lot of parents do not want their kids leaving, they want to keep them right there.” In contrast, Nora discussed how many students experience “family pressure” about choosing the best postsecondary option for them. She stated: “Even if a technical school can offer amazing opportunities to kids, it may not have what the parents think is the right prestige or whatever they're looking for, for their kids.”
School Counselor’s Experience
In the fourth domain, all participants described how aspects of their school counseling role influenced CCR programming. They discussed the challenges that come with navigating the multiple roles and responsibilities of being a school counselor. Many activities in their CCR programming require planning, organizing, and collaborating with others. At times, working with other educational partners provided additional support; at other times, this served as an additional challenge. Last, many shared how their experiences impacted them emotionally.
The largest category, navigating time and logistics, was supported by all but one participant. They described the many responsibilities they have as school counselors, including coordinating scholarships, organizing state testing, and meeting with academically struggling students, all while maintaining large caseloads of students who require social/emotional support beyond academic and career advising. BB expressed: “I wear many hats. Gosh, lots of things.” Nora spoke about the increase in mental health needs from her students and stated, “[Career and college] is just one of the things that falls by the wayside because an emergency is an emergency, and that has to be taken care of.” Many participants shared their struggles with finding time to implement different counseling services. Thea explained: “Classroom time is guarded very well, so we can't get in the classroom to do large group. Pulling our students is, again, difficult. Small group or even sometimes individual meetings . . . it can be very difficult to as well.”
Other categories for this domain were collaboration, emotional response, and perceptions of the school counselor's role. Although typical, they were less frequently endorsed by participants. The school counselors described how they worked with other educators and outside resources to provide multiple opportunities for students to explore career and college options. M. DuBois stated that teachers, students, faculty, and administrators “share the workload” in “helping the students see those purposeful goals.” Participants also shared how the process of CCR impacted them emotionally; Leigh commented: “It’s so discouraging that I’ve got really capable students who in many ways are just not working to their potential.” Perceptions of others also impacted CCR, as exemplified by Vanessa’s comment: “We have so many different tasks, and it can be so different at every school on what admin see as your role, what teachers see as your role, what students even think is your job description.” How these rural school counselors work with others and their feelings about engaging in CCR are part of their overall experiences.
Contextual Factors
Last, all participants outlined numerous contextual factors that influenced their CCR programming. These factors were larger, societal impacts that were often outside the control of the school counselors themselves or of school personnel. These school counselors described how both their ability to access opportunities, resources, and funding and their school’s demographics, culture, and geographic location impacted their ability to support students’ CCR development. Finally, due to the current context, many of the participants mentioned the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this domain, one general and three typical categories emerged.
Every participant spoke about their access to opportunities and resources. These school counselors highlighted both supports and barriers within their school, district, or state that contribute to the success of their CCR programming. They discussed access to financial resources, personnel, and learning opportunities, such as dual enrollment or career, technical, and agricultural education (CTAE) programs. M. DuBois described CTAE as “the non-collegiate pathways where a student graduates from high school career ready . . . audio, video tech, the business entrepreneurship, accounting pathway, and then of course multiple agriculture pathways.” However, Jan described the lack of opportunities in the community: “We have to work with what we have. We don't have a lot of opportunities for job shadowing. We don't have a lot of opportunities for work-study, because we don't have it in our area.” Joseph reiterated this sentiment: “There's less opportunities compared to major cities, so it makes students work hard.” Beyond exposure to CCR opportunities, the school counselors mentioned the need for funding for campus visits and additional school counselors to meet their caseload needs.
The other categories in this domain were less salient across participants. Geographic location related to how rurality influenced programming, school culture and demographics connected to general school and community characteristics, and COVID-19 captured comments specific to the recent pandemic. The counselors described how their school’s rural location and cultural aspects often influenced the paths students take after high school. BB commented: “I think we are in an extremely rural area. We don't have a McDonald's, we don't have anything here in our community, in our county.” Jan described the sense of “isolation,” saying, “Our kids usually do not participate in many [activities], simply for the fact that they don't have transportation, and a lot of them are not offered close to where they live.” Doris explained how land equity from farm ownership often “knocks a lot of students out of financial aid opportunities” even though the financial need exists. COVID-19 also impacted CCR activities, as Chiara noted: “COVID really cramped what I was trying to build.”
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to increase understanding of how rural Appalachian school counselors attend to and engage in CCR programming with students. Our 12 participants highlighted innovative and student-centered activities that also attended to culturally relevant community and student needs. Analysis revealed five domains and 20 categories that explained the process of, and barriers and supports for, CCR programming in their rural Appalachian high schools. Their definitions of CCR, including career and postsecondary awareness, transition planning, and self-knowledge, mirrored definitions from other studies (Conley, 2012; Hooker & Brand, 2010; Lindstrom et al., 2022). Many of our participants also mentioned individual planning, resilience, confidence, happiness, and passion as key components of CCR. Similarly, many of the CCR activities described by participants were similar to those used by other school counselors and educators, including increasing college and career knowledge, exposing students to career options, exploring soft skills, and learning about the self (Detgen et al., 2021; Hooker & Brand, 2010; Lindstrom et al., 2022). However, unlike other research (e.g., ASCA, 2022; Detgen et al., 2021), fewer participants mentioned activities such as mentoring, rigorous and advanced coursework, job shadowing, college visits, or cognitive skills as core components of CCR. Finally, although time was the primary barrier noted in prior CCR studies (Brookover & Johnson, 2022), our participants also added rurality, limited career knowledge of students, mixed family messages about postsecondary options, isolation, and lack of local opportunities as barriers.
Process for Identifying and Delivering Programming
Our participants were most likely to engage in individual student advising to discuss postsecondary plans and how to best prepare for them. The collectivist values of rural Appalachia and a strong sense of self-reliance (Foster et al., 2021; Gore et al., 2011; Hlinka, 2017) supported this focus on relationship building and customized advising that gets lost in large group programming. Some also tried to use experiential activities such as speakers, tours, and community outreach to increase student interest and engagement in CCR programming. Li et al. (2017) identified experiential activities as commonly used by rural school counselors as a method of addressing their students’ otherwise limited exposure to careers and access to career role models. To a lesser extent, participants reported using group activities such as classroom instruction or school presentations to share information.
Our participants thoughtfully considered how they identified CCR topics to include in their programming. Most important to them was the goal of increasing awareness of self and the world of work. CCR activities centered on increasing exposure to career and postsecondary options and providing concrete information about future possibilities. Given that many rural Appalachian students are from non-college-educated families (Pollard et al., 2023), concrete information about postsecondary options seems vital for students to be able to make informed decisions. Although many typical CCR tasks involve assisting students with college applications, writing letters of recommendation, or preparing students for admissions exams (Gilfillan, 2018), these school counselors primarily focused their efforts on increasing student interest to pursue postsecondary education options.
These rural school counselors also highlighted the importance of being encouraging and positive about future options for their students. School counselors often encourage students to engage in rigorous coursework that increases students’ options for postsecondary education (Clinedinst, 2019). However, students from lower SES backgrounds, similar to those in rural Appalachia, often report lower academic motivations (Ali & Saunders, 2009), are less likely to earn a college degree (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2019), and may view college as risky or unnecessary (Chenoweth & Galliher, 2004). Therefore, this study’s participating school counselors may have felt that providing encouragement was important to increase students’ beliefs about the possibility of attending college and the value ascribed to college going.
The participants also described the many ways they were persistent and flexible, engaging in an iterative process in which they reviewed past programming for successes and failures. To a lesser extent, our participants also used data, district and state requirements, and differentiated instruction techniques to inform their programming choices. Unfortunately, this flexible, tailored, and individualized approach to CCR may miss some of the best practices identified by Green et al. (2023), including partnerships with businesses and postsecondary institutions, mentoring programs, and promoting rigorous coursework for all students. However, given the strong geographic ties, limited career exposure, and economic challenges common in this region (Gore et al., 2011; Hlinka, 2017; Pollard et al., 2023), rural Appalachian school counselors are likely doing the best they can to support career and college readiness within the community context.
Barriers to and Supports for Programming
The rural Appalachian school counselors in our study identified a variety of supports for and barriers to CCR activities. They appreciated when collaboration with educational and community partners was successful and when the school community saw the value of school counseling services. They also stressed the value of knowing the individual needs and developmental levels of their students so that tailored programming could be provided. Understanding of cultural values such as strong family ties, attachment to the region (Denham, 2016; Keefe, 2005), and likely lower family education levels (Pollard et al., 2023) played a key role in developing culturally sensitive programming, as reflected by participants’ endorsement of familial support and pressure in students’ CCR.
On the other hand, our participants repeatedly described challenges with navigating their multifaceted responsibility to attend to students’ academic, social/emotional, and career development needs. Although they were grateful for opportunities to collaborate with teachers, they also shared the challenges associated with pulling students from academic classes or being allowed by school leaders to use class time for CCR delivery (Brookover & Johnson, 2022). Other barriers included the lack of local opportunities due to the rural location, the lack of student transportation, and the narrow future mindset of many students as supported by Agger and colleagues’ research (2018). Barriers specific to the rural Appalachia area made CCR programming more difficult for many of our participants.
Limitations
Although this study provides insight into the experiences of school counselors supporting CCR of rural Appalachian students, it has a few noteworthy limitations. Interviews were conducted with the participating school counselors via Zoom, which expanded access to participants outside of the researchers’ location but also resulted in occasional technology-related interruptions and distractions impacting participants’ engagement. These limitations may occur less frequently when interviewers are present in the same space as the participants.
Further, participants were explicitly recruited from the central Appalachian region to understand rural Appalachia's unique CCR needs. Recruitment may limit the generalizability of the research findings. Further, participants self-selected to participate in this research study; their involvement in the research may imply a bias toward valuing CCR, thus the study may not capture the experiences of school counselors with different priorities. In terms of demographic and professional data, the research team did not implement a formal procedure for collecting such information about the participants. Although some data was collected through the interview transcripts, we were unable to report complete data in Table 1. Implementing a brief demographic screener might help to provide additional context around the study’s findings.
Finally, interviews were conducted during spring 2022, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on school counseling programs was noted by the participants and may also have affected recruitment. Nearly all of the participants discussed how COVID-19 created challenges with implementing previous types of CCR programming they had provided due to virtual learning and safety protocols with community partners. Some discussed that they were still in the process of transitioning back to normalcy. Thus, the findings from this study might have been different if conducted pre-pandemic or further out from the rebuilding years.
Implications
The findings from this study highlight considerations for school counselors and counselor educators working in rural Appalachian schools or in proximity to the region. We address these implications as they relate to rural Appalachia specifically; in some cases, suggestions can be applied to rural school counseling broadly.
School Counseling Practice
First, school counselors must familiarize themselves with their community and its influence on CCR. For example, compared to students from other regions, students from rural Appalachia may view certain postsecondary education and career options as unattainable if such options are not well represented in their immediate geographic area (Agger et al., 2018). Thus, school counselors must intentionally develop CCR programming that exposes rural Appalachian students to opportunities that may more commonly exist in nonrural areas (e.g., STEM careers). At the same time, honoring rural Appalachian students' strong sense of community and desire to maintain geographic proximity is important. School counselors in rural Appalachia must emphasize the range of careers that exist but may be less known or immediately visible in their region (e.g., human resource managers at local stores).
When developing CCR programming, school counselors must pay attention to cultural values and address contextual factors influencing students’ decision making. This may include providing information about college affordability, inviting alumni or speakers of Appalachian origin to share about their postsecondary journey, and expanding awareness of postsecondary education options. For example, school counselors frequently host financial aid workshops focused on completing the FAFSA (Li et al., 2017). Given that rural students who pursue postsecondary are more likely to attend a 2-year college (Koricich et al., 2018), rural Appalachian school counselors might complement financial aid training with a presentation on the multiple ways students can pursue postsecondary education that extends beyond the traditional 4-year university (e.g., community college, vocational school, apprenticeships). Further, school counselors can work with students individually to build strong relationships, provide intentional programming, and involve family members given the influence they have on students’ decision-making process.
On a systemic level, school counselors must advocate for the unique needs of rural Appalachian students. The school counselors in this study discussed the challenges of balancing the demands of the role of the school counselor, meeting the expectations of others, and following requirements established by the school, district, or state. Since there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to CCR programming, school counselors must utilize their leadership skills and knowledge of students to inform school leaders, families, and community partners about best practices aimed at meeting students’ cultural and developmental needs. Last, the voices of rural Appalachian citizens need to be included in local, state, and federal decision making around CCR programming in schools. School counselors can advocate within legislation and policy reform to amplify rural Appalachians’ work-related experiences and perspectives on how to best support the CCR needs of students in the region.
School Counselor Preparation
To prepare school counselors to work in rural Appalachia, counselor educators must intentionally discuss rurality as a unique cultural identity. Attention also must be paid to discussing rurality not as a monolith but as an area with growing diversity and cultural strengths. In training programs that are proximal to the Appalachian region, counselor educators might facilitate further exploration of the cultural differences between rural Appalachia and other rural areas in the United States. Aspects of rural Appalachian culture can be integrated into the multicultural counseling course or applied across counseling courses to discuss how mental health, career, and lifespan topics impact rural Appalachian communities.
To support learning about rurality within coursework, school counseling students would also benefit from fieldwork experiences in rural communities. This may include opportunities for service-learning projects in addition to practicum and internship sites. For example, students might prepare a series of classroom lessons aimed at promoting the CCR development of rural students and deliver the lessons at rural schools in the nearby area. This experience would allow students to simultaneously increase their developmental and cultural understanding of rural students while practicing their school counseling skills. In light of the need for more school counselors in rural communities, incorporating supervised learning experiences during graduate training may increase the likelihood that early career school counselors will seek positions in rural communities.
Future Research
This study’s findings provide valuable insight into the experiences of rural, central Appalachian school counselors’ CCR programming. Because the Appalachian region is so large, future research might include a similar investigation with school counselors from northern Appalachia (e.g., Pennsylvania, New York) or southern Appalachia (e.g., Alabama, Mississippi) to see how their experience compares. Further, researchers must be intentional in how they gather and disaggregate data about rural communities. Rural communities do not embody a monolithic culture, and differentiating types of rural communities (e.g., Midwest rural vs. rural Appalachia) may be important when collecting and interpreting data. Future researchers also could investigate how CCR differs across school levels. Although these high school counselors discussed individual student advising that focused on registering for classes necessary for meeting students’ postsecondary goals or completing required college prep activities like the FAFSA or ACT, school counselors in elementary or middle schools may prioritize different aspects of CCR that are less focused on career decision making. Last, exploring the perspectives of students in rural Appalachian schools may support understanding what activities have been most beneficial to students’ career and college development and what factors have influenced their postsecondary paths.
Conclusion
The rural Appalachian high school counselors we interviewed value CCR programming for their students and identify both supports for and barriers to CCR planning and delivery. The participants in this study highlighted the importance of individualized and targeted programming that was delivered with enthusiasm, was experiential, and considered cultural context. Their experiences can help other rural Appalachian school counselors promote and deliver effective CCR programming.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (Science Education Partnership Award).
