TPC Journal V7, Issue 2 - FULL ISSUE

164 The Professional Counselor | Volume 7, Issue 2 relationships with professors had the greatest impact on my growth; more so than any technique they used or material they covered.” Consensus Statements There were two items of consensus on which all three factors agreed. It was of moderate importance to all three factors that their teachers were currently working with clients or possessed significant experience working with clients (item 13). Qualitative data seemed to suggest this item enhanced a counselor educator’s credibility when teaching students in clinical courses, providing them with experiences to draw on when demonstrating a technique. One participant explained: “I felt I received more honest and pragmatic lessons from professors that had recent stories, feedback and teachings from being up-to-date and current with everyday practice. Their knowledge meant more to me and left a longer-lasting impression.” Representatives of the three factors also perceived it as particularly unimportant that counselor educators incorporate technology into clinical courses to enhance learning (item 30). Qualitative feedback from respondents seemed to focus on two different themes in regards to item 30. One, respondents considered technology unnecessary in clinical courses, as they did not perceive that it was relevant to their work as professional counselors: “Technology does not affect how I practice as a counselor. I actually felt that I wasted much time in fighting with technology during my education that could have been better spent further developing my skills.” Two, respondents suggested that technology was perceived as less helpful when it came at the expense of clinical learning occurring in the classroom: “Technology is nice and all, but I appreciated clinical moments in the classroom with my professor and peers.” Discussion An important finding of this study was that three different shared viewpoints (i.e., application- oriented learners, intrinsically motivated learners, affective-oriented learners) exist among beginning- level clinical mental health counselors about helpful aspects of teachers in clinical courses. When considering the different teaching preferences that emerged in this study, it may be helpful for counselor educators to conceptualize each factor as a student-learner archetype present in CMHC clinical courses. An example of the Factor 1 application-oriented archetypal student is as follows: a student focused on becoming a competent professional counselor who is apprehensive about his or her lack of knowledge and experience. This student’s ideal teacher explicitly articulates and demonstrates what he or she needs to do to become a competent professional counselor, while providing supportive feedback as he or she tries to achieve that goal. An example of the Factor 2 intrinsically motivated archetypal student is as follows: a student who is a reflective thinker with a broad enjoyment of learning, motivated to become an excellent counselor. His or her ideal teacher helps to develop deeper personal understandings and wisdom through creating opportunities to hear diverse opinions and feedback. An example of the Factor 3 affective-oriented archetypal student is as follows: a student who wants to feel cared for and valued by a teacher as a means of developing a transformational relationship with him or her. His or her ideal teacher is a person he or she admires who inspires the student to want to become a professional counselor. The preferences of the Factor 1 student-learner archetype are congruent with counselor educators of clinical courses who use developmental (Granello, 2000) and teacher-centered (Baeten et al., 2012) pedagogies. Students from the Factor 1 archetype are unsure of themselves because of their lack of knowledge and experience in counseling. Thus, it may be helpful when counselor educators use their advanced knowledge and experiences as formal authorities to disseminate essential foundational