106 The Professional Counselor | Volume 14, Issue 1 Sample items include the following: Q1 “I can effectively inquire if a student has had thoughts of killing oneself” (General Suicide Assessment); Q11 “I can effectively ask a student about his or her history of mental illness” (Assessment of Personal Characteristics); Q18 “I can effectively ask a student about his or her previous suicide attempts” (Assessment of Suicide History); and Q25 “I can appropriately intervene if a student is at imminent risk for suicide” (Suicide Intervention). Table 1 Participant Demographics Variable n % Gender Identity Female Male Age 20–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60–69 Ethnicity or Race White or Caucasian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino Asian or Asian American Another race Enrollment Status as Student Full-time Part-time Prior Experience in Mental Health Field Yes No Prior Professional Experience or Training in Suicide Risk Assessment Yes No 54 6 41 13 2 3 1 48 6 4 1 1 31 29 36 24 27 33 90.0% 10.0% 68.4% 21.7% 3.4% 5.0% 1.7% 80.0% 10.0% 6.7% 1.7% 1.7% 51.7% 48.3% 60.0% 40.0% 45.0% 55.0% The total score for the scale is 125, with higher scores representing higher levels of self-efficacy associated with suicide assessment and intervention (Douglas & Wachter Morris, 2015). The CSAES can be scored two ways. First, the assessment can be scored individually for a more detailed understanding of what differences, if any, in self-efficacy exist between differing aspects of suicide assessment. The second way is to calculate the total sum of the assessment-related subscales and the intervention subscale. In doing so, each subscale would have a mean for the individual scale (Douglas & Wachter Morris, 2015).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU5MTM1