Leah I. Johnson, M.

A
CNS 736: Appraisal Procedures for Counselors
Assignment 4.1: Administer the Self-Directed Search
02.09.19

I carefully selected my volunteer to administer the Self-Directed Search (SDS) from my

current caseload at my outpatient internship site. I chose her because she is in the last semester of

her graduate degree and while she likes the work she does, she has multiple passions. Being so

close to graduation, she often expresses uncertainty of whether she truly wants to use her social

work degree or pursue her alternate passions in fashion design and graphics. I felt this

assessment would allow her to explore all of her interest at one time in a controlled way, while

possibly gaining confirmation that she was following paths that aligned with her passions.

My client’s initial reaction to taking the Self-Directed Search was inquisitive. She wanted

to know what it was and how I felt it would be beneficial for her. After being provided with a

brief description, an example of how the questions were arranged and its general purpose, she

agreed to fully participate during her next scheduled session. Prior to this appointment, I

prepared by revisiting my own completed SDS results and reading through all the definitions to

have a clear understanding when it was time to discuss the outcome of the assessment with my

client. I also reviewed the billing codes for assessments, as they are billed differently in an

outpatient setting. My final preparation prior to meeting with the client was ensuring I did not

schedule another client session immediately after hers, just in case the assessment took longer

than expected.

When reviewing the Hayes (2017) text, I took note of the expectancy effect. Due to the

fact this was not a new client for me and I had in depth knowledge of her expressed interests and

career goals I tried not to allow those previous conversations to impact my administration of the
assessment. I felt that ethical considerations had been taken by my having both taken and studied

the assessment prior to administering it. This contributed to my confidence and competence in its

administration. Additionally, when considering client welfare, it was not administered with the

intent of doing any harm or changing the client’s mind about her career path; simply offered to

guide her and provide insight. I feel the SDS covered a broad spectrum of interests and talents

that could address most multicultural considerations.

I feel what was most successful about my explanation of the SDS for my client was the

assurance that if she was unclear about any portion of it that she could ask questions. Due to this

client having heightened anxiety, I think it was also helpful for her that I emphasized her ability

to take her time and explained that I purposefully did not schedule a client after her so she would

not feel pressured to answer the questions too quickly. The client did not ask any questions after

my explanation of the instrument. When she did not present any questions, I believed she was

well informed and prepared to begin the assessment. Based on my personal critique, I think when

the answers changed from Like/ Dislike to Yes/No, I should have done a better job preparing the

client for the transition and change in answering style as it was a bit abrupt and awkward after I

asked the question and presented a different set of answers.

The client seemed to enjoy the process initially, but midway through she became a bit

restless and shifted around on the sofa. She seemed disinterested, but she continued to answer the

questions. I responded by asking if she would like to take a break or needed some water. When

she declined, we continued with the assessment until it was complete. The client was receptive to

the results of her assessment. As we processed, she listened attentively and asked lots of

questions about the outcomes. She claimed the testing experience was not that bad and even

though I explained that it would take approximately an hour, she reported it felt longer. She did
state that she felt confident in her answers and did not think she would have changed any of

them. She was fully engaged in this discussion and I do not think that I would have changed any

portion of this interaction with the client. She also mentioned that she felt the results related

closely to what she thought she already knew about herself, so she was glad and felt that it would

make her more confident in her decision making.

The insight that I gained from the administration of the SDS was that this particular

assessment may not be suitable for older adolescents (transition counseling for college prep) or

for young adults with an ADHD diagnosis/symptomology. This particular assessment may be too

long for them and they could possibly lose interest prior to its completion; I believe this may

skew the results. The one strength I perceived this instrument to have was, as aforementioned, it

covered such a wide range of careers that I feel even the most uncertain individual could identify

some area that piqued their interest. One limitation that was perceived was when discussing the

identification of gender and level of education in the beginning of the assessment. I feel this

could contribute to multicultural considerations.

Although this is one of my actual clients, I had not considered incorporating the results

into her treatment plan. This particular client has been diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety

Disorder (GAD) 300.02 (F41.1). Two treatment goals that I could possibly present would be

“Client will explore a career that combines her education and her interests” and/or “Client will

explore ways to incorporate her interests into social interactions.” From the Cognitive

Behavioral theoretical scope that I implement in my practice, her recommended timeframe for

counseling is approximately six months. During that time, some therapeutic interventions that

could be utilized are developing organizational skills to help reduce anxiety when job searching

and possibly keeping a job journal or role playing mock interviews to reduce anxiety as well.
Some measurable outcomes for this client would be obtaining employment that provides an

increased level of job satisfaction and/or increasing her interest-related social interactions to

possibly bi-monthly.
 References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Hays, D.G. (2017). Assessment in counseling(6thed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling

Association.