University of Virginia Library

Donn Kessler

Bureaucracy Stifles Counselor Interest

Recent events in the
first-year counseling program
seem to indicate that there is
something seriously wrong in
the program or at least in its
selection process.

First, let us see how the two
chairmen of counselors are
chosen. Any first-year
counselor can apply for the
positions and must undergo an
interview given by the
Executive Committee of
Counselors (all of the senior
dorm counselors) and then by
the University Committee on
Counselors chaired by Chester
Titus.

While the Executive
Committee of Counselors
debated over its position in
choosing the chairmen, the
existing method of selection is
that the Executive Committee
ranks the candidates it
interviews and sends that
ranking to the Committee on
Counselors. The University
Committee then interviews and
discusses each of the
candidates and chooses two of
them for chairmen.

Usually there are five to six
persons running for chairmen
of the first-year program. This
year, however, only four
people applied (and one of
those applied late).
Furthermore, while it is usual
that mainly senior counselors
apply for the prestigious
position, only three of the four
candidates this year were
senior counselors.

It should be noted that the
deadline for applications for
chairmen were scheduled after
the announcement next year's
new counselor program. While
this may not have had any
effect on other possible
applicants, it is interesting to
note that at least half of the 17
senior counselors were
third-yearmen and could have
run for chairmen positions.

A second interesting
development has occurred in
the selection of senior
counselors or, as renamed,
head and senior residents.
According to various sources in
the counselor program,
anywhere from 26 to 30
counselors had applied for
these 24 positions by the
deadline time. By deadline
time last year, approximately
the same number of persons
had applied for only 17 senior
counselor positions.

Suddenly, however, it has
been announced that
approximately 48 people have
applied to become counselors.
What has caused this large
jump in the number of
applicants? According to
various sources, at least one of
the Chairmen of Counselors
had approached several present
female counselors and had
asked them to apply for senior
or head resident positions.
Several of these women have
said that they were thinking of
applying for these positions
before the deadline date
anyway, but had decided
against it for lack of time or a
feeling that they wouldn't be
promoted.

These events seem to
indicate sudden downward

turn in interest in applying for
senior positions in the
counseling program. In
discussing this problem with
various members of the
counseling program, it seems
that there were several factors
for this sudden development.

The first factor is, of course,
the new counseling program.
The way it was presented may
have had a significant effect
both upon present senior
counselors and hall counselors.

The argument that bad
publicity of the new program
itself created the issue is of
course ridiculous. At least one
whole dorm of counselors
approached members of the
Office of Student Affairs in
opposition to the new program
before the program was
announced to the University
community.

A second factor, according
to several senior counselors, is
the whole direction of the
program starting with the
September counselor
orientation. As this counselor
put it, the program took a
downward turn as soon as
members of the Office of
Student Affairs talked to the
counseling staff in September
about their responsibilities to
the Housing Office and in
enforcing terms and
conditions.

Few people would argue
over the idea that all
counselors are supposed to
keep an orderly living
environment in the dorms and
are contracted to see that
University regulations are
enforced. But several
counselors have contended that
they entered the program with
the idea of working with and
helping their counselees. These
same counselors have indicated
that the method of presenting
their responsibility to rules and
buildings "turned them off" to
the program.

A third and most crucial
factor, however, is a seeming
desire by present counselors
not to get involved in structure
and bureaucracy. Indeed, while
a record number of
first-yearmen are applying for
resident assistant positions,
fewer present counselors than
ever before have indicated a
real desire to apply for higher
positions.

There are several possible
explanations for this trend.
One is that the attempts at
mass action (especially against
the war in Vietnam and
Cambodia) were utter failures.
Many students may have
reacted against this failure and
just decided to work on their
own individual levels and not
to get involved in any type of
bureaucracy.

A second possible
explanation is the splintering
of society. In recent
sociological studies, it has been
indicated that the larger a
community grows, the more
the community fractures into
several smaller and more
operational communities.

Perhaps this fact extends
down to the individual level.
As students become numbers
and must compete for courses
and apartments, the
community begins to divide
and each student just desires to
either be alone or to associate
with several students.

Whatever the reasons, we
are faced with what could
become a continuing decline in
interest in higher positions in
the counseling system.
Emergency measures of
advising people to apply for
positions will work for the
present. They will not solve the
problem tomorrow.