Since the late 1980s, college counselors have reported seeing increasing numbers of students who present with severe forms of emotional and psychological disturbance. However, little direct evidence has yet to demonstrate any trend in the level of severity of presenting problems. In this article, the authors explore methodological challenges for researchers who attempt to examine the question of increasing severity of client problems. Implications for college counseling centers are discussed.

This study examined the impact of an academic counseling approach implemented by counseling center staff for students in academic jeopardy. Participants were 414 undergraduate students placed on academic warning and probation. Students who participated in counseling demonstrated significantly greater increases in grade point average than did students who had not received counseling.A common concern of colleges and universities is the retention of students. One segment of the student body that is at risk for attrition is students who are in academic jeopardy. Academic jeopardy is regarded as the point at which a student has fallen below university academic standards for overall grade point average (GPA) and faces the possibility of dismissal. A review of the literature describing attributes of students at risk for early attrition (i.e., those in academic jeopardy) suggests that counseling services may not only be desirable but are much needed for these individuals. Call, Hendricks, and Jones (1 990) found that compared with academically successful college students, at-risk students are less trusting and less ethical in dealings with others; they exhibit more behaviors and attitudes that lead to social alienation or emotiona1 disturbance; they experience more anxiety in social interactions; and they have lower opinions of themselves. In addition, Maxwell (1 979) found that high-risk college students who do not succeed have made a poorer adaptation to the college environment, have less clearly defined aspirations, are less committed to their goals. are less willing to study hard, and have weaker interpersonal skills and support. In support of the role of nonacademic factors with this group, Gerdes and Mallinckrodt (1 994) found that emotional and social adjustment factors predicted college attrition as well as or better than academic adjustment factors.Although schools often provide academic advising to assist students in academic jeopardy (Metzner, 1 989), traditional advising methods are unlikely to meet the complex needs of this group. As Trombley (1984) noted, the most common model of student advisement has been the faculty-run

Help-seeking (HS) students and non-help-seeking (NHS) students were compared on their perceptions of (a) their own level of mental health functioning and (b) the average level of mental health functioning of their (NHS or HS) peers. Results showed that NHS students' perceptions of HS students' self-ratings were similar to HS students' self-ratings of functioning but that HS students underestimated the level of functioning of their NHS peers. Implications of the findings for campus outreach and future research are discussed.

No abstract

College counseling centers play an important role in the training and supervision of counselor trainees. This article addresses the importance of communication between college counselors and academic counseling program faculty when college counselors supervise graduate students from academic counseling programs. As the authors discuss, effective communication contributes to positive and productive training experiences for graduate student trainees. Suggestions are offered for successful communication between counseling center staff and program faculty.