by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consulting Association

We are still in the early stages of conference registration for IECA’s Fall National Conference in Cincinnati, Ohio. However, we have already passed 600 attendees and are looking forward to a wonderful gathering. Here are six new, improved, or unique aspects to the conference that you may have missed in our registration packet:

(1) Cincinnati is surprisingly easy to fly in to and worth visiting. The Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati (CVG) airport is a hub for Delta airlines, but this new, modern airport offers 200 incoming flights a day with direct service to more than 80 cities. Cincinnati was a major stop of the Underground Railroad for slavesseeking freedom in the north. The Underground Railroad Freedom Center is my favorite place in the city. Also don’t miss the Museum Center (our conference logo) at Union Station where four museums, plus several restaurants, are housed under one roof.

(2) There will NOT be an opening keynote speech. Instead we have invited several educational leaders and innovators (all currently university presidents) to have a round-table discussion about the future of American education on Wednesday afternoon. We will get to “listen in” to their conversation and raise some questions and discussion points. This will be a unique opportunity to hear educational opinion leaders from Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky.

(3) We have made nine changes to the schedule impacting therapeutic schools & programs and educational consultants serving those resources. Among other things, a special ‘professional exchange’ time at the end of the School Fair on Thursday, Program Showcases on Saturday, an overlap in the schedule when all conference attendees are together, and a wonderful Master Class on Saturday featuring Dr. Paul Keck, president-CEO of the Lindner Center speaking about bipolar disorder.

(4) There are five pre-conference opportunities. We are offering two 3-1/2 hour pre-conference workshops: One on social networking for consultants and the other exploring autism spectrum disorders. In addition, our one-on-one speed meetings will feature traditional schools. All these are scheduled for Wednesday morning. In addition, IECA is offering tours of Ohio and Kentucky colleges Monday through Wednesday, and a number of schools and programs are extending offers for visits throughout the Great Lakes region.

(5) Conference Central has emerged as a major meeting, learning, exploring place during conferences. For those who have not attended a conference in over a year, wait until you experienceconference central: refreshments, cyber-lounge, bookstore, exhibit booths, member services, raffles, and give-aways, just to name a few of the attractions. We have added comfortable seating to make sure the Conference Central area is a place to relax, network, and much more.

(6) Special events from beginning to end. Wednesday’s dinner; Friday’s reception with plenty to eatand drink; Murray Banks, the amazing Thursday lunch speaker; a Friday general session featuring the Kinship Center, the nation’s leading voice on adoption issues are among all that we have scheduled. We’ll also be featuring the amazing movie “In 500 Words or Less” on Thursday night with the film’s creators in attendance, leading a discussion after the film. We’re even be including pizza and drinks for this special movie night!

We hope to see you in Cincinnati. Registration is open and hotel rooms are still available in the IECA block. Plan your travel to take full advantage of all we have going on. Join us as we “Come Together in the Heartland.”

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark H. Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Yesterday, I was able to spend several hours in Los Angeles with some of IECA’s local members. In all, 27 members took part in our gathering—a wonderful number by any standard, but almost remarkable in the short notice we provided. More remarkable still is that they gathered not to hear an expert on educational testing or a panel of admission directors, but rather to hear me talk about the state of the educational consulting profession, trends as I see them, and then to share their questions, thoughts, and hopes for the field and the association.

Most in the room were surprised to learn of two major, critical studies announced in the last year that readers of this blog may recall: a major survey demonstrated that 26% of high achieving students use educational consultants in their college search; and the second was the recently released study by Harvard on what they called the “aspiring profession” of educational consulting that identified IECA’s leadership over and over again. That so few of our members knew of these studies (let alone their potential significance) was a reminder that we must rely on traditional forms of communication as well as new media.

More importantly was the genuine enthusiasm in the room about the importance of these studies and ideas for ensuring that the college community understands the significant and important role IECA plays. Many seemed ready to assist in our outreach efforts.

Of course we also discussed the ups and downs of boarding school and therapeutic program advising and how the economic downturn has had a major impact, particularly on the latter. I shared my view that the days when nearly 100% of students in special needs programs came from IECA client referrals were likely gone but, like boarding schools, programs will discover that consultant referrals may be the difference between a program being 2/3 full or completely full (perhaps the difference between a program closing its doors, or not). More significantly, many programs freely admit that the students sent by consultants (as opposed to the Web) are a better match for their program.

I was rightly asked if we made any changes to the conference program based on the survey of consultants and program reps. When I mentioned many of the changes were implemented (we accepted all recommendations but one), there was genuine satisfaction that IECA was responding to attendees. I also noted one frustration from members that we’d like to help change. In recent years special needs programs have been sending MARKETING representatives to conferences. Overwhelmingly IECA members tell us they want counselors and therapists to attend, rather than marketers.

I was asked about the movie “In 500 Words.” We not only plan to show the film at our Fall Conference, but the creators will actually be on site to lead a discussion. Over 200 registrants have already signed up to watch the movie and discuss! We were asked to look into the possibility of co-branding with the producers to gain rights to the film and workbook so members could use these with clients.

There were a number of questions about education and training, and using new technologies like webinars to bring education to members.

What struck me the most was the genuine excitement in the room about joining together (and the genuine regret from dozens more local members who were not available). I found it a bit sad that we needed name tags, until I realized that new members and growing numbers are signs of a healthy, growing organization (despite our east coast beginning, IECA now has more members in California than any other state!). Attendees excitedly discussed establishing a couple of regional IECA groups: one for Los Angeles, the other for Orange County. As I listened to discussions, ideas, and planning, I realized the tremendous power that comes from members joining together, acting together, comparing notes and ideas. It is this collaboration that makes IECA so strong, and their work with families so successful and rewarding.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

By Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

This week I am attending the national conference of the American Society of Association Executives (ASAE & The Center for Association Leadership) conference in Los Angeles. During an early breakout on Sunday, the presenter reminded us of the definition of “associations.” They are defined as organizations where individuals with similar goals or interests join together. It is that simple.

Yet isn’t it accurate to say that this is what social networking sites are really all about? Like many of you, I joined Facebook to connect with those with whom I shared a similar history—family, friends from Philadelphia, and students I taught. Soon I discovered communities of those who belonged to the same swim club I frequented as a teen, attended the same synagogue and the same schools, where reminiscing ruled the posts.

In recent years my social networking has taken a new turn: I have joined the IECA community on Facebook to connect with educational consultants, and through LinkedIn I exchange information and ideas with fellow association executives. We discuss the changing landscape of member relations, share new ideas for conferences and distance learning, argue ethics and expenses, and examine topics like, well, social media and blogging.

One discussion that kept popping up among the gathered association professionals this past weekend was whether the need still exists for us. After all, if LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and others are allowing anyone to join communities of like-minded individuals—the very definition of associations—and they do it essentially at no cost, why should anyone join an association?

The answer is one that will please some and distress others among my colleagues. It seems that those associations ONLY built around sharing, communicating, and exchanging are doomed to fail, as new technologies not only offer these abilities, but they do it better and cheaper. If you could start a LinkedIn Group for tutors and get a real exchange of members, why pay to join an association built around exchanging information among tutors?

Yet other associations seem ready to gain in this era of ‘new media.’ Those associations that form around a commitment to certain ideals; who stand firm on membership criteria (so “membership” holds greater meaning than a Facebook “friend”); who develop and enforce ethical and knowledge-based standards; who are committed to ensuring that not only does all information get shared, but that important information—new information—gets taught, shared, discussed, and instituted as a framework for professional success; these associations are poised to grow and succeed as others devolve into Web-based pseudo-clubs.

So what does this mean specifically for the Independent Educational Consultants Association? I am confident that we fall into the second category. Evidence is everywhere. We have not only maintained our requirements for membership, we have strengthened them. This year we established our key-competencies in our Standards of Excellence—the only such comprehensive document for this profession, which was recently singled out by a Harvard study as evidence of our leadership. We have acted in just the past month, as we have in the past, to remove members who violate our Principles of Good Practice. And with this, our membership has grown significantly, even in this tough economy.

This growth, in an ironic twist, has strengthened other forms of networking: regional groups have started, or are organizing, in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and New Jersey, among others. Affinity groups are joining together new moms; expanding awareness on issues involving lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered people in our industry; technology gurus; and more. Our Facebook page is closing in on 1,000 fans and the IECA blog is read by hundreds. Why would IECA’s own social media efforts be doing so well when so many options exist? Simple: people know that those IECA educational consultants they are communicating with, asking questions of, responding to, and more, are professionals of great competence, and are dedicated to students, the role of choosing the right educational environment, and more. IECA members are not just like-minded, but serious professionals recognized both within and beyond our organization.

In other words, with so many social media or affiliation opportunities, people are being drawn to the sites and the organizations that set high standards and where members fully understand their profession and the value of sharing. And this is exactly what the research being conducted shows. Why do people put up with our higher than other association dues; with membership applications that require a demonstration of knowledge, experience, and training; with strict ethics requirements? It is because they know membership in such an organization MEANS something.

The future of associations—associations like IECA—is exciting, and limitless, as long as we maintain our commitment to excellence, professionalism, education, high standards, and above all, putting families’ and students’ needs first.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Recently I came across a comment on a blog where someone expressed an implied criticism of IECA. The criticism was that the Independent Educational Consultants Association does not focus its energies exclusively in school selection, application, and admission. The criticism actually kept me up all night—quite a feat for those who know me—yet I tossed and turned. But not for the reasons you may think. I’m certainly not thin-skinned, and so I can take any criticism. In this case I was restless because I was confounded. How could someone have written those words believing them to be critical, when to me they express the very difference that makes IECA and its members so uniquely qualified? Critical? No—to me it was the ultimate praise.

How can one even imagine preparing to send students away for school, but not understand issues like adolescent depression or anxiety? Should we apologize for bringing in the top experts in the country to present about the latest developments in research on brain theory, gender differences, attachment, and the impact of adoption? We know full well how such things impact the ability to succeed both in class and with peers. Should we not support our members who wish to do career exploration or employ the dynamic information gained in Myers-Briggs Type Indicator?

Some of the criticism, I suspect, was related to some of the topics at IECA conferences. Does the person offering the critique believe that those assisting in college or school admission should confine their discussion to majors, Greek life, financial aid and ‘where you can get in?’ All that should be noted, but every single person working with adolescents, if they wish to be taken as a true professional, should gain some understanding of some growing trends of concern: Internet and gaming addictions (the numbers of kids who land in a dorm room and play World of Warcraft or other games 24 hours a day, skipping class, is scary!), abuse of prescription drugs (a growing campus trend), campus bullying (using social media), eating and body-perception disorders, and so much more.

It seems that some think college admission can be accomplished using a chart: standardized test scores in column A, GPA in column B, activities in column C, and voila…”Here’s your list of schools, Sally!” Let’s remember that adolescents are not a simple commodity where we plug in the proper numbers and out pops the result. IECA’s strength comes from our realization—make that commitment—to seeing every child as an individual, with abilities and weaknesses, emotional strengths and scars, unique talents, and needs. Yes, this is indeed what makes IECA unique, and more importantly, what makes our members uniquely qualified to really serve the best interests, the true needs of every child.

That anyone can think otherwise, will keep me up at nights.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

Here he defends the soon-to-be-released U.S. News rankings, anticipating that “many in the Education Establishment will [trash] them… They will be labeled as non-scientific, elitist, poorly constructed, etc. etc.” even though they are “meeting a human need.”

I can’t agree with much in Mr. Vedder’s piece, except that the rankings are popular and that they sell. But I’m happy to be among those who will trash them—not for Mr. Vedder’s reasons, but rather because they are pernicious.

He cites Consumer Reports as a model. But colleges do not lend themselves to consumer-reports-style rankings, where measurements of quality are known in advance and can be quantified: for example, how clean a washer will get your clothes and how often on average it will need repair.

Much of what makes colleges effective cannot be measured in numbers. Every college is a unique amalgam with its own personality and community that places its stamp on education—on faculty who teach there and on students who go there. And more than anything, it is these subtleties that shape students’ attitudes, learning, and experiences.

These are considerations that rankings can’t even attempt to deal with, let alone compare from college to college. Moreover, the non-quantifiable part, the “reputational survey,” is a not only a joke, but there is also clear evidence that contributors try to manipulate it.

Let’s take Mr. Vedder’s example: “If you are paying $50,000 a year to send your kid to either Harvard or George Washington U, other things equal, the quality of education is likely to be superior at Harvard.”

He offers no basis for this statement other than the implication that because Harvard is ranked higher, Harvard is inherently superior. Is teaching better? Rankings won’t tell you that, because good teaching depends on a blend of factors, many of which are subtle and can’t be quantified. Just ask colleges; they’ve struggled forever to measure teaching effectiveness as part of tenure and promotion.

Yes, rankings sell. And since colleges mostly don’t change rapidly, to have a rankings farrago annually, U.S. News has to tweak the formula annually so that rankings will remain in the forefront and they can present a picture of colleges battling it out to move up the ladder.

But rankings are not merely imperfect because formulas are manipulated or because they are unscientific or whatever. They are pernicious because, although they may be attractive, they are not a good tool to help answer questions that at bottom matter most to a student: which schools will be the best match in terms of my needs and plans.

None of their fatal shortcomings would matter much if ranking if colleges were a harmless pastime. But they are not harmless. They have transformed how trustees and the public judge a college’s effectiveness. They encourage students to make prestige the centerpiece of their college search instead of figuring out what they truly want for themselves. And they are the foundation of the marketing engine driving multi-billion dollar enterprises that have transformed applying to highly-ranked schools from a ‘best match’ process into a trophy hunt.

Some have unfairly lumped independent educational consultants with those enterprises. It’s true that educational consultants are flourishing in this new climate, but that’s because we are part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Our job is to help families sort through the hype and reduce anxiety by focusing on basics: helping students figure out what they want in a college, and then figure out who has it. And then help students master the skills of showing their best selves to colleges so that good matches can take place.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark H. Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

It is this week that U.S. News and World Report releases its best-selling issue of the year: its annual ranking of colleges and universities. Based on criteria that no one thinks is ideal (and few fully comprehend), the result is a week where colleges condemn (when their rankings decline) and others reluctantly cheer (when their rankings rise) and all express bewilderment. Worst of all, students add colleges to their ‘wish lists’ not understanding that much of the criteria that put a school on the list has no consequence to their particular needs, interests, or desires.

This year the non-profit group, American Council of Trustees and Alumni, has released an alternate ranking. Theirs is based on whether colleges provide a well-rounded learning experience based on requiring survey classes in history, literature, writing, science, and more. This group believes that colleges should require such basic general knowledge classes. For example: does a college require a student to take an ancient or modern world history, or can they satisfy this need by taking a course in say, “Evolution of Medical Care in Ancient Civilizations,” as their sole history requirement? At the top of their rankings, no one will find the colleges that top the U.S. News list.

What’s a family to make of this discrepancy? How to evaluate surveys that use reputation over student engagement? Financial reserves over evidence of learning? For many, the real acknowledgment is that the colleges that lead the U.S. News rankings may do so because of who fills their student body; after all, success seems assured when you choose your students body from among the top 2% of college applicants.

Such rankings pop up throughout the year and have begun to wend their way to secondary schools. One respected newspaper touts its annual survey of the “nation’s top high schools.”  The list has been taken as gospel by many, reprinted in national magazines. Yet the list is almost exclusively based on a single criterion: the percentage of students taking Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate classes. It does not examine whether students are learning in those classes, nor is there a word about services to those unsuited for AP classes, or measuring demonstrated readiness for college success through an examination of writing skills.

Students and parents will look to the rankings because they are drawn to the simplicity of the charts. The important role that both school-based counselors and educational consultants must play is to ensure that parents understand this simple, direct concept: a college must be evaluated by how well its programs, mission, academic offerings, campus environment, and more, meet the specific needs of one’s own student. Our role in the weeks ahead is educational: inform parents that while it may be nice for a school or college to be in the “top 10,” such a ranking has no direct relevance to them. They need to look beyond the charts and discover whether a school is the right match for their child: does it meet our academic, social, and community needs and desires?

Students exploring potential colleges should not look to see who is rated #1, but rather, does a college I’m looking at succeed not only with students ‘at the top’ (who frankly may succeed anywhere), but with students who learn the way I do; who need a class size that works best for me; that establishes (or not) relationships with professors; that seeks a balance of academics and social life; and a level of peer support or competition—based on what I am looking for, not what works for a magazine editor?

Finally, I know full well that rankings will not disappear. But let’s all pledge to assist parents in understanding the limitations of rankings, and better understand the concept of “fit” and “match” which has driven the mission of the Independent Educational Consultants Association and its nearly 900 members for almost 35 years.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, IECA Executive Director

A new study, part of the GoodWork Project Report Series from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, cast an eye to ‘the commercialization of the college application process and the rise of the for-profit educational consultant.’  The report, authored by Alexis Brooke Redding, was released late last week.  Redding sought to discover the impact of the growing field of educational consulting and what is being done to regulate and promote “good work” in the field.

Redding first documented the rise—and reasons behind it—of the use of independent educational consultants (IECs), noting the increased level of frenzy seen in college admissions today, the shift to aggressive marketing techniques among colleges and subsequent ‘consumerist view’ in admissions offices of the process, as well as the growing student-to-counselor ratios in school districts across the United States. Additionally, the report notes that with the process for applying to college changing so dramatically over the last 20 years, even parents who attended colleges feel ill-equipped to advise their children today.

Along with growth, the report examines the role IECs play in the process. It quotes Tim Lee, stating that the field of educational consulting, led by IECA, is focused on helping students find the “best fit” schools.  This underscores my belief that it was IECA members who first introduced “good match or fit” into the college admission vernacular. The author concurs that the role of IECs is to use “their ability to draw upon their broad base of knowledge to help students explore the range of options.” Notes Redding, there is a “professional mantra that the goal is for a counselor to use his or her expertise to facilitate the process so that the student can get into schools based on merit and fit.”

The author cites evidence of the growth in consultant use and cites independent research that today “22% of all freshmen at private, four-year colleges [in 2006] have used IECs.”  This enforces the results of other independent research this past year that found that 26% of high achieving seniors used an educational consultant in their college search or application process. Redding concludes that “IECs are becoming an integral part of the revised admissions process.”

The author notes that the field needs three bases in order to gain recognition as a true profession: knowledge, skill and an underlying ethical framework.  She raises a concern about those who do not attain the knowledge or adhere to such published ethical guidelines.  She also raises red flags about those not choosing to join professional organizations that both examine qualifications, provide education and training, and require adherence to ethical precepts.  In this regard, the report cites IECA frequently, noting our Standards of Excellence as well as our Principles of Good Practice.  More than just ethics, competence and experience are noted:

“The standards for acceptance into NACAC and IECA highlight the importance of experience and expertise.  For example, in order to become a Professional Member of IECA, one has to have a master’s degree in a related field, 3+ years of experience, a record of service to more than 50 students, a minimum of 50 campus visits, and three professional references.”  The report indicates that parents have a responsibility to ensure that the consultant they use rises to this level of knowledge and ethical behavior and suggests such requirements be demanded of all practitioners.

Other professionals in the field also saw our leadership.  The report quotes Dr. William Fitzsimmons, Dean of Admissions at Harvard: “the field is ‘a little bit like the Wild West’ in which IECA ‘is doing the best it can’ to deal with the ‘set of cottage industries that have developed.’”  He also saw that “in some cases, the use of an independent is highly appropriate.”

The report also praised IECA by noting my own statement that IECA is committed to serving all students, whether they can afford consultants or not. Says Redding “A visit to the IECA website supports his [Sklarow's] statement.  They have a link for parents and students with downloads…” Moreover she notes IECA “publications highlight the importance of professional memberships, experience, and transparency in pricing… By following these guidelines, families would have excellent resources to aid them in finding a qualified counselor and would be better able to protect themselves from being taken advantage of by unscrupulous practitioners.” Finally she notes “IECA members have been vetted during the membership application process, thus assuring that they have met their standards.”

When one interviewee was asked about the benefits of her professional affiliations she noted: “assurance to clients that we follow the principles of good practice for both NACAC and IECA; constant professional development; networking opportunities with my colleagues; opportunities to both attend and participate in conferences…”  In this regard, the report qutoes me saying “ANYONE can PROMISE that they work ethically.  By joining [IECA] you say to the public: I’m being watched: if I violate those ethical guidelines, someone will step in and act… That’s how you know that I am honest, competent, and well qualified.”  David Hawkins, Vice President of NACAC noted, “only members of either of our organizations [NACAC and IECA] are subject to our rules.

Bottom Line:  The author calls independent educational consulting an “aspiring profession.”  While extolling the work that IECA has done to advance the field, it is clear that she believes that today only those who choose to professionally affiliate have agreed to be ‘vetted’ and be held to high ethical standards.  The field will achieve greater status when the vast majority of those practicing agree to meet these or similar standards.

This report mirrors the view endorsed by the IECA executive board that IECA must grow to represent the vast majority of those qualified, ethical consultants in the field.  As I have said before, just as every good doctor believes he or she must join the AMA and every ethical lawyer must join the American Bar Association, so too should every qualified, ethical consultant join IECA.  As I read it, the report affirms this mission.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, IECA Executive Director

The Executive Committee of the IECA Board of Directors met Monday and Tuesday this week to examine current issues and ensure the Association’s future is on track, incorporating member feedback and planning for upcoming meetings of the Board of Directors.  While the officers examined numerous topics (e.g., conference changes, affinity groups, ethics, and relationships with affiliated organizations) most discussions led back to three central themes of communication, education, and IECA’s role as the preeminent organization for educational advising in the world.

Given that IECA is the leading professional association for educational consultants, the Executive Committee emphasized a three-year goal of membership growth to include the vast majority of all competent, ethical, knowledgeable, qualified consultants.  The effort revolves around the simple belief that just as the nation’s leading doctors join the AMA and leading psychologists join the APA, the nation’s (and world’s) leading educational consultants should be members of IECA. The result, while ensuring some growth, will guarantee greater awareness by the general public, general acceptance by admission directors, and partnership with leading educational organizations.

Such an effort will challenge IECA to act decisively to ensure effective communication.  This includes communication among our members, communication between the association’s national staff and the membership, as well as communication between our members and the admission and broader educational communities.

IECA has made a commitment to maintain publishing: brochures, fliers, directory and Insights.  While other groups have abandoned ‘hard copies’ we believe such printed material gives us an unequaled presence.  At the same time, our web site is updated regularly and will continue to be renewed. When families search for an educational consultant, we are committed to ensuring that IECA emerges at the top of that search.   Our social media and new media efforts are well ahead of most other associations with thousands now connecting to us through Facebook, LinkedIn, our blog, the TalkList and other efforts.  Increasingly these new communication tools will connect members with each other and with the general public.

The growing importance of our committees, of affinity groups (like the two newest groups for consultants with small children and consultants in dual roles and the coming group for BestNotes users), and newly developing regional groups are all part of the emphasis on communication.  They are also an important part of education, the last piece of our trifecta.

Members in recent surveys have indicated a desire for more educational opportunities.  Having just completed our Summer Training Institute, I know that no organization anywhere does a better job of educating consultants.  Our training is unequaled.  Now we will be looking at new training opportunities, for those just starting out, as well as for those in the process of growing their practices or adding new specialties, as well as for those more senior and experienced members looking to keep up with new technologies and changes in the world of admissions and adolescents.  This is also likely to include a new, online ethics course that all new members of IECA will need to complete during the months following their acceptance to the organization.

A central aspect of IECA’s role is our deep belief that the profession–and students–are best served by our members’ commitment to sharing: through mentoring, presenting at conferences, teaching at the STI and other workshops and seminars.  Sharing is central to our mission.

The fundamental message of the Executive Committee’s work is that IECA intends to be the leader in the field by providing exceptional service and educational opportunities to our members, and by expanding awareness of the profession and recognition of IECA from coast-to-coast and increasingly, around the world.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, IECA Executive Director

In some ways the Summer Training Institute lasts far longer than the 4 days attendees spend in Swarthmore, PA.  First, in a practical sense, it could takes months just to read everything in their workshop binders.  Hundreds of articles, reproduced blogs, resource lists, sample contracts, intake forms, campus visit checklists and more make the binder a valuable resource for years. IECA education director Sue DePra put together an amazing textbook.

In addition, the attendees are able to start their journeys into the profession knowing they can rely on IECA for support.  Each can immediately link through this blog and the IECA facebook page.  As they seek Associate or Professional Membership they will discover the value IECA offers:  assigning mentors, joining campus tours, gaining discounts on everything from insurance to FedEx.  As a member they will discover the amazing opportunities, products and discounts offered by our partners including College Essay Organizer, Wintergreen Orchard House, Princeton Review, Kaplan, and more than 30 others.  Attending our national conferences in the fall and spring, reading Insights, and participating in LinkedIn discussions all will allow those who took part in this past week’s training to continue to learn and grow.

Yet above all there are the wonderful connections the participants made with each other.  Stretching from San Diego to Maine, and Vancouver to Miami, the STI Class of 2010 seems poised to keep these new relationships alive: visiting schools together, sharing expertise, providing business and counseling support and guidance.  Since 2003, we have seen the incredible value the summer training graduates find in remaining in touch, supporting each other, and raising up their classmates.  We at IECA look forward to their continued involvement.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser

by Mark Sklarow, IECA Executive Director

The final afternoon of the 2010 Summer Training Institute was focused on a 3-hour session that was designed to bring together the information attendees gained throughout the week through the process of creating their own personal business plan.  Recognizing that most who enter the field of educational consulting do so with a passion for students and knowledge of counseling, attendees welcomed this final opportunity to examine the small business development aspect of starting a practice.

I shared the teaching for this unit with marketing guru and IECA member Lisa Bleich.  Among the exercises completed, attendees examined their personal reasons for entering the field and crafted mission statements, set goals and specific objectives and examined the external community traits that impact consulting.  Attendees examined the benefits of students using web-based, school-based or corporate-based advising in order to better understand the landscape.  Each completed a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats) analysis based on their 4 days of learning.

The business plan also had participants examine traditional and new media marketing techniques, start-up costs for establishing a practice as well as on-going expenses, particularly in the early years while a practice is being built.

While plans were hardly complete at the end of the exercise, the 93 attendees left with the basic components of a business plan in hand, along with a cohort of colleagues from across the country and around the world with whom they shared the institute.  Many anticipate continuing their learning at the upcoming IECA Fall Conference in Ohio.

• share:
• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later
• Bookmark in Browser