by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, Independent Educational Consultants Association

Sixteen years ago, my first day with IECA was at the start of the spring conference in Raleigh, North Carolina. I believe there were fewer than 250 attendees, including some 80 IECA members. There was no NATSAP back then, Small Boarding School Conferences were intimate events, and The Association of Boarding Schools, just separating from NAIS, was years away from hosting its own conference. Today with more school conferences, therapeutic conferences, college conferences, plus LDA, CHADD, and more, I contemplated the role of IECA gatherings. I wondered if we are we simply duplicating efforts, and more importantly, whether IECA makes a significant contribution to the welfare of students.

To be sure the IECA conferences have grown. Upwards of 1,200 people have attended our conferences, including as many as 300 consultants. There has been a surge in college participation, while attendance from schools and special purpose programs grew rapidly in the first half of the decade and has stabilized. Even as the economy turned sour and where other associations reported 25 to 30 to even 35% percent drops in attendance, IECA has exceeded expectations with only minor declines. As a friend of mine, the director of another educational association, said to me recently, “The rest of us feel lucky to be hanging on…IECA is doing great and YOU’RE the one wondering how to change, improve, and redesign conferences? People come because there’s value to attending.” But again I wonder, with so many other choices out there, what IS the value? What makes IECA conferences unique and valued?

I recently asked a representative of Wintergreen Orchard House, a veteran of trade shows from coast-to-coast, about our conference. “The IECA Conference is a must-attend,” she told me. “It goes on my calendar first.” When I asked why, I was told “No where else can I meet people across disciplines: those in college placements, boarding school administrators, LD experts…it allows me to connect with all of the communities we want to reach.”

I asked an IECA member who has been around for years, someone who I’ll see at NACAC or other regional gathering from time to time. Her view was that IECA conferences provide something no one else does: a holistic view of adolescents. “We see teens as far more than a commodity to be placed or a potential student at a small private college. We know that to understand placement you need to understand the entire child: hopes, fears, learning style, anxieties, traits, and flaws. No where else do I get workshops on so wide a range of topics.”

While attending NATSAP last month I sat down and spoke with the head of a small emotional growth boarding school. He indicated that a few events each year are “musts.” This includes the two IECA conferences, because “…no where else can I speak to educational consultants who directly deal with students and families who are desperate and emotionally spent, and need a real professional to help them through a crisis; and then, turn around and talk to wilderness programs that could feed into my school, then traditional schools that we may feed into, and even colleges who want to understand better who we serve. Where else could I find that?”

And one more: a dean of admission from a college who jokingly told me many years ago that he would “never” tell his admission colleagues about IECA because it was one of the best kept secrets: “The last thing I want is more colleges to come. No where else do I get this wonderful opportunity to talk about my school with professionals who are MUCH more likely to work with students considering private colleges and MUCH more likely to explore colleges out of state. Why would I want my competitors to know about IECA?”

What then does IECA offer? First of all, the unique crowd that assembles: colleges, traditional boarding schools, gap year programs, emotional growth schools, therapeutic programs, and summer opportunities—all who believe in a holistic view of the student. Also, a schedule of workshops that range from NCAA rules to Asperger’s, and from learning communities to parent advocates. And we have worked in recent years to strengthen the academic offerings, even while expanding opportunities for networking in both formal and informal settings. As I look toward Toronto, I can say with confidence that “No Where Else” will such a gathering be possible.

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Based on a request brought by the IECA Special Needs Committee, the Board of Directors met via teleconference last week. Knowing that members overwhelmingly view the TalkList as a valuable benefit (based on the January 2010 member survey), the effort focused on ways to make the TalkList both more valuable but also ensure that several current concerns are addressed.

Concerns focused on just a few specific area: (1) the tendency of some to reveal too much information in  a case study such that client confidentiality could be compromised; (2) the tendency of some to present so little background as to call in to question whether the person making the post is qualified or ‘did their homework’ before asking for assistance; (3) the actions of some in forwarding TalkList postings to individuals outside of IECA (often in schools or programs), a clear violation of the rules that members agree to support.

Board consensus was that the regulations established should be shared with members more frequently. It was felt that often members sign the TalkList agreement but forget expectations, like proper titles. There was discussion about online training that would review what constitutes a good case study posting: one that provides sufficient information but no identifying characteristics, and demonstrates the research done by the consultant prior to the post. It was also felt that members need to be reminded that it is unacceptable to forward postings outside the membership and that doing so is basis for being removed from the TalkList.

There was discussion about the possibility of creating a TalkList mentor group. Their role would be to assist those trying to frame a posting or to contact those who post something considered improper to explain why and provide assistance in changing to a more valuable post.

Many on the Board felt that there were more significant problems of members venturing into advising beyond their expertise. This was judged to be an issue beyond just the TalkList and will be addressed separately.

The Board will continue this work and create a series of proposals. You may share your thoughts in the comments section below this blog, or send your comments to IECA board president Diane Geller at dianegeller@gmail.com or to me at msklarow@iecaonline.com.

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

Nearly 30 years ago IECA set the standard for the profession of educational consulting by establishing the first Principles of Good Practice. Major revisions several years ago made these ethics guidelines stricter and more demanding, setting limits on the value of gifts, articulating the limits on commercial activities, and places a firm prohibition against activities that heighten student or family anxieties. IECA became one of the first associations in the country that regularly reviewed the marketing materials of applicants to ensure these emphasize a “good fit” over “getting in.”

Now the Independent Educational Consultants Association has again raised the bar substantially by establishing new STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE for the practice of educational consulting. These new competencies (covering 14 pages of information) ensure that those in the field keep up with the ever-changing body of knowledge and practice in a professional and empathic way. The new document covers the major consulting areas of college advising, school advising, advising of students with learning disabilities, and advising students with special needs (emotional and behavioral problems). Within each advising specialty, competencies are articulated in the areas of assessments, working with the family, working with educational institutions, professional ethics, professional office management, and professional development.

Among the competencies:

• Consultants seeks to empower the student to take charge of the application process.

• Educate families and students about college ranking systems and media coverage in order to bring balance to decision-making and put this information in context.

• Recommend only schools that the consultant has visited except in highly unusual situations; make regular visits to campuses (spending up to 20% of one’s professional time doing so).

• Advise on the best alternatives for the child, regardless of parental desire or pressure. Consultants should seek to help parents understand why actions are recommended.

• Use intake procedures that insure the consultant develops an in-depth understanding of the unique characteristics of each student, i.e. unique abilities, academic learning style, personal characteristics, values, attitudes, feelings, interests, personal strengths and weaknesses, work ethic, aspirations, short-term and long-term goals.

• Prepare students and families for issues surrounding the transition from high school to college, i.e. self-advocacy skills.

• Understand the limitations of and appropriate uses of common assessment instruments.

• Be aware of accreditation, licensure and approval status of programs they recommend.

• Maintain knowledge of programs’ safety records, number of students, maintenance, administrative policies, education, therapy and emotional growth components, food service and quality, population description, confidentiality, and more.

• Respect the families’ and parents’ experience, history, values, religion, goals, and financial parameters in order to factor these in to the application and decision-making process.

The complete document, copyrighted by IECA, is available on the Association’s Web site: www.IECAonline.com.

by Emily Snyder, IECA Professional Member (Virginia), and Chair of IECA’s College Committee

For those of you who follow national development of educational issues, I returned home from the IECA Conference to hear Al Sharpton, Newt Gingrich, and Arnie Duncan come together with David Gregory on NBC’s Sunday morning “Meet the Press” to discuss forming a coalition to address what they all believe is a need for national curriculum standards. The implications of such a movement — which we have actually been headed towards for some time — on education from pre-K through college and beyond are enormous. My belief is that any resulting legislation will require us to alter how we work with students and families, regardless of our specialties, in ways that we have not even begun to fathom.

Part of our role as consultants is being aware of what’s on the educational horizon so that we can appropriately guide the students and families we work with as they make expensive and long term educational decisions. That’s why it will be more important for us than ever before to support IECA sponsoring workshops and sessions on controversial legislation that impacts any and all of us — like the Friday afternoon session where members from CAFETY and therapeutic boarding schools came together to discuss their views with consultants.

While there wasn’t much time to do more than touch the surface of the issue and its implications, Mark Sklarow as the moderator, the panelists, and the comments from the audience all served a purpose — IECA created a public dialogue where both sides of the issue were aired and information was shared; a forum I would encourage all of us to support as the nature of our work continues to evolve.

by Mark Sklarow, Executive Director, IECA

From the IECA Conference in NC

I had the opportunity to moderate a truly extraordinary session before 400 attendees at the IECA Conference in Charlotte. A panel of seven represented divergent views on legislation currently being considered that would regulate the therapeutic industry.

Brian Lombrowski, president of CAFETY supports the legislation and spoke of the role of government to ensure the safety of youth, noting that in many states with licensure and standards already in place, the federal legislation would have little impact, but would address problems in states with little or no regulation.

Next Dr. Jared Balmer, co-founder of a residential treatment program, provided some history. He noted that 25 years ago most troubled youth were housed in psychiatric hospitals, a far worse situation than what is afforded young people in RTCs today. He endorsed regulation but indicated concerns with some aspects of the current legislation.

Next up was Chris Noroski, a student at the University of St. Thomas, and vice president of CAFETY. He noted a concern for the lack of standing a teen has in deciding his or her own placement in a program. He drew attention to the conflict that may come when the parent is the customer and the student is the client. Grace Cole, a student from Charlottesville, Virginia, spoke next and reiterated Chris’ point that students deserve greater say in deciding their own fate and spoke of the need of students to be able to report suspected abuse.

Dr. John Santa, founder of Montana Academy, countered that from his experience, virtually no adolescents will willingly go to the residential treatment center, and so students cannot be making such decisions and that parents make this decisions out of concern for the well-being of their child. He also noted the danger that can come if students can regularly make accusations without foundation, to federal or state authorities. The result of the proposed bill, he said, is that programs would opt for safety, rather than treatment that might invite accusations of violations.

Lon Woodbury, chair of the Special Needs Committee of the Independent Educational Consultants Association spoke next, noting a series of legislative attempts to serve troubled teens that have been unsuccessful. He reminded everyone that even if well-intended, the key to results in new laws are in the regulations and guidelines that are written to implement the law and that these often corrupt the original intent.

Dr. Robert Friedman, a professor in the Department of Child and Family Studies at the University of South Florida, was the final panelist. He expressed concern for programs, Web sites, and unethical consultants that prey on parent anxieties, noting that many of the programs in the room, and IECA, seem committed to raising standards and operating in an ethical manner. He offered that efforts must be made to deal with those less ethical and those who do not work to meet higher standards.

During questions and answers, attendees raised questions about why the legislation doesn’t include traditional boarding schools, as well as questions about lowering the age of consent, as has been done in Washington state.

In the end it was remarkable because it marked the first opportunity for each side in this important debate to listen and speak with each other and to begin a dialogue. I was taken at one point by Dr. Santa’s view that 10 of the 14 regulations outlined in the bill he completely agreed with, and he saw two as administrative annoyances that he could live with. That left just two parts of the bill where he disagreed–with some vehemence–but this showed me that both sides are closer together than anyone had thought. The CAFETY and A-START folks are NOT trying to close down all residential programs, and the therapeutic industry folks accept the value and need for some regulation or licensure.

In the end I think it was a worthwhile exercise, and I had dozens of attendees seek me out to offer their opinion that the session was interesting, valuable, and a breakthrough. We look forward to continuing the dialogue and finding the role consultants may play in ensuring student success and family harmony.

I had a good meeting Wednesday with Jan Moss, outgoing executive director and Cliff Brownstein, the new NATSAP executive. We had a wide-ranging discussion about pending legislation, ethics, conferences, and parent inquiries. I am looking forward to discovering possibilities for our two organizations to work together in new and dynamic ways. I’m also thrilled that Jan will be at our gathering in San Francisco.

I will be taking some time away from the virtual college fair this Wednesday to join NATSAP’s outgoing (Jan Moss) and incoming (Cliff Brownstein) executive directors for lunch and a planning session.  With NATSAP moving its national office to the DC area it will certainly facilitate such opportunities and improve our ability to coordinate and enhance cooperation on a host of issues from ethics to the impact of the financial crisis on both our members and our organizations.