童年好词好句好段-广东航海学院

对菲律宾学校辅导员学习观的探索
艾伦 B.I.贝尔纳多著
[摘要] 学生学习改革是学校改革的重中之重，辅导员在学生的学习和进步中起着推动
作用.然而，辅导员对学习 过程有着怎样的理解呢？在这个研究中，我们调查了115
个菲律宾学校的辅导员.就学习过程和影响学 习的因素，他们对42个州的看法和做法
表明了态度.一个对42个州的回应分析报告阐释了三个因素： （F1）社会认知构建主
义，（F2）以教师或课程为中心的行为主义，（F3）个别差异.研究的主要 成果是菲律
宾学校辅导员的学习观对引导并促进学生的学习和进步起着很大影响.
[关键词]学习观，学习概念，学校辅导员，学生学习，菲律宾
世界上许多不同地区的学校改 革都将重点放在学生学习上.特别是，大多数学校
改进项目都将学生能接受高质量的教育和技能作为自己 的目标，以帮助学生活跃于当
今竞争激烈的全球经济社会（如：Lee & Williams, 2006）.在这方面，学校改革项目
吸取了当代一些学习理论和研究（如：Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Lambert &
McCombs, 199 8）.其中中心思想是学校改进的重点应致力于保证学生高质量的学习或
接受有明确目标和标准的课程. 例如，教科书（Chien & Young, 2007），计算机与教育
技术（Gravoso, 2002; Haertnel & Means, 2003; Technology in Schools Task Force, 2003），
教育评估体系（Black & Wiliam, 2004; Cheung & Ng, 2007; Clark, 2001; Stiggins, 2005）
被重新考虑，因为这些支撑性的技术和资料影响着学生学习的进步.同 样地，学校财
政资源的管理和分配也被评估，以验证它们是否被充分调动起来促进学生学习.
（ Bolam, 2006; Chung & Hung, 2006; Retna, 2007）
从这方面来说，一些支持者号召在改革中对学校辅导员进行测试（Herr, 2002）.
在美国，House and Hays (2002) 提出学校辅导员在引导学生进步 中应扮演积极的领导
角色.与此同时，美国学校辅导员协会在1997年倡导，“学校辅导员计划视是为 了促
进和加强学习过程”.为了回应这个提议，一些人推荐了所谓的最好办法，让学校辅
导员全 面参与到促进学生学习中来.（如：Rowell & Hong, 2002; Sink, 2005）.
提高学生的学习也是菲律宾学校改革的主题之一（Bernardo & Garcia, 2006;
Bernado & Mendoza, 2009）.然而，尽管学校辅导员在学生学习中的作用引起人们的

重新思考，但这股浪潮并不十分明显.在菲律宾，学校辅导员通常被叫做指导员.他们
在学生学习中所 起的合作者作用在菲律宾学校辅导员作用讨论中并没被强调.并且，
这些作用在菲律宾学校辅导员讨论（ Abrenica, 2001; Salazar-Cleme.a, 2000）和辅导员
教育计划（Almeda-Estanislao, 2007; Guarino, 2007; Pabition, 2003）中也没被提及.事实
上，没有任何出 版物系统研究过辅导员在学生学习和进步中所起的作用（Pabition,
2001, is a rare example）.
本研究将通过调查菲律宾学校辅导员有关学生学习过程的观念或信念， 以主动探
究他们在促进学生学习中可能起的作用. “什么是学习，为何学习”一直是各类教育
利益相关者研究的重点.例如，有的侧重于学生学习概念的研究（Purdie & Hattie，
2002），因为这些概念涉及到学生的学习行为和策略（Entwistle & Peterson, 2004;
Pillay, Purdie, Boulton-Lewis, 2000）.同样，一些研究侧重讨论教师
（Boulton-Lewis, Smith, McCrindle, Burnett, & Campbell, 2001; Kane, Sandretto,
& Heath, 2002; Samuelowicz & Bain, 2001)）和职前教师（Bernardo, 2008; Cliff,
1998）对学习的理解 和信仰，因为据说这些认知可以指导教师在课堂上的行为
（Calderhead, 1996），甚至关系到学生成就（Gao & Watkins, 004）.本研究旨大规
模探讨菲律宾学校辅导员对学习所持的信念.
不像学生和教师，学校 辅导员不是学校学习的直接参与者.然而，学校辅导员对
自身在促进学生的学习方面的认识，很可能受制 于他们对学习概念的理解.学校辅导
员要想成为学生学习的有效帮助者，就必须客观深刻的理解学习过程 以及促进或妨碍
学生学习的因素.在这项研究中，我们调查了菲律宾六个不同地区的学校辅导员，要求他们评估有关学习过程不同看法，并表明他们的立场.我们用主成分分析法分析他
们的回答，以揭 示他们的学习观结构.我们还讨论了在众多的学习观中，辅导员将倾
向于选择哪种.
方法
参与者
116个来自全国不同地区的学校辅导员参与了这项研究，研究主要采用调查问卷的方
式.其中男性10人，女性103人，还有三人为注明性别.参与者大多比较年轻，20多
岁的 占43.1％，三十多岁的占30.2％.大多数被调查者是刚参加工作的辅导员；50.9％
的受访者 有五年或以下的工作经历，仅26.7％的人有五到十五年的工作经历.大约有

一半或54.9％的参与者只有学士学位，其余的具有硕士以上学位.
工具
调查问卷中有42个涉及学习过程和影响学习过程的因素.看法来自于当代的各种学习理论和学习原则.问卷中的题目按随机顺序排列.与会者被要求表明是否同意问卷中
的每个声明， 每题有从0（非常不同意）到7（非常同意）八个不同选项.问卷还包括
调查学校辅导员的教育和专业背 景及其他一些人口统计信息.
结果
为探讨辅导员学习观结构，我们采用探索性因素分析法对 他们的反应进行了分析.
首先，对42个项目的内部一致性和该项目相关性进行计算.该项目相关性介于
0.27~0.66之间，信度α=.94. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin充分抽样调查指 数是0.815，这表
明数据是可行的.然后，采用主成分分析法分析42个项目中的原始数据，得到三 个主
要因素.我们应用旋转矩阵（正交因子旋转斜职位）分析组成因子.该模式有三个因素
矩阵 占总数的42.30％. 因素负荷量的判别方法是，其中一个因素至少占0.40，而其
他因素不能多于0.35.
因素1的测试（特征值=12.62; 方差=30.06％）表明，大多数人的学习观念与认
知建构主义观点是一致的.这些条目强调实现更高层次的认知知识和技能，同时积极
参与更复杂的新旧知 识构建.一些样本项目包括：“学习各种材料，包括能够有效地
计划如何理解一个复杂的技能或概念”和 “学习多种材料，包括改变或重新构建大脑
的信息框架”.
另一方面，因素2（特征值= 3.26; 方差= 7.77％）指出与行为主义相一致的学
习观.这也表明，学习过程受先天能力的 限制，但也受到更加传统的引导教学的影响.
其中的条目显示了学习者的被动，和教学过程中外部引导的 重要性.一些样本项目包
括：“学习复杂的材料，包括通过反复练习强化复杂技能，这种方法省力高效” ，“学习
各种资源，包括按意愿模仿生活中模范人物的行为”.
最后，因素3（特征值=1.88; 方差= 4.48％），是指个体差异影响因素，如发育，
动机，社会和个人认知.这些条目大多是指个人、群体或社会因素会影响学习效果.示
例项目包括：“ 在学习过程，所学任务或概念与生活有无关联影响着学生的学习兴趣”，
“学习过程受到学生成功期望值 的影响”.
代表三个不同因素的项目被分为三块，分别表示每个因素.社会认知的建构主义

信念量表有17个项目（男= 5.72，标准差= 0.72，信度α= .92）.行为主义信念量表
包括9项（男= 5.14，标准差= 0.98，信度α= 0.83）.最后，个体差异信念量表包括
9项（男= 5.64，标准差= 0.78，信度α= .82）.参与者对不同项目的反应在三个因素
中密切相关.社会认知建构主义与行为主义相关（r =0 .48，p<0.0001），也与个体差
异相关（r = 0.67，p<0.0001）.行为主义信念也与个体差异信念相关（r = 0.50，
p<0.0 001）.这三个因素的描述性统计表明，辅导员没有明确的偏好，各个信念也没
有大的差别.其他描述 性统计分析显示，这三个因素与教育，职业，或个人（性别，
年龄，工龄，教育专业，教育成就）无必然 联系.
讨论
这样说来,如果这种信念不是正式顾问教育课程的产品，那探究这种信念如何出
现将是一件有趣的事情.也许,这些信念来自于菲律宾学校顾问的个人学习经验或个人
的阅读资 料和研究.菲律宾学校学生的个人学习经验会塑造学习概念，这和信仰结构
的第三因素的特点相符合.因 素3里的条目表明了个体差异,发展和社会因素影响菲律
宾学校顾问学习理念的学习构成和重要视角.这 个因素表明了菲律宾学校顾问的一个
重要倾向：考虑与不同个人或者不同情境因素有关的学习过程，这些 因素为特定的个
人学习经历下定义.这个学习概念的形成揭示了，这个概念在一个程度上注意到了每个学生不同的学习经历，专注影响每一位学生学习的发展的、社会的、甚至文化因素.
这样一种构想 最可能关系到菲律宾学校顾问进行心理评估的核心功能,该评估突显出
个体差异.基本的咨询技巧也同样 需要顾问去探究特定的因素，这些因素决定那些不
被看好的学生、荣誉学生和其他顾问在职业生涯中遇到 的特殊学生的学习结果和经
历.
即使这项研究的结果只是初步探测，但是它提示了有用的类别 或构建，来用于研
究菲律宾顾问推动和促进菲律宾籍学生的学习的更方面能力.前面的讨论凸显了与第< br>三因素相关的学习观念是如何与学校顾问的基本职能和功能相密切联系.与前两个因
素或视角相对 应的学习理念也可能与处理学生的学习需求的特定选择相关.那些强烈
坚信社会构建主义学习信念的学校 顾问很可能对一些学习问题进行概念，这些问题关
于学习策略的积极使用，计划和其他的自律的学习模式 ,以及影响学生学习能力和动
机的个人和社会因素.此外,社会建构主义学习理念可能与是开发更强的机 构和学生自
主决定的努力相联系.另一方面,那些坚信行为学习理念的顾问倾向于对学习问题从以

下方面概念：适当的内部和外部的强化有效的学习行为,他们 会把注意力集中在分析
教师、父母、同辈、甚至是学生们自己如何应对各种有效和无效的学生学习行为. 因
此,行为主义学习信念可能改变特定的外部事件，并影响到以扬长避短为目的的学生
学习环境 .
在这一点上面，学校顾问的学习信念和专业实践的关系仍然是推测性的，因为这
项研究并没 有试图收集关于专业操作的数据.未来的研究可以聚焦于这重要的一点,同
样的，一些对教师和学生的学 习理念相关的研究与教师实践(Calderhead，1996;高和
沃特金斯,2004年)和学生 学习行为(·恩特威斯尔&彼得
森,Purdie,2003;Pillay,Boulton-Lew is,2000年)相关.这项研究的一个重要贡献在于它
提供了一个有用的工具，这具有很高的内部一 致性的价值.该工具可用于研究学校顾
问不同的学习理念如何联系学生的学业表现(例如,失败,成绩不 良等)、咨询及其它帮
助学生提高学习成绩,甚至建立自己的专业职能的策略.
由于世界不同 地区的学校顾问在积极推动和促进学生的学习,那么考虑学校顾问
提及的过程有关的认知, 这是很重要 的.从菲律宾学校顾问的例子，研究表明了对学习
过程下定义的角度,可以提供相关的专业职能,加强学 习.这项研究的结果走出了一个
小但重要的一步，其能够更加有效地对菲律宾学校顾问如何发挥其功能去 提高学生的
学习方法下定义.

Exploring Filipino School Counselors’
Beliefs about Learning
Allan B. I. Bernardo
[
Abstract]School reform efforts that focus on student learning require school counselors to
take on important new roles as advocates of student learning and achievement. But how do
school counselors understand the process of learning? In this study, we explore the learning
beliefs of 115 Filipino school counselors who indicated their degree of agreement with 42
statements about the process of learning and the factors that influence this process. A
principal components analysis of the responses to the 42 statements suggested three factors:
(F1) social-cognitive constructivist beliefs, (F2) teacher-curriculum-centered behaviorist
beliefs, and (F3) individual difference factors. The preliminary results are briefly discussed
in terms of issues related to how Filipino school counselors’ conceptions of learning may
guide their strategies for promoting student learning and achievement.
[Key words] beliefs about learning, conceptions of learning, school counselors, student
learning, Philippines

School reform efforts in different parts of the world have focused on students’
learning. In particular, most school improvement programs now aim to ensure that students
acquire the high- level knowledge and skills that help them to thrive in today’s highly
competitive global economy (e.g., Lee & Williams, 2006). In this regard, school reform
programs draw from various contemporary theories and research on learning (e.g.,
Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Lambert & McCombs, 1998). The basic idea is that
all school improvement efforts should be directed at ensuring students achieve high levels
of learning or attainment of well-defined curricular objectives and standards. For example,
textbooks (Chien & Young, 2007), computers and educational technology (Gravoso, 2002;
Haertnel & Means, 2003; Technology in Schools Task Force, 2003), and educational

assessment systems (Black & Wiliam, 2004; Cheung & Ng, 2007; Clark, 2001; Stiggins,
2005) are being reconsidered as regards how they can effectively provide scaffolds and
resources for advancing student learning. Likewise, the allocation and management of a
school’s financial resources are assessed in terms of whether these are effectively
mobilized and utilized towards improving student learning (Bolam, 2006; Chung & Hung,
2006; Retna, 2007).
In this regard, some advocates have also called for an examination of the role of
school counselors in these reform efforts (Herr, 2002). In the United States, House and
Hayes (2002) challenged school counselors to take proactive leadership roles in advocating
for the success of all students in schools. In this line, the American School Counselor
Association (1997) has advocated that “the purpose of a counseling program in a school
setting is to promote and enhance the learning process.” In response to this thrust, many
have documented and advocated best practices that would allow school counselors to fulfill
their new roles in enhancing student learning (e.g., Rowell & Hong, 2002; Sink, 2005).
The improvement of student learning has also been an important theme in school
reform efforts in the Philippines (Bernardo & Garcia, 2006; Bernardo & Mendoza, 2009).
However, the push for rethinking the roles of school counselors in improving student
learning has not been as pronounced. School counselors, who are often called guidance
counselors in the Philippines, and their functions and competencies as collaborators in the
promotion of student learning in achievement have not been highlighted in discussions on
the functions of Philippine school counselors (Abrenica, 2001; Salazar- Cleme.a, 2000).
These functions and competencies are also not mentioned in discussions on the perceived
competencies of Philippine school counselors (Almeda-Estanislao, 2007; Guarino, 2007;
Pabiton, 2003), or in the counselor education programs (Wong-Fernandez, 2000, 2001). In
fact, there is hardly any published research that looks into the role of school counselors in
improving student learning and achievement (Pabiton, 2001, is a rare example).
The present study aims to initiate inquiry into the possible roles of Philippine
school counselors in promoting student learning, by looking into school counselors’
conceptions or beliefs regarding the learning process. Conceptions and beliefs about

learning has been an important focus of research among various education stakeholders.
For example, research has focused on students’ conceptions of learning (Purdie & Hattie,
2002) as these conceptions are related to the students’ learning behaviors and strategies
(Entwistle & Peterson, 2004; Pillay, Purdie, Boulton-Lewis, 2000). Similarly, research has
also focused on conceptions and beliefs about learning of teachers (Boulton-Lewis, Smith,
McCrindle, Burnett, & Campbell, 2001; Kane, Sandretto, & Heath, 2002; Samuelowicz &
Bain, 2001) and pre-service teachers (Bernardo, 2008; Cliff, 1998) as these cognitions are
said to guide teachers practices in the classroom (Calderhead, 1996) and may even be
related to student achievement (Gao & Watkins, 2004). This study aims to extend this line
of inquiry by exploring the beliefs about learning of school counselors in the Philippines.
School counselors are not the direct participants in the learning processes in schools,
unlike students and teachers. Nevertheless, how school counselors conceive of their roles
in promoting student learning is likely to be shaped by their own conceptions regarding the
learning process. If school counselors are to be effective agents in facilitating students
learning, they should have a deep and principled understanding of the processes of learning,
and the factors that may promote or hinder these processes. In this study, we inquired into
the beliefs about learning of practicing school counselors in six different regions of the
Philippine by asking them to assess different statements regarding the learning process and
indicate their agreement with such statements. Their responses were analyzed using
principal components analysis in order to reveal the structure of their beliefs about learning,
and possible options for school counselors in relation to the various dimensions of the
learning beliefs are discussed.
Method
Participants
One- hundred sixteen school counselors from six different regions of the country
participated in the study by answering a questionnaire on conceptions of learning. Ten of
the participants were male, 103 female, and three did not indicate their gender. Most of the
participants are relatively young; 43.1% of the participants were in their 20s, and 30.2%
were in their 30’s. Most of the participants are also relatively new in their present positions

as counselors; 50.9% of the participants have been in their present positions for five years
for less and 26.7% have been in their positions for 6 to 15 years. About half or 54.9% of
the participants have only a bachelor’s degree, and the rest have master’s degrees.
Instrument
A questionnaire was designed to include 42 statements regarding the learning
process and factors that affect this process. The statements were derived from different
contemporary theories and principles regarding learning. The items were arranged in one
random sequence in the questionnaire. The participants were asked to indicate whether
they agree or disagree with each statement in the questionnaire, using a scale from 0 (very
strongly disagree) to 7 (very strongly agree). The questionnaire also included questions
referring to the school counselors’ educational and professional background and some
other demographic information.
Results
To explore the structure of the school counselors’ beliefs about learning, their
responses were analyzed using an exploratory factor analysis. First, the internal
consistency of the entire 42-item scale was computed and the item-total correlations were
computed. The item-total correlations ranged from .27 to .66, Cronbach’s α = .94. The
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .815 indicating that the data are
factorable. The raw data on the 42 items were then analyzed using principal components
analysis, and the scree plot suggested three factors. The component matrix was rotated
using the promax rotation (orthogonal factors are rotated to oblique positions). The pattern
matrix with three factors accounted for 42.30% of the variance. The factor loadings were
determined by considering items with loading of at least .40 in one factor and not more
than .35 in either of the other factors.
An examination of the items in Factor 1 (Eigenvalue = 12.62; % of variance =
30.06) indicates that most of the items refer to conceptions of learning that are consistent
with cognitive constructivist views of learning. These items emphasize the importance of
attaining higher level cognitive knowledge and skills, and the importance of active
processes that relate old and new knowledge in the process of constructing more complex

knowledge representations. Some sample items include: “Learning complex material
involves being able to effectively plan how to understand a complex skill or concept” and
“Learning complex material involves changing or reorganizing how one represents
information in the mind.”
On the other hand, the items in Factor 2 (Eigenvalue = 3.26; % of variance = 7.77)
refer to conceptions of learning consistent with behaviorist conceptions of learning, that
also suggest that learning processes are constrained by innate capabilities but are shaped by
more traditional instructional processes. The items in this factor also suggest a passive role
of the learner, and the importance of external instructional processes in advancing learning.
Some sample items include: “Learning complex material involves the consistent practice
and reinforcement of complex skills so that this is executed fast and without error” and
“Learning complex material involves the imitation of desired behaviors from models in the
environment.”
Finally, the items in Factor 3 (Eigenvalue = 1.88; % of variance = 4.48) refer to
factors that influence individual differences in learning, such as developmental,
motivational, social, and individual cognitive styles. Most of the items in this factor refer
to one or more personal or social factors that may influence the outcomes of the learning
process. Example items include: “The learning process is influenced by whether the task
and concepts to be learned are relevant to the learner’s personal interest” and “The learning
process is influenced by the learner’s expectations for success and failure in learning.”
The different items that loaded into the three factors were combined form three
scales that represented each of the three factors. The social- cognitive constructivist beliefs
scale consisted of 17 items (M=5.72, SD = .72, Cronbach’s α = .92). The behaviorist
beliefs scale consisted of 9 items (M = 5.14, SD = .98, Cronbach’s α = .83). Finally,
individual difference beliefs scale consisted of another 9 items (M = 5.64, SD = .78,
Cronbach’s α = .82). The participants’ responses to the items in the three factors were
highly related. Social- cognitive constructivists beliefs were correlated with behaviorist
beliefs (r = .48, p < .0001), and with individual difference beliefs (r = .67, p < .0001).
Behaviorist beliefs were also correlated with individual difference beliefs (r = .50,

p< .0001). The descriptive statistics for the three factors suggest that there is no clear
preference for one set of beliefs or another, nor is there a clear distinction made among the
beliefs. Other descriptive statistical analysis revealed that the responses for the three
factors were not associated with any of the educational, professional, or demographic
variables such as sex, age, years in the profession, educational concentrationmajor, or
educational attainment.
Discussion
This exploratory study reveals that Filipino school counselors’ beliefs about
learning are organized in terms of fairly coherent systems of principles and factors that are
consistent with both traditional (behaviorist) and contemporary (constructivist) approaches
to understanding learning. One could speculate that the beliefs are organized in ways that
reflect formal instruction regarding theories of learning, however, research on the guidance
and counseling or counselor education curriculum in the Philippines (Wong-Fernandez,
2000, 2001) indicates that such concepts are not given emphasis at all. Thus, it is unlikely
that the Filipino counselors’ beliefs about learning merely replicate the structure of formal
courses on learning.
In this regard, it would be interesting to inquire into how such beliefs actually
emerge if it is not likely to be a product of the formal counselor education curriculum.
Perhaps, the beliefs emerge from reflections about the Filipino school counselors’ personal
learning experiences or personal readings and studies. That the personal experiences of
Filipino school counselors may shape their conceptions of learning seems consistent with
the features of the third factor in the structure of their beliefs. The items in Factor 3
indicate that ideas regarding individual difference, developmental and social factors that
influence learning comprise and important dimension of the Filipino school counselors’
beliefs about learning. The factor indicates an important predisposition among Filipino
school counselors to think about the learning process in relation to the various personal and
contextual factors that define the specific experiences of each learner. This
conceptualization of learning reveals a degree of sensitivity to the distinctiveness in the
learning experiences of each student, and mindfulness about the various developmental,

social, and even cultural factors that influence the learning of each individual student. Such
a conceptualization most likely relates to the Filipino school counselors’ core function of
psychological assessment, which highlights individual difference variables. Basic
counseling techniques also require the school counselors to inquire into specific factors
that determine the learning outcomes and experiences of underachieving students, honor
students, and other distinct cases that the school counselors are likely to encounter in their
professional practice.
Even as the results of the study are exploratory and preliminary, the results indicate
useful categories or constructs to begin studying aspects of the Filipino counselors’
capacity to engage the function of promoting and enhancing Filipino students’ learning.
The preceding discussion highlights how learning beliefs associated with the third factor
are likely to be associated with some fundamental competencies and functions of school
counselors. Learning beliefs corresponding to the first two factors or dimensions may also
be related to specific options for dealing with students’ learning needs. School counselors
who hold strong social-cognitive constructivist learning beliefs are likely to conceptualize
learning problems in terms of the use of active learning strategies, planning and other
self-regulatory learning approaches, and possible personal and social factors that influence
the students’ ability and motivation to implement these strategies. Moreover,
social-cognitive constructivist learning beliefs might be associated with efforts to develop
stronger agency and self-determination on the part of the student. On the other hand,
school counselors who hold strong behaviorist learning beliefs are likely to conceptualize
learning problems in terms of problems with appropriate internal and external
reinforcements to effective learning behaviors, and are likely to focus on analyzing how
teachers, parents, peers, and even the students themselves respond to various effective and
ineffective learning behaviors of the student. Thus, behaviorist learning beliefs might be
associated with interventions that will involve changing certain external contingencies in
the students’ learning environment for the purpose of shaping and strengthening good
learning behaviors and extinguishing bad ones.
The relationship between school counselors’ learning beliefs and their professional

approaches and practices remains speculative at this point, as the study did not attempt to
gather data on these professional practices. Future research studies can focus on this
important point, in the same way that some research on teachers’ and students’ beliefs
about learning are associated with teacher practices (Calderhead, 1996; Gao & Watkins,
2004) and student learning behaviors (Entwistle & Peterson, 2004; Pillay, Purdie,
Boulton-Lewis, 2000). One important contribution of the study is that it provides a useful
instrument with high internal consistency values for doing so. The instrument may be used
to study how school counselors’ different conceptualizations of learning may be related to
their attributions for students’ academic performance (e.g., failure, underachievement, etc.),
to the counseling and other intervention strategies they adopt for helping students improve
on their learning achievement levels, and even to how they construct their professional
functions vis-à-vis student learning.
As school counselors in different parts of the world strive to define more active
roles in promoting and enhancing student learning, it is important to consider the relevant
cognitions that school counselors might have related to the process. In the case of Filipino
school counselors, the study indicates dimensions of conceptualizations about the learning
process that may provide the foundation for concretizing the school counselors’
professional functions related to enhancing learning. The results of this study represent a
small but important step towards more effectively conceptualizing approaches for how
Filipino school counselors may engage this function of enhancing learning among Filipino
students.