The Role of School Counselors Working with Students in Foster Care: Increasing

Access to Postsecondary Educational Opportunities

Lorri M. Capizzi
San José State University

Emily Bruce
San José State University
 Abstract

With school reform efforts underway, students in foster care are in sharper focus

as a subgroup and districts are now being held accountable for academic achievement

for these youth. School counselors play a key role in the effort to increase rates of

postsecondary enrollment and are often a primary support for academic planning,

resource connectivity, and college readiness for students in care. The purpose of this

article is to inform professional school counselors and counselor trainers about the

unique needs of students in foster care. Highlighted are 6 areas of focus and

recommendations for school counselors to increase access to postsecondary

educational opportunities for students in foster care.

Keywords: School counseling, school counselor trainers, foster youth, student

success, college access

The Role of School Counselors Working with Students in Foster Care: Increasing

Access to Postsecondary Educational Opportunities

As leaders and facilitators, professional school counselors must be skilled to

work with and advocate for all students (American School Counseling Association,

2005, 2012, 2019; Bemak & Chung, 2005; Brown & Trusty, 2005). Students in foster

care represent one of the most vulnerable populations school counselors will serve.

Acting as the liaison between school and child welfare agencies, as well as one of the

primary advocates responsible for addressing this population’s educational needs

through collaborative efforts with all stakeholders, school counselors provide multi-

dimensional support for these students.

Students in foster care face multiple home and school placements which

exacerbates an already disproportionately high level of exposure to trauma and

psychiatric distress. In addition to the absence of a consistent parent or guardian,

students in care also are challenged with delayed enrollment, credit transfer, and lack of

transportation to and from school and afterschool activities (Frerer, Sosenko, & Henke,

2013). This necessitates additional social and mental health services for this often-

underserved population. Year after year, special interest advocacy groups fight for the

rights of these youth and legislators are responding with mandates that place the

educational outcomes of these youth in an even sharper focus. Consequently, foster

youth are now defined as a distinct sub-group in the funding guidelines of California

public schools and annual accountability plans that include prioritized evaluation metrics

for Local Education Agencies (LEAs).

These new educational mandates allow foster youth who are in high school to

seriously begin to consider postsecondary educational options. Obtaining a

postsecondary degree increases opportunities for a higher annual income and financial

stability for these youth (Osgood & Courtney, 2010). Although approximately 83% of

students in foster care aspire to attain a postsecondary degree (Okpych, Courtney, &

Charles, 2015), only 10% apply to a four-year college; 3-5% of those who actually

attend college graduate with a college diploma (Geiger & Beltran, 2017). School

counselors are key in the effort to increase rates of postsecondary enrollment for these

youth as school counselors are often a primary source of college-related information

and social support for historically disadvantaged populations (Morton, 2016).

School counselors are best situated within the schools to identify resources and

develop plans to support academic achievement for this population. Central to the

success of school counselors is their understanding of the individual backgrounds of

each student in their care (Vacca, 2008). With training and/or professional development,

school personnel will be more skilled to create the environments and develop the plans

that will deliver the services necessary to increase the educational opportunities that

can lead to gainful employment for these students in the future.

The purpose of this article is to inform professional school counselors and school

counselor trainers about the unique needs of students in foster care as well as highlight

6 areas of focus and recommendations to increase access to postsecondary

educational opportunities for students in foster care.

Focus # 1: Building supportive relationships with students

School counselors are key in identifying, promoting, and assisting students with

information and resources to access higher education. Former foster youth who have

successfully enrolled in postsecondary education or training reported that having at

least one caring and supportive adult was of invaluable assistance. These supportive

adults have helped these former foster youth build up the resilience needed to

overcome the typical challenges that are likely to occur in early adulthood (Hass &

Gaydon, 2009). Research supports that these students’ academic, behavioral,

emotional and social unmet needs are the possible result of the lack of adult investment

(Pleck, 2008). Former foster youth have reported that they would have liked more

support from their teachers (Day, Riebschleger, Dworsky, Damashek, & Fogarty, 2012;

Martin & Jackson, 2002). School counselors are positioned to intervene with this

special population (Brinser & Wissel, 2020) to remove barriers to learning and deliver

needed services to support academic success (Weinberg, Zetlin, & Shea, 2009; Zetlin,

Weinberg, & Kimm, 2005; Zetlin, Weinberg, & Shea, 2006).

Focus #1: Recommendations for School Counselors

It is reported that the number of contacts students have with their school

counselor can have a positive effect on the number of college application submissions

(Bryan et. al, 2011). In the state of California, district education liaisons assist LEAs in

meeting the state mandates for the education of these young people from K through

12th grade. To maximize the most opportunities for students to participate in programs,

school counselors could work directly with case carrying social workers, and district

education liaisons to establish effective professional collaborations in order to build

positive relationships that will facilitate the development of planning for, and access to

resources (i.e., access to mental health services, information regarding financial support

for postsecondary education, and other supports that are needed for a successful

completion of primary and secondary education). Student input in such plans is critical;

therefore, an in-depth conversation with the students regarding their future aspirations is

essential. This work is enhanced with school counselors and case carrying social

workers who work in coordination with each other. Utilizing the American School

Counselor (ASCA, 2005, 2012, 2019) standards, the framework for developing such

plans will increase future opportunities for these particular young people by identifying

gaps in the following facets of their lives (i.e., academic, personal/social, and career

domains), to create individualized plans that are unique to each student who is in out-of-

home care.

Focus # 2: Addressing mobility and school stability

The literature indicates that residential mobility can have a negative impact on

academic performance among foster youth (Emerson & Lovitt, 2003; Zetlin & Weinberg,

2004; Hahnel & Van Zile, 2012). Ten percent of these youth will remain in care for five

or more years (California Department of Social Services, 2013). Most foster youth live

within private homes with relatives or foster families, and nearly 12% (California) foster

youth reside in group homes or institutions, and spend slightly over two years (28

months) in placement (Webster et al., 2017). Furthermore, youth who enter the foster

care system between the ages of 11 and 14 are likely to have an average of 7 to 13

placements over the course of their time in out-of-home care, which translates into

roughly a move every 6 months (Courtney, Terao, & Bost, 2004). While in care, these
 7

youth may have their basic needs met, but often their lives are far from stable. On

average, foster youth will move to new homes and transfer to new schools

approximately 3.1 times per year (Day, Riebschleger, Dworsky, Damashek, & Fogarty,

2012).

Focus #2: Recommendations for School Counselors

Districts must provide placement agencies with grade transfer documentation

and academic work to ensure a student’s successful administrative transition to a new

school. With the passage of California AB 97, the transfer of school records must

happen within two business days (California Education Code §1622: AB-97 [2013] –

School Finance). In addition, the language of this law also ensures that grades cannot

be lowered due to absences that are caused by a change in placement, a court ordered

activity, or a court appearance; and allows for partial credits to be awarded. School

counselors can monitor students’ work, and facilitate the expeditious application of

administrative paperwork in order to ensure the transfer of academic records (Sullivan,

Jones, & Mathiesen, 2010; Zeitlin, Weinberg, & Shea, 2006).

School counselors can familiarize themselves with laws such as AB 490 and use

its provisions to collaborate with Local Education Agencies (LEAs) and district

personnel to ensure that students in foster care are afforded stable school placements,

that they have the least restrictive educational placements, and that they have access to

services and resources that include enrichment and extracurricular activities (California

Education Code: §48945.5: AB490 [2003] – Education: foster children; Shea et al.,

2010; Williams, 2016). To further address educational stability and to keep foster youth
 8

at the same school, it is recommended that school personnel work directly with case

carrying social workers (Gustavsson & MacEachron, 2012).

Focus # 3: Identifying the need for special education services

Inadequate resources for special education services can have a tremendously

negative impact on foster youth who qualify for these services (Stanley, 2012). School

transfers can impede the implementation of an Individual Education Plan (IEP) and the

provision of special education services (Blakeslee et. al, 2013; Zetlin, 2006). The

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA] of 2005 (Public Law 101-476 2004)

Section 1416 (a) (3) (A) provides states with funding to ensure that children with special

needs receive “a free, appropriate, public education in a least restrictive environment.”

Youth in foster care are more likely to qualify for special education services than

students in the general population (Blakeslee et. al, 2013). Almost 55% of the students

in foster care qualify for special education services, in comparison to 10% of the

students in the general population. While school districts are recognizing that students

in foster care come with significant academic and personal challenges, many school

districts are struggling to meet the needs of these youth (Wiegmann, Putnam-Hornstein,

Barrat, Magruder, & Needell, 2014).

Focus #3: Recommendations for School Counselors

Youth in foster care are more likely to have been assessed for services but they

frequently do not receive the services they need because of the significant likelihood of

changing placements (Zetlin & Weinberg, 2004); or often they face disciplinary action by

school personnel who may be unaware that the students are foster youth and/or that

they may have an IEP (Zetlin, 2006). Even when schools are prepared to provide
 9

services to foster youth, there may be delays for any number of reasons, such as school

staff do not receive records that include the current IEP; the IEP is out of date; the

parent or education rights holder cannot be contacted in a timely manner (Zetlin, 2006);

and often the Local Education Agency (LEA) does not have enough information to make

an appropriate educational placement. The caregivers of these youth may lack

information about special education services, therefore are not able to effectively

advocate for better options when it comes to determining an appropriate educational

placement (Blakeslee et. al, 2013). Without informed advocates, some foster youth are

placed into alternative education or independent study (Zetlin, 2006). Because foster

youth with special needs cannot optimize their educational outcomes if they do not have

access to resources and supports that can help them receive the services outlined by

IDEA, school counselors must collaborate with case carrying social workers and school

personnel to develop plans to identify who will be involved in 1) the IEP meetings, 2) the

implementation of IEP goals, and 3) the follow up with communication strategies,

making sure to include all stakeholder input.

Focus # 4: Creating a culture of trauma informed practice

A common issue that sets students in foster care apart from students who have

not been in care is that they have been exposed to some form of trauma. The most

basic type of trauma is that which results from being ‘placed’ in a home away from

familiar surroundings and people (i.e., a new school and neighborhood). Compounding

this trauma is the direct experience of witnessing maltreatment. Youth in foster care are

likely to develop emotional and psychological responses to deal with these traumatic

events. These responses can lead to problems such as depression, substance abuse,
 10

eating disorders, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD] (Pecora, 2010); and these

challenges are many times addressed inadequately or not at all (Finkelstein, Wamsley,

& Miranda, 2002). Further Finkelstein et al. suggest that students in foster care

experience difficulties not only in their home placements but also at school with

teachers and classmates. Thus, as a consequence of these many potential challenges,

children in the foster care system are more likely to experience academic and

disciplinary problems at school (Scherr, 2007).

Focus #4: Recommendations for School Counselors

A critical role of school counselors is to assist in the development of school

policies based on the recognition of the impact of trauma on all children, but in

particular, children who are in foster care. School counselors can offer professional

development for teachers and administrative staff so that they fully understand the

needs of foster youth and the best practices that can improve classroom success and

ease the challenges of adjusting to a new school (Zeitlin & Weinberg, 2004). Orienting

new students to their classroom and helping to set clear expectations and guidelines for

academic success is critical (Vacca, 2006). Notifying teachers about foster youth who

transfer into their classes can increase opportunities for teachers to adapt assignments

and/or to arrange for additional help for students who are currently in foster care

(Gustavvson & MacEachron, 2012). These notifications must be communicated in such

a way to protect the privacy of each student.

School personnel may need professional development to inform their

understanding of the physical and emotional impact that trauma can have on a student’s

ability to learn, interact with others, and self-regulate in a classroom setting. The role of
 11

the school counselor in this area would be to guide school personnel to appropriate

resources on these subjects, as well as to become resources themselves. With training

regarding the impact of trauma on these children, informed teachers can approach

foster youth with more sensitivity and flexibility, and encourage a supportive relationship

while these students are in school (Parker et al., 2020; Rodger et al., 2020; Wall, 2020).

Focus # 5: Strengthening inter-agency collaborations

Studies emphasize the extent to which collaborative relationships between

school personnel and social workers can be a challenge (Naccarato & DeLorenzo,

2008). While both case carrying social workers and school personnel work to support

youth in foster care, each focuses on different aspects of these students’ needs.

Collaboration and communication between school personnel and case carrying social

workers can reduce inconsistencies in case management efforts (Altshuler, 2003).

Having stakeholders work together to utilize available resources and participate in

collaborative relationships would be in the best interest of students in foster care.

Advocates’ knowledge and awareness of legal mandates are invaluable in providing the

best services for these young people. Primary advocates include (but are not limited to):

caregivers, school personnel, and case carrying social workers (Zetlin, Weinberg &

Shea, 2006; Weinberg, Zetlin, & Shea, 2009). While the situations, resources, and

responses to the educational achievement of foster youth are variable, successful

collaboration is critical. Such successful collaborations could include the following:

institutions/agencies that are committed to working with LEAs; making plans to collect

and share data; and strong cooperative leadership between institutions, agencies, and

school districts. Although existing positive relationships are helpful, the combination of
 12

strong leadership and the commitment of resources leads to increased collaboration

(Bryan, 2005; Weinberg, Zetlin, & Shea, 2009) which has measurable positive influence

in assisting students who are in foster care overcome barriers to academic

achievement.

Focus #5: Recommendations for School Counselors

Although school counselors cannot be expected to be the sole source of support

for these youth, school counselors can create connections that nurture positive

relationships for foster youth, as well as build relationships with other stakeholders

(institutions and agencies) (Holcomb-McCoy, 2001; Masten, Herbers, Cutuli, & Lafavor,

2008). Each school district in California is mandated to have a foster youth liaison. The

district liaisons can be an invaluable asset to school counselors and foster youth. These

individuals are tasked with helping students adjust to school and helping them develop

positive perspectives about school (Weinberg, Oshiro, & Shea, 2014).

School counselors can work with school psychologists and case carrying social

workers to develop behavioral assessment and intervention plans that support the

academic achievement of students in foster care (Scherr, 2007). There are a number of

ways to learn to work interdisciplinary to effectively serve foster youth enrolled in school,

such as cross-system training for pre-service and continuing professional education by

universities; professional development that fosters interagency communication and

awareness of trauma-related behavioral or learning issues; and the use of innovative

practices to increase interagency involvement (Day, Somers, Darden, Yoon, 2015).

Focus # 6: Working with students to create an academic plan

Students in foster care are at a significant disadvantage in their preparation for

college and career (Unrau, Font, & Rawls, 2012). This disadvantage poses both a

challenge and significant opportunity for the school counselors. Over 80% of students in

care do not apply to college; a lack of awareness about funding opportunities, the

requirements for applying for funding, meeting the eligibility requirements, and the

frequent missing of application deadlines (Okpych, 2012) are a few reasons why these

college application rates are low. Understanding state laws and legislation that have an

impact on the lives of these youth can expand the range of opportunities and pathways

to postsecondary education.

Focus #6: Recommendations for School Counselors

School counselors can familiarize themselves with laws such as California AB

97, AB 490, and AB 167/216, as well as California Welfare and Institution codes. It is

recommended that school counselors utilize the American School Counselor standards

(ASCA, 2005, 2012, 2019) which is the framework for developing individualized plans

(i.e., academic, personal/social, and career domains). The Foster Youth Education

Toolkit (2016) can be used as a template for school counselors to ensure that district

and school site personnel have all the relevant information regarding the educational

rights for students in foster care. The Toolkit includes comprehensive information,

procedures and implementation tools such as sample notification letters, records

requests, and helpful checklists. This toolkit also addresses best practices for handling

topics such as how to complete education evaluations, assisting youth with immediate

enrollment or remaining in their school of origin, awarding partial credits and supporting
 14

youth through high school graduation. Creating a comprehensive academic plan with

student input is critical; therefore, an in-depth conversation with students regarding their

future aspirations is essential to the development of their future plans.

Conclusion

The opportunity gap facing students in foster care justifies the creation of more

collaborative work between schools, district offices and child welfare agencies.

Increasing postsecondary outcomes for these youth will require that district and school

site personnel develop the knowledge and capacity to effectively implement the policies

that have been created to address the academic and social obstacles that exist for

students in foster care. Federal and state policy makers have sent a strong message

through the implementation of a legislative agenda that seeks to ensure that students in

foster care are seen and are effectively served. School counselors are uniquely situated

in schools to increase the educational opportunities for students in foster care, but they

must be equipped for their roles at their school sites. School counselor training

programs would benefit from staying current on legislation that protects these students

and include specific curriculum that addresses the needs of these young people.
 References

Altshuler, S. J. (2003). From barriers to successful collaboration: Public schools and

child welfare working together. Social Work, 48(1), 52.63.

American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA National Model: A

framework for school counseling programs (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Author.

American School Counseling Association. (2012). The ASCA National Model: A

framework for school counseling programs (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA.: Author.

American School Counselor Association. (2019). ASCA national model: A framework for

school counseling programs (4th ed.). Alexandria, VA.: Author.

Bemak, F. & Chung, R. C-Y. (2005). Advocacy as a critical role for urban school

counselors: Working toward equity and social justice. Professional School

Counseling, 8, 196-202.

Blakeslee, J., Del Quest, A., Powers, J., Powers, L., Geenen, S., Nelson, M., Lawrence

D. Dalton, L., & McHugh, E. (2013). Reaching everyone: Promoting the inclusion of

youth with disabilities in evaluating foster care outcomes. Children and Youth

Services Review, 35, 1801-1808.

Brinser, H. & Wissel, A. (2020). Serving students in foster care: Implications and

interventions for school counselors. The Professional Counselor, 10 (2), 170–

180.

Brown, D., & Trusty, J. (2005). School counselors, comprehensive school counseling

programs, and academic achievement: Are school counselors promising more

than they can deliver? Professional School Counseling, 9 (1), 1-8.

15
 16

Bryan, J. (2005). Fostering educational resilience and achievement in urban schools

through school-family- community partnerships: School counselors’ roles.

Professional School Counseling, 8, 219–227.

California Education Code §1622: School Finance AB-97 [2013], Amended by Local

Control Funding Formula SB-78 [2015].

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB9

California Education Code §48945.5: Education-Foster children AB-490 [2003];

Amended by Student Financial Aid – Cal Grant Program AB-2306 [2017].

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2

306

Courtney, M., Terao, S., & Bost, N. (2004). Midwest evaluations of the adult functioning

of former foster youth: Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care.

Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.

Day, A., Riebschleger, J., Dworsky, A., Damashek, A., & Fogarty, K. (2012). Maximizing

educational opportunities for youth aging out of foster care by engaging youth

voices in a partnership for social change. Children and Youth Services Review,

34, 1007-1014.

Day, A. G., Somers, C., Darden, J. S., & Yoon, J. (2015). Using cross-system

communication to promote educational well-being of foster children:

Recommendations for a national research, practice, and policy agenda. Children

& Schools, 37(1), 54-62.

Emerson, J. (2007). From foster care to college: Supporting independent students.

Leadership Exchange: Solutions for Student Affairs Management, 4(4), 2-11.

Emerson, J. & Lovitt, T. (2003). Encouraging news for college-bound foster youth,

Focus, Third Quarter 1, 6-7.

Finkelstein, M., Wamsley, M., & Miranda, D. (2002). What keeps children in foster care

from succeeding in school? New York: Vera Institute of Justice.

Frerer, K., Sosenko, L. D., & Henke, R. R. (2013). At greater risk: California foster youth

and the path from high school to college. San Francisco, CA: Stuart Foundation.

Gustavson, N. & MacEachron, A.E., (2012). Educational policy and foster youths: The

risks of change. Children Schools, 34(2), 83-91.

Geiger, J. M. & Beltran, S. J. (2017). Experiences and outcomes of foster care alumni

inpostsecondary education: A review of the literature. Children and Youth

Services Review, 79, 186-197.

Hahnel, J., & Van Zile, C. (2012). The other achievement gap: Court-dependent youth

and educational advocacy. Journal of Law & Education, 41(3), 435-481.

Hass, M., & Graydon, K. (2009). Sources of resiliency among successful foster youth,

Children & Youth Services Review, 31(4), 457-463.

Holcomb-McCoy, C. (2001). Examining urban school counseling professionals

perceptions of school restructuring activities. Greensboro, NC.

Martin, P.Y. & Jackson, S. (2002) ‘Educational success for children in public care:

advice from a group of high achievers.’ Child and Family Social Work, 5(2): 121-

130
 18

Masten, A. S., Herbers, J. E., Cutuli, J. J., and Lafavor, T. L. (2008). Promoting

competence and resilience in the school context. Professional School

Counseling, 12(2), 76-84.

Morton, B. M. (2016). The power of community: How foster parents, teachers, and

community member’s support academic achievement for foster youth. Journal of

Research in Childhood Education, 30, 99-112.

Moyer, A. M., & Goldberg, A. E. (2020). Foster youth’s educational challenges and

supports: Perspectives of teachers, foster parents, and former foster youth. Child

and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 37(2), 123–136.

Naccarato, T., & DeLorenzo, E. (2008). Independent living skills program research:

Practice implications from a systemic review. The Child and Adolescent Social

Work Journal, 25, 287-308.

Okpych, N. (2012). Policy framework supporting youth aging-out of foster care through

college: Review and recommendations. Children and Youth Services Review,

34(7), 1390–1396.

Parker, J., Olson, S., & Bunde, J. (2020). The impact of trauma-based training on

Educators. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma, 13(2), 217-227.

Pecora, P. J. (2010). Why current and former recipients of foster care need high quality

mental health services. Administration Policy and Mental Health, 37, 185-190.

Rodger, S., Bird, R., Hibbert, K., Johnson, A. M., Specht, J., & Wathen, C. N. (2020).

Initial teacher education and trauma and violence informed care in the

classroom: Results from a preliminary online teacher education course.

Psychology in the Schools. 1-17.

Scherr, T.G. (2007). Educational experiences of children in foster care: Meta-analyses

of special, retention and discipline rates. School Psychology International. (28),

419-436.

Shea, N. M., Zetlin, A. G., & Weinberg, L. A. (2010). Improving school stability: An

exploratory study of the work of the AB 490 liaisons in California. Children and

Youth Services Review, 32(1), 74–79.

Stanley, S. G. (2012). Children with disabilities in foster care: The role of the school

social worker in the context of special education. Children & Schools, 34(3), 190-

192.

Sullivan, M. J., Jones, L., & Mathiesen, S. (2010). School change, academic progress,

and behavior problems in a sample of foster youth. Children and Youth Services

Review, 32(2), 164–170.

Unrau, Y., Font, S., & Rawls, G. (2012). Readiness for college engagement among

students who have aged out of foster care. Children and Youth Services Review,

34, 76-83.

Vacca, J. (2008). Breaking the cycle of academic failure for foster children-What can the

schools do to help? Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1081-1087.

Wall, C. R. G. (2020). Relationship over reproach: Fostering resilience by embracing a

trauma-informed approach to elementary education. Journal of Aggression,

Maltreatment, and Trauma. 1-20.

Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., Exel, M., Cuccaro-Alamin,

S., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Wiegmann, W., Rezvani, G., Eyre, M., Sandoval, A.,

Yee, H., Xiong, B., Benton, C., White, J., & Cotto, H. (2017). CCWIP reports
 20

(Placement Type/Placement Days). Retrieved 5/29/2017, from University of

California at Berkeley California Child Welfare Indicators Project website. URL:

<http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare>

Wiegmann, W., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Barrat, V. X., Magruder, J. & Needell, B. (2014).

The Invisible Achievement Gap Part 2: How the Foster Care Experiences of

California Public School Students Are Associated with Their Education

Outcomes. Retrieved from:

http://stuartfoundation.org/NewsAndReports/ReportsAndResearch/2014/05/22/in

visible-achievement-gap-report-part-2

Weinberg, L. A., Oshiro, M., & Shea, N. (2014). Education liaisons work to improve

educational outcomes of foster youth: A mixed methods case study. Children and

Youth Services Review, 41(4), 5-52.

Weinberg, L. A., Zetlin, A., & Shea, N. M. (2009). Removing barriers to educating

children in foster care through interagency collaboration: A seven county

multiple-case study. Child Welfare: Journal of Policy, Practice, And Program,

88(4), 77-111.

Williams, R. G. (2016). The role of school counselors in the career and college

readiness of foster care youth: An ecological systems theory approach. Journal

of Counselor Leadership and Advocacy, 3(2), 135-146.

Zetlin, A. G., (2006). The experiences of foster children and youth in special education.

Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 31(3), 161-165.

Zetlin, A. G., Weinberg, L. A., & Kimm, C. (2005). Helping social workers address the

educational needs of foster children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29, 811-823.
 21

Zetlin, A. G., & Weinberg, L. A. (2004). Understanding the plight of foster youth and

improving their educational opportunities. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(9), 917-923.

Zetlin, A., Weinberg, L., & Shea, N. (2006). Seeing the whole picture: Views from

Diverse participants on barriers to educating foster youths. Children and Schools,

28(3), 165-173.