The authors discuss the evolution of approaches to college counseling outreach, and suggest that an initiator-catalyst approach makes the most sense in contemporary college counseling and mental health settings. A briefhistory of outreach models and approaches is presented along with an outline of and example of the initiator-catalyst approach. Topics related to this approach are also discussed: mass communicationsltechnology, assessment, faculty, student, and staff change agents; and campus politics.
Although there has been a steady move away from individual counseling to a more outreach, community-based approach in the field of college counseling since the late 1960s, the primary focus of college counseling remains on individual and group treatment. For example, Stone and Archer (1 990) sur- veyed a number of college counseling centers and found that only 24% of their staff time was spent in outreach and consultation. Crego (1 990) called for a further evolution by suggesting a paradigm shift, one aspect of which would be further development of the counselor's role as campus educator.
In recent years, new pressures on campus counseling centers have emerged to heighten the need for additional focus to be place on education, with an attending need for revised outreach and consultation models. These pressures include the following: (a) increased demand for counseling services and for outreach programs and services; (b) a philosophic shift in higher education toward a "bottom line" evaluation of all functions of the college or university, including counseling services, in terms of the direct contribution of each to the primary mission of the institution, what Schroeder (1996) called a "Student Learning Imperative"; (c) the recognition that effective outreach and consultation for complex problems require institution-wide support and collaboration among students, faculty, and administration; (d) an awareness of the emerging research that outreach program effectiveness depends on its comprehensiveness, intensity, and relevance with changes in peer culture perceptions and values (Berkowitz. 1996); and (e) the development of new technologies (e.g., Internet, campus television networks, and CD- ROM) that are altering the way students interact, learn, and communicate.