leadership, cooperation, and systemic change (ASCA, 2019). Engaging in advocacy is one element of being an effective school

counselor (Field & Baker, 2004; Haskins & Singh, 2016). A school counselor can make a difference by being a proactive and

responsible advocate (Bemak & Chung, 2005). Counselors worked with and advocated for students with a sensitivity toward

the ecological system the student is situated in, because such systems influence student psychological adaptation (Cigrand et al.,

2015; Havlik et al., 2019; Williams & Greenleaf, 2012). This helps remove barriers related to injustice or oppression, promotes

equal opportunities, and enhances learning and educational performance (Gibson et al., 2012; Lewis et al., 2003; Ratts et al.,

2009).

Guidance counselors work in a Chinese cultural context, which is considered to be collectivist. In Chinese culture, social

justice is construed less as the protection of individual rights and more as social harmony that is upheld by right and proper

action (Zhang, 2009). Thus, given this cultural difference with the West, this study used grounded theory to explore how

advocacy is thought of and practiced in the Taiwanese context.

The qualifications for recruiting participants are: (1) currently employed as a full-time guidance counselor in the secondary

school; (2) had the concept of advocacy, which involved speaking out or taking action to change the system environment

on behalf of the welfare of students (Bradley & Lewis, 2000); (3) had at least three advocacy experiences including actions

at the individual student/client level (student empowerment and student advocacy), institutional/school/organizational level

(community collaboration and systems advocacy), and public arena level (collective action and social/political advocacy)

(Toporek & Daniels, 2018); (4) willing to participate in the interview for this study.

We interviewed 15 guidance counselors (12 women and 3 men, with an average age of 41 years and an average working

experience of 14 years). The results indicated that the process through which guidance counselors engage in advocacy

comprised five stages: a contemplating, judging and making a decision, assessing the situation, taking action, and making

influence stage. The counselors advocated through their social network to smoothen the process.

In the contemplating stage, the counselors tried to be aware of experiences of oppression, respect the dignity of the student,

remedy any injustice faced by the student, and integrate learning and supervision experience to ensure that social justice is

met. Drawing on the concept of social justice, the counselors were well-equipped to effectively deal with the systemic factors

contributing to the student’s problems.

In the judging and making a decision stage, the counselors considered the four main principles that guided their advocacy

efforts. First, the system was harmful to students’ physical and mental health. Second, the accomplice structure that meant

resolving conflicts only by adopting a conciliatory method needed to be rejected. Third, guidance counselors’ personal workplace status and individual power should be calculated. Fourth, professional effectiveness should not come at the expense

of personal burnout.

In the assessing the situation stage, the counselors took a bird’s eye view of the situation and weighed the pros and cons.

They also took care not to place extra pressure on students. The school’s flexibility in responding to advocacy efforts was

determined, and the interests of and opportunities to work with stakeholders were identified. Subsequently, the counselor

surmised how the situation will develop and made a plan.

In the taking action stage, the counselors adopted many strategies, such as communicating with stakeholders in the context

of a harmonious relationship, making good use of regulations or the law to protect students’ rights, leveraging and pulling

together resources, actively participating in system collaboration with stakeholders, and encouraging students to advocate for

themselves. Such advocacy had systemic ripple effects.

In the making influence stage, the counselor had to adjust how they related to and interacted with others to ameliorate these

systemic disruptions . They reflected on their advocacy behavior and made adjustments to their approach if necessary. Finally,

the advocacy was not always smooth, the belief of not giving up any student had to be still kept in mind.

Overall, the advocacy was more effective if relationships were utilized well. Building reciprocal trust could reduce barriers

to advocacy, and counselors are more willing to utilize these relationships if they feel confident in doing so. This practice of

advocacy through a network of relationships smoothens the transition to the assessing the situation stage. In the taking action

stage, the strategies of leveraging resources and intervening in the system were based on an idea of using relationships to

maximize effectiveness in advocacy.

This importance of relationship lies in collectivist tendencies in Chinese culture. This is consistent with previous findings

that managing professional relationships is as important as managing interpersonal relationships during school counseling

work (Chao & Chen, 2004). In particular, guidance counselors are more effective if they have good working relationships with

administrative staff (Nelson, 2018).

The advocacy process uncovered herin is similar to those in previous studies (Dahir & Stone, 2011; Hof et al., 2009; Trusty

& Brown, 2005). However, the characteristics of the advocacy stages were related to relational thinking in Chinese collective

culture. The likelihood of guidance counselors taking advocacy action depended on personal interpersonal relationship

resources and effectiveness. The judgment criteria of stakeholders were based on the collaboration relationship experiences.

The attitude of mutual understating and empathy was emphasized for achieving two-way harmonious communication. Although

advocacy would increase tension in relationships, the state of extreme opposition was avoided. Moreover, our results indicated

that advocacy was related to the assessment of students, systems, and guidance counselors. In addition to problem-focus, the

influencing factors of understanding students’ situations needed to incorporate the effects on systems. The effect was also

comprised of guidance counselors’ situations, thereby extending its influence to three parties.

According to our findings, advocacy in Taiwan is pursued through relationships, rather than in spite of relationships;

herein lies the biggest difference between advocacy in a relatively collectivist context as opposed to advocacy in a relatively

individualist (i.e., Western) context.

In conclusion, in the contemplating stage, guidance counselors are encouraged to be aware of the opinion of advocacy

and related experiences. The values of social justice are also helpful to reflect on. In the judging and making a decision stage,

counselors should adopt a systemic perspective in understanding the student’s problems and take stock of the resources at hand.

In the assessing the situation stage, the counselor should understand the ecological context the student is in, accounting for the

student’s interactions with their family or the culture of their school. In the taking action stage, counselors could adopt advocacy

strategies with a sensitivity toward systemic realities. In the making influence stage, the counselor needed to pay attention to

mending or adjusting any relationships that may have been frayed as a result of systemic disruptions from their advocacy efforts.

The ways of advocacy action were reimagined, according to the principles of each advocacy stage. Finally, guidance counselors

in Taiwan should advocate through their relationships. This use of relationships also makes the system more amenable to

change. This research illuminates the different advocacy stages and practical advocacy strategies and encourages guidance

counselors to advocate for students in need.