BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The American Counseling Association (ACA) Graduate Student Ethics Awards for master’s degree students recognize exceptional, demonstrable understanding of the ACA Code of Ethics – the foundation of ethical professional counseling practice. 

SUBMISSION DEADLINE
January 31, 2025 | 11:59 p.m. ET  

AWARD NOTIFICATION
To be announced

JUDGES
Members of the ACA Ethics Committee

PRIZE
The names of the team members and the names of the institutions of the winning teams will be published in Counseling Today and CT Online.

  • First Place Award: $100 honorarium and a certificate of recognition for each student team member. Complimentary registration for the 2025 ACA Conference and Expo, March 27–29, 2025, in Orlando, FL, and recognition during event. Winners will receive further information at the time of award notification.  The essay will be posted online.
  • Second Place Award: $75 honorarium and a certificate of recognition for each student team member.
  • Third Place Award: $50 honorarium and a certificate of recognition for each student team member.
  • Honorable Mention Award: Certificate of recognition for each student team member. 

Sponsor: The American Counseling Association Foundation 

Apply Now

ELIGIBILITY, RULES AND CRITERIA

  • Each student team member must be currently enrolled in good standing in a master's degree program in counseling or counselor education and must be enrolled for a minimum of three credits during the term when the competition will take place.
  • Each student and faculty member on a team must be a member of the American Counseling Association. 

Expand lists below to read detailed criteria for doctoral student candidates

  • A counseling or counselor education program may have one team of master’s degree students and one team of doctoral degree students in the competition.
  • Master’s degree and doctoral degree teams will be judged separately. Teams must be made up of students in the same level of a degree program. This is not a mixed-level competition.
  • Counseling or counselor education programs with separate and distinct campuses may have a master's degree team representing each campus. Separate and distinct campuses are considered those that have stand-alone programs.
  • A single counseling or counselor education program that has multiple satellite campuses is not eligible for multiple master’s degree team submissions. (These campuses would have one dedicated representative in an accreditation process, representing the multiple satellite campuses.) 
  • Teams are limited to having a minimum of three and a maximum of four students.
  • Each team must have a faculty member who serves as an administrative contact person for the counseling or counselor education program.
  • The role of the faculty contact person is to represent the team’s counseling or counselor education program only.
  • Faculty members should not act as consultants in the awards competition.
  • The faculty member’s email address must be their own, not that of a student.

Essays will be scored based on five factors:  

  1. Identification of the Dilemma: The team clearly identified the ethical dilemma(s) including conflicting factors, dimensions and variables included in the professional quandary. The dilemma was described in relationship to ethical standards, laws and professional ideas or aspirations.
  2. Proposed Ethical Action: The team proposed action it would take including having: (a) clearly articulated professional interventions; (b) persuasive justification for proposed action; and (c) a description of the professionally recognized decision-making model or process used to arrive at decisions.
  3. Use of the ACA Code of Ethics: The team cited appropriate sections of the ACA Code of Ethics (2014) and, if appropriate, other ethical guidelines considered in rendering their arguments. In addition, the team provided a clear rationale regarding selected sections of the 2014 ACA Code of Ethics and any other ethical guidelines cited.
  4. Use of the Proposed Model: The steps of the group's decision-making model were clearly followed and skillfully applied to the case.
  5. Overall: A thorough yet concise paper addressing details of the case and (a) the case study included proper citation of sources throughout the paper using the Publication manual of the American Psychological Association 7th edition for the reference list; (b) the paper was well organized and written, and information was presented clearly and concisely; (c) the paper cited the appropriate scholarly literature relevant to solving the ethical dilemma; and (d) the paper is no longer than 10 pages.

HOW TO APPLY

  • Submit an essay addressing this year's essay prompt, found below.
  • Each team member must provide their American Counseling Association member number at the time of submission. Incomplete submissions will not be accepted.
  • Registering on the American Counseling Association website to generate an ID number does not constitute membership. For membership information, contact the membership department or call 800-347-6647.
  • By submitting an essay, teams and team members agree to allow their names and essay responses to be posted on CT Online

Expand list below to read essay prompt for master's student candidates

Topic: Social Media relationships 

Students acting as social media influencers and using their platform to speak about MH issues and clinical experiences social Media relationships - Students acting as social media influencers and using their platform to speak about MH issues and clinical experiences.

Case

Alex, a master’s level counseling student at State University, is incredibly active online and has a growing presence and popularity on social media platforms. Alex shares personal insights into mental health challenges, discusses topics covered in their coursework, and occasionally references anonymized client scenarios to illustrate points about therapy and recovery. In one post in particular, Alex shares of a client who was experiencing suicidal ideations, and needed to be hospitalized. They shared in their post a biased perspective of how suicide is a “cop-out from dealing with your problems,” projecting their perspective onto the audience. Further, Alex disclosed that they “did not want to deal with it” and sent their client to the hospital for further evaluation without consulting with their supervisor.

Alex received a message later in the day from a client of theirs, Sam. Sam shared that they were scrolling through their social media videos when they stumbled upon this video of Alex discussing their client’s suicidal ideations. Sam quickly realized that the client being discussed was them. Enraged, Sam expressed their feelings to Alex regarding the intense violation of their privacy and disregard for their mental health support. Sam informed Alex that they would be reaching out to their supervisor immediately. Alex felt perplexed about how to respond to the message; ultimately choosing not to respond to Sam or ask for support from their supervisor.