CareerSteer – careers test for career choice www.careersteer.org
Guidance Skills and Processes Assignment: Summer 1998.
Diploma in Careers Guidance, College of Guidance Studies, Swanley.
Cole Davis
Analyse ways in which the skills of SUMMARISING, CHALLENGING
and HELPFUL QUESTIONING can impact positively on the process of a
guidance group work session.
Critically evaluate your own professional practice and
identify how these skills may impact on and enhance the process
of guidance for the client through group work. (It may be
helpful to focus on a specific piece of group work that you have
undertaken recently).
This piece of work should include recommendations for your own
professional development in the area of group work.
The assessment should be approximately 2000 words in length.
"Education is what survives when what has been learnt
has been forgotten." (B. F. Skinner, 1964).
Methodology is only valid when applied towards a purpose. An
analysis of skills, therefore, must necessarily be preceded by an
overview of the function of group work within careers guidance.
Careers work in schools has emerged as a requirement (Law,
1996b). Groups characterise careers education more than guidance
(Law, 1996a) and will primarily be considered in this context.
While the growth of computer-aided guidance may reduce the cost-
effectiveness of the mass imparting of information (Killeen,
1996), a wide range of potential functions exist along the DOTS
model (Law and Watts, 1977).
Decision-making and transitions may be seen as part of a
guidance culture within education. Self-awareness - and
relationships with others - may be more representative of liberal
education. Whilst opportunities may now be more the stuff of
library and computer work - arguably - vocational education also
includes the development of skills and competences (Law, 1996a).
While diverse, it may be argued that this rather personalised
learning content could best be achieved by student-centred
methods. Law (1996a) suggests that varied methods increase
student interest; that they provide 'depth, breadth and
progression' - this is supported by psychological experiments
demonstrating the superiority of 'elaborative' methods of human
memory storage (e.g. Craik & Lockhart, 1972) - and that they may
cater for different learning styles (c.f. Kolb, 1984).
Assuming that a variety of teaching methods is most
effective, therefore, group work should be both experiential,
grounded in personal and social experience (Reynolds, 1994), and
participative (Law, 1996a).
Once such a route has been embarked upon, the nature of group
dynamics needs to be considered. While providing conditions for
human growth, groups are full of potential pitfalls; this
volatility is illustrated by one model of group formation -
'forming, storming, norming and performing' (Tuckman, 1965).
Variables may include individual personalities and status,
such as opinion-leaders (Klein, 1963) and scapegoats (Douglas,
1978). "Attitudes, opinions, feelings, beliefs, and emotions are
manifested in the actions and words of group members, which often
lead to rewarding relationships. However, they sometimes can be
the source of frustration for both the people and the group
process." (Stech and Ratliffe, 1976).
When working with these attitudes, both as the raw material of
the educator and as potential barriers, it is important for
practitioners to consider the process as well as the content of
sessions.
Group workers need to observe, interpret and then to act
(Milson, 1973). A model that may be adapted to both long-term
relationships with groups and to single sessions is that of the
ground-breaking social psychologist Kurt Lewin (1948). Changes
in attitude may occur in three phases: the unfreezing of previous
attitudes, changing attitudes and refreezing of new attitudes.
Unfreezing an 'unskilled group', where participants are unused
to group work, requires the group to determine its own needs
(Maier, 1953). More specifically for our current purposes,
interventions may be needed to help members learn social skills
(Johnson and Johnson, 1996).
Foremost intervention models are 'client-centred', based upon
Rogers' client-centred counselling (1942), which is idiographic
(as opposed to nomothetic), stressing the ability of the person
to make conscious and responsible decisions, and to construct
reality. This approach centres on the emotional and the
immediate; embodied within the approach are practical skills
which are widely applied in guidance and in counselling, often as
part of an eclectic process model.
One such process model is Egan's 'skilled helper' (1998),
which itself fuels the 'Swanley Model' (Fielding and Vautier,
1994). Rogerian techniques emphasise listening to the client
with empathy, transparency/congruence (Rogers, 1961), and
'unconditional positive regard' (Masson, 1992, considers these to
be irreconcilable attitudes). While these may be preconditions
for effective guidance, they need to be applied at the level of
technique.
Questioning may be used for a variety of purposes: starting
conversation, expanding on points, obtaining illustrations,
checking perceptions and obtaining information. These should be
used sparingly and carefully, using open and closed questions as
appropriate. (Brammer and MacDonald, 1996).
Helpful questioning means not merely 'probing' (Egan, 1998),
but encouraging individuals to participate. This may free up
group members who are resistant to sharing their perceptions of
issues, as well as helping the reluctant to feel included.
(Richardson, 1967). Questions starting with 'what do you
think ...' and 'can you tell me about ... ' are typical.
Questioning may also stimulate self-awareness and interactions
beneath the threshold of challenging. 'Why' and 'how' questions
may be used, however, both to focus content and to challenge
unsupported (or unsupportable) assertions.
While Egan once postulated "confrontation as invitation ... to
examine his or her interpersonal style - emotions, experiences,
and behaviors" (1977), he now adopts the term 'challenging' as a
more responsible approach to changing dysfunctional attitudes,
thoughts and behaviours - 'blind spots' - which clients have not
seen fit to alter themselves (1998).
Egan (1998) considers challenging to include information
sharing, helper disclosure, immediacy, suggestions and
recommendations, as well as confrontations.
Immediacy, direct mutual talk, focuses on particular events in
a session, maybe including direct praise or criticism of a
comment or behaviour (Egan, 1998). This may be appropriate in
periods of tension and other episodes within group dynamics.
Although clearly a part of Rogerian client-centred therapy,
this may also be considered in terms of behavioural and social
learning perspectives (immediate reinforcers and cues).
Psychodynamic theories also suggest wariness - and use of - such
dynamics as the transference and countertransference.
These interactions need to take into account the general
ability and developmental stage of the group: this includes the
previous experiences of the participants. Some form of
assessment must be made 'on the hoof'.
Challenging may be appropriate in counteracting unrealistic
expectations, which may be based on distorted perceptions of the
world, perhaps emerging from community influences. The latter
may include attitudes to equal opportunities.
If questioning, perhaps in Socratic style, may be used in the
unfreezing process, and challenging used to change attitudes,
then summarising may be used to consolidate on learning,
refreezing new attitudes at the end of a session and allowing
reflection to reinforce learning (Kolb, 1984).
In practice, however, summarising may be used at various
points in the progress of a session. It may clarify content
already covered, placing disparate ideas in focus, demonstrate
mutual understanding and herald new directions (Brammer and
MacDonald, 1996; Nelson-Jones, 1993). Egan (1998) also
recommends summarising early on, when interactions seem to be
going nowhere or clients get 'stuck'.
I generally summarise within my own group sessions to check
understanding of what has been covered before moving to the next
topic. In a session with a group of emotional and behavioural
disturbed adolescents, I found that I would have consolidated
learning - or 'refreezed' (Lewin, 1948) - by summarising in the
conclusion. Even more usefully for the internalisation of
learning, participants could have summarised what they had
learned. (My limited version of this was to work collaboratively
at agreeing three general principles for approaching work
constructively, but this was not presented as a clear summary).
('What do employers expect of you?', 11/5/1998; assessor's
feedback enclosed as an appendix).
The same session included helpful questions for various
purposes. As well as interacting with the more active group
members, who had taken up my invitation to participate and
question me, I needed to include two other people. One young
person merely seemed quiet, whilst another seemed actively
resistant to participating, slouching and avoiding eye contact.
I asked individual content-related questions of both of these
young people, the quieter one gaining confidence and increasing
participation, the other at least paying desultory attention. I
did not increase the frequency of questioning the latter person;
beyond the usual careful and sparing usage of questions (Brammer
and MacDonald, 1996), there was the danger of provoking this
individual, who may well have perceived this as victimisation.
In his case, I had found myself confronting him - I think this
is the most accurate term - early in the session. Whilst this
runs counter to the usual relationship-building preceding
challenging, it was necessary in terms of building the parameters
of the group work relationship. He had carried a newspaper into
the room and had started to read it during my introduction. I
asked him to put it in his bag, explaining that it would distract
him from his task. Giving reasons often leads to consent.
Whilst this challenge was necessary for any meaningful
transactions to take place, there was always the risk of adding
friction to the previous disengagement (although his mode of
withdrawal was blatant enough to be construed as a challenge).
In order to improve our relationship, I maintained friendly eye
contact before venturing my question, and continued to send non-
verbal messages of inclusion.
More conventional challenging within this session took place
when one of the more outward-going participants referred to 'gay
queers'. I said that such a statement would be considered
inappropriate within the workplace, my challenge thus retaining
relevance to the learning content; immediacy was sustained by my
adding "and, dare I say it, here". My reaction was received
without rancour by the person concerned, with whom rapport had
already been established.
Previous criticisms of my group sessions had been that, whilst
I provided a relaxed atmosphere, I rather let more lively
participants 'walk all over me'. My last session clearly took
account of that. Within future sessions, I need to find a
balance between lacking control and being over assertive.
Integral to this is the agreement with participants of ground
rules; the agreement is to inserted as part of Stage 1
(contracting; Fielding and Vautier, 1994). Practising
opportunities include the forthcoming D.C.G. Part I summative
assessments and also Part II observed sessions; in both cases,
observing practitioners will evaluate challenges (real or
potential) and read lesson plans.
Similar opportunities may be used to evaluate my use of
summaries, which are vital to the effective running of guidance
interactions, and questions. I have occasionally noticed myself
using closed questions more than necessary, although I would
defend their use for occasional directing of conversations that
are drifting, for initiating discussions by eliciting easy
responses and for challenging. I can continue to monitor
excessive use of closed questions, following up with more open
ones. Observers are likely, given the nature of their training,
to notice overuse; it is then up to me to respond accordingly in
future sessions.
Another clear objective to emerge from the above analysis is
the need to provide effective, transparent summaries. Students
should be clear about what they have learned; to optimise
reinforcement of appropriate learning, they should be encouraged
to participate in these. Again, it is my intention to include
this in lesson plans (as part of Stage 3), which may then be seen
by observers.
Other objectives, to be evaluated similarly, include
contracting over the purpose of the session, choosing appropriate
DOTS topics (Law and Watts, 1977), ensuring contingency materials
and structuring sessions to ensure effective guidance. As I have
not usually had problems along these areas, I have not
elucidated. These are, however, necessary in maintaining the
quality of all group work sessions and thus require continuous
attention.
REFERENCES
Brammer, L. M. and MacDonald, G. (1996) The Helping
Relationship: Process and Skills. London: Allyn & Bacon.
Craik, I.F.M. and Lockhart, R.S. (1972) Levels of processing: a
framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behaviour, 11, 671-84.
Douglas, T. (1978) Basic Groupwork. London: Tavistock.
Egan, G. (1977) You and Me. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Egan, G. (1998) The Skilled Helper (6th. edn.). Pacific Grove,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Fielding, A. & Vautier, E. (1994) Guidance Explored: An
Integrated Approach to Guidance Interventions. Swanley, Kent:
The College of Guidance Studies.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, F. P. (1996) Joining Together: Group
Theory and Group Skills. London: Allyn & Bacon.
Killeen, J. (1996) The learning and economic outcomes of
guidance. In Watts, A.G., Law, B., Killeen, J, Kidd, J.M. and
Hawthorn, R. Rethinking careers education and guidance. London:
Routledge.
Klein, J. (1963) Working with Groups. London: Hutchinson.
Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning Experience as a Source
of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Law, B. (1996a) Careers education in a curriculum. In Watts,
A.G., Law, B., Killeen, J, Kidd, J.M. and Hawthorn, R.
Rethinking careers education and guidance. London: Routledge.
Law, B. (1996b) Careers work in schools. In Watts, A.G., Law,
B., Killeen, J, Kidd, J.M. and Hawthorn, R. Rethinking careers
education and guidance. London: Routledge.
Law, B. and Watts, A.G. (1977) Schools, Careers and Community.
London: Church Information Office.
Lewin, K. (1948) Resolving Social Conflicts. New York: Harper.
Maier, N. R. F. (1953) An experimental test of the effect of
training on discussion leadership. Human Relations, VI.
Masson, J. (1992) Against Therapy. London: Harper-Collins.
Milson, F. (1973) An Introduction to Group Work Skill. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Nelson-Jones, R. (1993) Practical Counselling and Helping
Skills: How to Use the Lifeskills Helping Model. London: Cassell.
Reynolds, M. (1994) Groupwork in Education and Training: ideas
in practice. London: Kogan Page.
Richardson, E. (1967) Group Study for Teachers. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Rogers, C. (1942) Counseling and Psychotherapy. Boston, MA:
Houghton-Mifflin.
Rogers, C. (1961) On Becoming a Person. London: Constable.
Skinner, B. F. (1964). New Scientist, 21 May.
Stech, E. and Ratliffe, S. A. (1976) Working in Groups. Skokie,
Illinois: National Textbook Company.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965) Developmental sequences in small groups.
Psychological Bulletin, 54, 229-49.
CareerSteer – careers test for career choice www.careersteer.org