Category: Human Services

This assignment requires that you write a paper. Select an article to review fr

This assignment requires that you write a paper. Select an article to review from a Social Work Journal. Choose an article that involves group work. The article should detail a well-constructed study (one that can be duplicated). A sample journal article that includes the required features for this assignment is included in the assignment details in Canvas. The sample article cannot be used for your review. Literature reviews are not acceptable. Submit a copy of your article to me via canvas no later than July 2, 2024. Include a copy of the article (if the article is very long, just attach the first page of the article, reflecting its title) with your assignment when it is submitted. Your paper should be two pages in length in addition to the cover page and reference page, APA style, and should include the following elements:
• Provide a summary of the article
• Describe the population used in the study
• Describe how the sample was selected
• Size of the sample used
• Describe how group work was used in the study
• Describe the specific techniques used
• What was the length of the study
• Was the outcome successful?
• What implications are there for further study?

Article Review Assignment: Exploring Countertransference in Social Work Practice

Article Review Assignment: Exploring Countertransference in Social Work Practice
Objective:
This assignment aims to review the article titled “Social work students’ experience and management of countertransference” by Adrian van Breda and Terry Feller. Through this review, students will gain insights into the significance of countertransference in social work practice and its implications for ethical and effective service delivery.
Assignment Instructions:
Article Summary (150 words):
Provide a concise summary of the article, highlighting the main points discussed and the key findings presented regarding social work students’ experiences with countertransference.
Briefly mention the recommendations provided in the article for social work education and supervision.
2.Critical Analysis (200 words):
Analyze the challenges faced by social work students in understanding and managing countertransference.
Reflect on the implications of these challenges for ethical practice and client well-being.
Discuss potential strategies for addressing the identified gaps in social work education and supervision.
3.Application to Practicum Experience (150 words):
Reflect on how the insights from the article can inform your practicum experience in a human services setting.
Consider how you can recognize and manage countertransference reactions in your professional practice.
4.Conclusion (100 words):
Summarize the key takeaways from the article review and its relevance for human services undergraduate practicum students.
Offer any final reflections or considerations based on the insights gained.
Submission Guidelines:
Your review should be concise and well-organized.
Use clear and professional language, avoiding excessive jargon.
This assignment should be broken into the categories given with the categories as your headers. This should be submitted as an Word document 12 point font, double spaced.
Evaluation Criteria:
Depth of reflection and engagement with the article’s content.
Clarity and coherence of writing.
Critical analysis of challenges and potential strategies.
Application of insights to real-world practicum experiences in human services settings.
This assignment encourages you to reflect on the complexities of countertransference in social work practice and consider its implications for their future roles as practitioners in the human services field.

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content gu

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content guides, discussions, quizzes, videos, the assignment, and intervention models. Write and submit a short essay post of about 250 to 400 words and address all of the following steps:
Describe your personal major learning points (aka “learning take-aways”) from this course. Include all significant concepts, learning points, insights and realizations about families, family dynamics, systems theory, family development cycles, intervention models, how working with families differs from individual methods, etc.
Which concepts, models and theories about family intervention did you find especially of value?
Are there mistaken beliefs and misconceptions you once held about families and family interventions that have changed as a result of this course? Please describe what you originally thought and what has changed for you?
How might you continue to apply what you have learned in future courses?
Specifically, how might you apply your new knowledge in your work and/or personal life?
An interesting fact is that family therapy evolved out of research in which family interactions were observed, especially families with members who had a serious mental disorder or substance use disorder. Family interaction research was conducted at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, California in the late 1950s led by anthropologist Gregory Bateson, with clinical practitioners Virginia Satir, John Weakland, Don Jackson, Jay Haley, and Paul Watzlawick. Peter Steinglass and his associates (1987) conducted studies observing families who had an alcohol dependent member while at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Murray Bowen at Georgetown University observed families within an inpatient setting who had a member who had schizophrenia. Others, including Wynne (1988), Boszormenyi-Nagy and Framo (1985) and Lidz and Lidz (1949) were psychiatrists or psychologists who initially began doing research with families with members affected by schizophrenia. Only later did the above researchers therapeutic methods.
The focus of these many family researchers ultimately shifted to developing family therapy models and family interventions, but left behind the importance of researching the methods. This led to diverse ideas and theoretical concepts, at the expense of scientific research that did not rigorously test these theories and strategies that could explain family processes and facilitate therapeutic change. Such research testing was essential for verifying the efficacy and safety of various family interventions, yet was overlooked for some years.
As the marital and family therapy field has evolved, research and research coursework has been integrated as a requirement of graduate social work, mental health and family therapy programs. Research about family therapy and theory now continues to expand due to the scholarly work of faculty teaching in graduate programs. Research using the scientific method is now a foundation of all family therapy theory and the practices that are developed. A “good theory” is important as it can explain family dynamics, it can make useful and specific predictions, it can support which methods work best for certain populations, the theory can be tested scientifically, and its utility will be supported by ongoing research by independent researchers. Over time, a good theory will evolve as new information is gained from research and practice. However, too often the importance of research has gotten lost and many practitioners dismiss its significance and relevance to their own practice, thinking they know best what to do.
Family interventions and counseling in any form (individual, group, family) should never be practiced based on conjecture, speculation, one’s own personal experience, or based on clinical intuition- “it felt like the right thing to do”. Sound clinical practice must be based on well-grounded theory that has been scientifically validated or at least has evolving scientific support from quality clinical research. Practitioners also need to be able to articulate any theoretical model with which they are using and be able to explain what they are doing and why they are doing it. They also must know the limits of a model, draw on clinical expertise, client feedback, and recognize when their chosen methods are not effective.
Presently, Evidence-Based Treatment (EBT) models are prioritized in therapy. These are models that have been validated and popularized by randomly-controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which individuals receive an experimental treatment are compared with a control group- those receiving no treatment or who receive some commonly used “standard treatment”. The experimental treatment follows a specific protocol which is usually manual-ized (uses step-by-step instructions for implementation) so interventions are delivered consistently across populations, settings, and practitioners. When the experimental group shows a statistically significant response to the treatment as compared to the control group, the treatment is considered to be “evidence-based.”
Another research approach is the use of Case Studies that provide an in-depth examination of one or a few family intervention cases where a specific theory and method was used. While this can be a useful starting point to explore a given intervention method, it has many limitations due to the lack of control for variables that affect each case. Without controlling for these variables, it isn’t possible to identify a direct cause-effect relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Cohort studies use a select group of families with similar characteristics to explore whether the approach consistently shows effectiveness in family participation, retention, and change, compared to another group where these methods are not used.
Correlation studies are often used to identify whether a systematic and strong relationship exists between two or more variables that improve therapeutic outcome of families. Two examples of a correlation study are:
-better outcomes for families who attend psycho-educational groups along with family intervention sessions compared to for those who do not.
-increased abstinence rates for clients who are engaged in individual and family sessions vs those only attending individual and group therapy.
For those who plan a career in human services, it is important to gain understanding of basic statistics and basics of doing social science research, so that one can at least read and develop some basic analysis of family intervention research. Gathering feedback from families and clients as to what was helpful and what was not helpful should also not be under-estimated as to its importance to assess your own effectiveness. This will help you learn to self evaluate your own practice.
References:
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Framo, J. (Eds.) (1985). Intensive family therapy: Theoretical and practical aspects. 2nd Edition Brunner/Mazel
Lidz, R.W. & Lidz, T. (1949). “The family environment of schizophrenic patients”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949, pp. 332–345.
Mental Research Institute. ( n.d.) About MRI. https://mri.org/about
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L.A., Wolin, S.J. & Reiss, D. (1987). The Alcoholic Family. Basic Books
Wynne L.C., Ryckoff L.M., Day J. & Hirsch, S. I. (1958): Pseudomutuality in the family relations
of schizophrenics. Psychiatry, 21:205-220
Wynne, L. (Ed.) (1988). The State of the Art in Family Therapy Research : Controversies and Recommendations. Family Process Press.

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profi

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Inspired to work in a creative team with flexible hours, innovative mindsets, and collaborative ideas?
The book mentions, “one of the best ways to fuel
creativity is to seek ideas from other sources, such as another organization,
because they might have newer and more innovative practices that can be adopted
and used in the community.” Involving the community by sponsoring events or
game nights could potentially build rapport with the citizens over time and
establish networks essential to our organizational goals. We can accomplish
this by following the creative steps to prepare, concentrate, incubate, illuminate,
verify, evaluate, and implement the necessary changes to the solutions through
sincere teamwork (Denhardt, Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 90,
2024).
In terms of teams, I would opt to use self-directed teams
and virtual teams. I choose self-directed teams because I want to empower them
to use their unique set of skills to achieve our team’s goals, allowing them
the space to create amazing work that will help build the team’s confidence and
trust. I also will need the virtual team because I would need outside sources
and ideas to share and implement. Moreover, my self-directed team will be able
to collaborate with them as well with their ideas and questions (Denhardt,
Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 320, 2024).
Source: Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (2024). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Cengage Inc.
#2 Asked by Jessica Crews (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Productivity and employee satisfaction can rise when companies know how to foster creativity in the workplace. How can innovation and critical thinking be fostered by creativity?
As mentioned In the text are many ways to be innovative and how to encourage creativity in any organization such as, encouraging staff creativity by encouraging them to generate new ideas, seek feedback, take on new challenges, and consider alternative options. Keep a creativity journal, seek inspiration, allocate time for imaginative thought, eliminate pessimistic mindset, seek novel experiences, develop skills, and take breaks.
By becoming knowledgeable about and using creative exercises and techniques, you can increase your creativity. Leadership has been argued to be vital in fostering team-derived inclusion (Randel et al., 2018). Methods for fostering creative thinking and related abilities, like idea generation, open-mindedness, and problem-solving, are known as creativity techniques. You can use these strategies for both independent and collaborative tasks at work. Encourage staff members to contribute by putting good ideas into practice and appreciating the thought that went into some others. Inform the worker directly that you intend to put their suggestion into practice. After you see results, formally inform the team that brought about the change. Talking about and praising a good idea in public encourages idea sharing and higher levels of creativity. Members of the team are more motivated to voice their ideas and opinions.
Environments focused on teams or groups are often conducive to creativity. To foster teamwork, permit colleagues to combine their efforts on specific assignments. When they collaborate, they are more likely to use one another as inspiration to generate original ideas. Encourage the use of video chatting so that employees who work from home or in different offices feel like they are a part of the team.
Make sure your organization’s purpose and vision are clear, and communicate them often. Make sure that every employee understands your approach and try to keep it as open and honest as possible. Information sharing strengthens the relationship and fosters more trust between an employer and its staff. Make the company’s long-term objectives and direction clear. Provide information or figures that demonstrate how the efforts of each team impact the company’s course. Having an open environment demonstrates to staff members their worth to the business and motivates them to assist in achieving both short- and long-term objectives.
Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (n.d.). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Fifth Edition. Retrieved from https://platform.virdocs.com/read/533996/23/#/4/2[s9781506382685.i1613]/4,/1:0,/1:0
Source: Leroy, H., Buengeler, C., Veestraeten, M., Shemla, M., & Hoever, I. J. (2022). Fostering Team Creativity Through Team-Focused Inclusion: The Role of Leader Harvesting the Benefits of Diversity and Cultivating Value-In-Diversity Beliefs. Group & Organization Management, 47(4), 798-839. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211009683

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profi

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Inspired to work in a creative team with flexible hours, innovative mindsets, and collaborative ideas?
The book mentions, “one of the best ways to fuel
creativity is to seek ideas from other sources, such as another organization,
because they might have newer and more innovative practices that can be adopted
and used in the community.” Involving the community by sponsoring events or
game nights could potentially build rapport with the citizens over time and
establish networks essential to our organizational goals. We can accomplish
this by following the creative steps to prepare, concentrate, incubate, illuminate,
verify, evaluate, and implement the necessary changes to the solutions through
sincere teamwork (Denhardt, Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 90,
2024).
In terms of teams, I would opt to use self-directed teams
and virtual teams. I choose self-directed teams because I want to empower them
to use their unique set of skills to achieve our team’s goals, allowing them
the space to create amazing work that will help build the team’s confidence and
trust. I also will need the virtual team because I would need outside sources
and ideas to share and implement. Moreover, my self-directed team will be able
to collaborate with them as well with their ideas and questions (Denhardt,
Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 320, 2024).
Source: Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (2024). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Cengage Inc.
#2 Asked by Jessica Crews (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Productivity and employee satisfaction can rise when companies know how to foster creativity in the workplace. How can innovation and critical thinking be fostered by creativity?
As mentioned In the text are many ways to be innovative and how to encourage creativity in any organization such as, encouraging staff creativity by encouraging them to generate new ideas, seek feedback, take on new challenges, and consider alternative options. Keep a creativity journal, seek inspiration, allocate time for imaginative thought, eliminate pessimistic mindset, seek novel experiences, develop skills, and take breaks.
By becoming knowledgeable about and using creative exercises and techniques, you can increase your creativity. Leadership has been argued to be vital in fostering team-derived inclusion (Randel et al., 2018). Methods for fostering creative thinking and related abilities, like idea generation, open-mindedness, and problem-solving, are known as creativity techniques. You can use these strategies for both independent and collaborative tasks at work. Encourage staff members to contribute by putting good ideas into practice and appreciating the thought that went into some others. Inform the worker directly that you intend to put their suggestion into practice. After you see results, formally inform the team that brought about the change. Talking about and praising a good idea in public encourages idea sharing and higher levels of creativity. Members of the team are more motivated to voice their ideas and opinions.
Environments focused on teams or groups are often conducive to creativity. To foster teamwork, permit colleagues to combine their efforts on specific assignments. When they collaborate, they are more likely to use one another as inspiration to generate original ideas. Encourage the use of video chatting so that employees who work from home or in different offices feel like they are a part of the team.
Make sure your organization’s purpose and vision are clear, and communicate them often. Make sure that every employee understands your approach and try to keep it as open and honest as possible. Information sharing strengthens the relationship and fosters more trust between an employer and its staff. Make the company’s long-term objectives and direction clear. Provide information or figures that demonstrate how the efforts of each team impact the company’s course. Having an open environment demonstrates to staff members their worth to the business and motivates them to assist in achieving both short- and long-term objectives.
Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (n.d.). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Fifth Edition. Retrieved from https://platform.virdocs.com/read/533996/23/#/4/2[s9781506382685.i1613]/4,/1:0,/1:0
Source: Leroy, H., Buengeler, C., Veestraeten, M., Shemla, M., & Hoever, I. J. (2022). Fostering Team Creativity Through Team-Focused Inclusion: The Role of Leader Harvesting the Benefits of Diversity and Cultivating Value-In-Diversity Beliefs. Group & Organization Management, 47(4), 798-839. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211009683

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content gu

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content guides, discussions, quizzes, videos, the assignment, and intervention models. Write and submit a short essay post of about 250 to 400 words and address all of the following steps:
Describe your personal major learning points (aka “learning take-aways”) from this course. Include all significant concepts, learning points, insights and realizations about families, family dynamics, systems theory, family development cycles, intervention models, how working with families differs from individual methods, etc.
Which concepts, models and theories about family intervention did you find especially of value?
Are there mistaken beliefs and misconceptions you once held about families and family interventions that have changed as a result of this course? Please describe what you originally thought and what has changed for you?
How might you continue to apply what you have learned in future courses?
Specifically, how might you apply your new knowledge in your work and/or personal life?
An interesting fact is that family therapy evolved out of research in which family interactions were observed, especially families with members who had a serious mental disorder or substance use disorder. Family interaction research was conducted at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, California in the late 1950s led by anthropologist Gregory Bateson, with clinical practitioners Virginia Satir, John Weakland, Don Jackson, Jay Haley, and Paul Watzlawick. Peter Steinglass and his associates (1987) conducted studies observing families who had an alcohol dependent member while at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Murray Bowen at Georgetown University observed families within an inpatient setting who had a member who had schizophrenia. Others, including Wynne (1988), Boszormenyi-Nagy and Framo (1985) and Lidz and Lidz (1949) were psychiatrists or psychologists who initially began doing research with families with members affected by schizophrenia. Only later did the above researchers therapeutic methods.
The focus of these many family researchers ultimately shifted to developing family therapy models and family interventions, but left behind the importance of researching the methods. This led to diverse ideas and theoretical concepts, at the expense of scientific research that did not rigorously test these theories and strategies that could explain family processes and facilitate therapeutic change. Such research testing was essential for verifying the efficacy and safety of various family interventions, yet was overlooked for some years.
As the marital and family therapy field has evolved, research and research coursework has been integrated as a requirement of graduate social work, mental health and family therapy programs. Research about family therapy and theory now continues to expand due to the scholarly work of faculty teaching in graduate programs. Research using the scientific method is now a foundation of all family therapy theory and the practices that are developed. A “good theory” is important as it can explain family dynamics, it can make useful and specific predictions, it can support which methods work best for certain populations, the theory can be tested scientifically, and its utility will be supported by ongoing research by independent researchers. Over time, a good theory will evolve as new information is gained from research and practice. However, too often the importance of research has gotten lost and many practitioners dismiss its significance and relevance to their own practice, thinking they know best what to do.
Family interventions and counseling in any form (individual, group, family) should never be practiced based on conjecture, speculation, one’s own personal experience, or based on clinical intuition- “it felt like the right thing to do”. Sound clinical practice must be based on well-grounded theory that has been scientifically validated or at least has evolving scientific support from quality clinical research. Practitioners also need to be able to articulate any theoretical model with which they are using and be able to explain what they are doing and why they are doing it. They also must know the limits of a model, draw on clinical expertise, client feedback, and recognize when their chosen methods are not effective.
Presently, Evidence-Based Treatment (EBT) models are prioritized in therapy. These are models that have been validated and popularized by randomly-controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which individuals receive an experimental treatment are compared with a control group- those receiving no treatment or who receive some commonly used “standard treatment”. The experimental treatment follows a specific protocol which is usually manual-ized (uses step-by-step instructions for implementation) so interventions are delivered consistently across populations, settings, and practitioners. When the experimental group shows a statistically significant response to the treatment as compared to the control group, the treatment is considered to be “evidence-based.”
Another research approach is the use of Case Studies that provide an in-depth examination of one or a few family intervention cases where a specific theory and method was used. While this can be a useful starting point to explore a given intervention method, it has many limitations due to the lack of control for variables that affect each case. Without controlling for these variables, it isn’t possible to identify a direct cause-effect relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Cohort studies use a select group of families with similar characteristics to explore whether the approach consistently shows effectiveness in family participation, retention, and change, compared to another group where these methods are not used.
Correlation studies are often used to identify whether a systematic and strong relationship exists between two or more variables that improve therapeutic outcome of families. Two examples of a correlation study are:
-better outcomes for families who attend psycho-educational groups along with family intervention sessions compared to for those who do not.
-increased abstinence rates for clients who are engaged in individual and family sessions vs those only attending individual and group therapy.
For those who plan a career in human services, it is important to gain understanding of basic statistics and basics of doing social science research, so that one can at least read and develop some basic analysis of family intervention research. Gathering feedback from families and clients as to what was helpful and what was not helpful should also not be under-estimated as to its importance to assess your own effectiveness. This will help you learn to self evaluate your own practice.
References:
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Framo, J. (Eds.) (1985). Intensive family therapy: Theoretical and practical aspects. 2nd Edition Brunner/Mazel
Lidz, R.W. & Lidz, T. (1949). “The family environment of schizophrenic patients”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949, pp. 332–345.
Mental Research Institute. ( n.d.) About MRI. https://mri.org/about
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L.A., Wolin, S.J. & Reiss, D. (1987). The Alcoholic Family. Basic Books
Wynne L.C., Ryckoff L.M., Day J. & Hirsch, S. I. (1958): Pseudomutuality in the family relations
of schizophrenics. Psychiatry, 21:205-220
Wynne, L. (Ed.) (1988). The State of the Art in Family Therapy Research : Controversies and Recommendations. Family Process Press.

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content gu

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content guides, discussions, quizzes, videos, the assignment, and intervention models. Write and submit a short essay post of about 250 to 400 words and address all of the following steps:
Describe your personal major learning points (aka “learning take-aways”) from this course. Include all significant concepts, learning points, insights and realizations about families, family dynamics, systems theory, family development cycles, intervention models, how working with families differs from individual methods, etc.
Which concepts, models and theories about family intervention did you find especially of value?
Are there mistaken beliefs and misconceptions you once held about families and family interventions that have changed as a result of this course? Please describe what you originally thought and what has changed for you?
How might you continue to apply what you have learned in future courses?
Specifically, how might you apply your new knowledge in your work and/or personal life?
An interesting fact is that family therapy evolved out of research in which family interactions were observed, especially families with members who had a serious mental disorder or substance use disorder. Family interaction research was conducted at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, California in the late 1950s led by anthropologist Gregory Bateson, with clinical practitioners Virginia Satir, John Weakland, Don Jackson, Jay Haley, and Paul Watzlawick. Peter Steinglass and his associates (1987) conducted studies observing families who had an alcohol dependent member while at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Murray Bowen at Georgetown University observed families within an inpatient setting who had a member who had schizophrenia. Others, including Wynne (1988), Boszormenyi-Nagy and Framo (1985) and Lidz and Lidz (1949) were psychiatrists or psychologists who initially began doing research with families with members affected by schizophrenia. Only later did the above researchers therapeutic methods.
The focus of these many family researchers ultimately shifted to developing family therapy models and family interventions, but left behind the importance of researching the methods. This led to diverse ideas and theoretical concepts, at the expense of scientific research that did not rigorously test these theories and strategies that could explain family processes and facilitate therapeutic change. Such research testing was essential for verifying the efficacy and safety of various family interventions, yet was overlooked for some years.
As the marital and family therapy field has evolved, research and research coursework has been integrated as a requirement of graduate social work, mental health and family therapy programs. Research about family therapy and theory now continues to expand due to the scholarly work of faculty teaching in graduate programs. Research using the scientific method is now a foundation of all family therapy theory and the practices that are developed. A “good theory” is important as it can explain family dynamics, it can make useful and specific predictions, it can support which methods work best for certain populations, the theory can be tested scientifically, and its utility will be supported by ongoing research by independent researchers. Over time, a good theory will evolve as new information is gained from research and practice. However, too often the importance of research has gotten lost and many practitioners dismiss its significance and relevance to their own practice, thinking they know best what to do.
Family interventions and counseling in any form (individual, group, family) should never be practiced based on conjecture, speculation, one’s own personal experience, or based on clinical intuition- “it felt like the right thing to do”. Sound clinical practice must be based on well-grounded theory that has been scientifically validated or at least has evolving scientific support from quality clinical research. Practitioners also need to be able to articulate any theoretical model with which they are using and be able to explain what they are doing and why they are doing it. They also must know the limits of a model, draw on clinical expertise, client feedback, and recognize when their chosen methods are not effective.
Presently, Evidence-Based Treatment (EBT) models are prioritized in therapy. These are models that have been validated and popularized by randomly-controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which individuals receive an experimental treatment are compared with a control group- those receiving no treatment or who receive some commonly used “standard treatment”. The experimental treatment follows a specific protocol which is usually manual-ized (uses step-by-step instructions for implementation) so interventions are delivered consistently across populations, settings, and practitioners. When the experimental group shows a statistically significant response to the treatment as compared to the control group, the treatment is considered to be “evidence-based.”
Another research approach is the use of Case Studies that provide an in-depth examination of one or a few family intervention cases where a specific theory and method was used. While this can be a useful starting point to explore a given intervention method, it has many limitations due to the lack of control for variables that affect each case. Without controlling for these variables, it isn’t possible to identify a direct cause-effect relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Cohort studies use a select group of families with similar characteristics to explore whether the approach consistently shows effectiveness in family participation, retention, and change, compared to another group where these methods are not used.
Correlation studies are often used to identify whether a systematic and strong relationship exists between two or more variables that improve therapeutic outcome of families. Two examples of a correlation study are:
-better outcomes for families who attend psycho-educational groups along with family intervention sessions compared to for those who do not.
-increased abstinence rates for clients who are engaged in individual and family sessions vs those only attending individual and group therapy.
For those who plan a career in human services, it is important to gain understanding of basic statistics and basics of doing social science research, so that one can at least read and develop some basic analysis of family intervention research. Gathering feedback from families and clients as to what was helpful and what was not helpful should also not be under-estimated as to its importance to assess your own effectiveness. This will help you learn to self evaluate your own practice.
References:
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Framo, J. (Eds.) (1985). Intensive family therapy: Theoretical and practical aspects. 2nd Edition Brunner/Mazel
Lidz, R.W. & Lidz, T. (1949). “The family environment of schizophrenic patients”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949, pp. 332–345.
Mental Research Institute. ( n.d.) About MRI. https://mri.org/about
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L.A., Wolin, S.J. & Reiss, D. (1987). The Alcoholic Family. Basic Books
Wynne L.C., Ryckoff L.M., Day J. & Hirsch, S. I. (1958): Pseudomutuality in the family relations
of schizophrenics. Psychiatry, 21:205-220
Wynne, L. (Ed.) (1988). The State of the Art in Family Therapy Research : Controversies and Recommendations. Family Process Press.

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content gu

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content guides, discussions, quizzes, videos, the assignment, and intervention models. Write and submit a short essay post of about 250 to 400 words and address all of the following steps:
Describe your personal major learning points (aka “learning take-aways”) from this course. Include all significant concepts, learning points, insights and realizations about families, family dynamics, systems theory, family development cycles, intervention models, how working with families differs from individual methods, etc.
Which concepts, models and theories about family intervention did you find especially of value?
Are there mistaken beliefs and misconceptions you once held about families and family interventions that have changed as a result of this course? Please describe what you originally thought and what has changed for you?
How might you continue to apply what you have learned in future courses?
Specifically, how might you apply your new knowledge in your work and/or personal life?
An interesting fact is that family therapy evolved out of research in which family interactions were observed, especially families with members who had a serious mental disorder or substance use disorder. Family interaction research was conducted at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, California in the late 1950s led by anthropologist Gregory Bateson, with clinical practitioners Virginia Satir, John Weakland, Don Jackson, Jay Haley, and Paul Watzlawick. Peter Steinglass and his associates (1987) conducted studies observing families who had an alcohol dependent member while at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Murray Bowen at Georgetown University observed families within an inpatient setting who had a member who had schizophrenia. Others, including Wynne (1988), Boszormenyi-Nagy and Framo (1985) and Lidz and Lidz (1949) were psychiatrists or psychologists who initially began doing research with families with members affected by schizophrenia. Only later did the above researchers therapeutic methods.
The focus of these many family researchers ultimately shifted to developing family therapy models and family interventions, but left behind the importance of researching the methods. This led to diverse ideas and theoretical concepts, at the expense of scientific research that did not rigorously test these theories and strategies that could explain family processes and facilitate therapeutic change. Such research testing was essential for verifying the efficacy and safety of various family interventions, yet was overlooked for some years.
As the marital and family therapy field has evolved, research and research coursework has been integrated as a requirement of graduate social work, mental health and family therapy programs. Research about family therapy and theory now continues to expand due to the scholarly work of faculty teaching in graduate programs. Research using the scientific method is now a foundation of all family therapy theory and the practices that are developed. A “good theory” is important as it can explain family dynamics, it can make useful and specific predictions, it can support which methods work best for certain populations, the theory can be tested scientifically, and its utility will be supported by ongoing research by independent researchers. Over time, a good theory will evolve as new information is gained from research and practice. However, too often the importance of research has gotten lost and many practitioners dismiss its significance and relevance to their own practice, thinking they know best what to do.
Family interventions and counseling in any form (individual, group, family) should never be practiced based on conjecture, speculation, one’s own personal experience, or based on clinical intuition- “it felt like the right thing to do”. Sound clinical practice must be based on well-grounded theory that has been scientifically validated or at least has evolving scientific support from quality clinical research. Practitioners also need to be able to articulate any theoretical model with which they are using and be able to explain what they are doing and why they are doing it. They also must know the limits of a model, draw on clinical expertise, client feedback, and recognize when their chosen methods are not effective.
Presently, Evidence-Based Treatment (EBT) models are prioritized in therapy. These are models that have been validated and popularized by randomly-controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which individuals receive an experimental treatment are compared with a control group- those receiving no treatment or who receive some commonly used “standard treatment”. The experimental treatment follows a specific protocol which is usually manual-ized (uses step-by-step instructions for implementation) so interventions are delivered consistently across populations, settings, and practitioners. When the experimental group shows a statistically significant response to the treatment as compared to the control group, the treatment is considered to be “evidence-based.”
Another research approach is the use of Case Studies that provide an in-depth examination of one or a few family intervention cases where a specific theory and method was used. While this can be a useful starting point to explore a given intervention method, it has many limitations due to the lack of control for variables that affect each case. Without controlling for these variables, it isn’t possible to identify a direct cause-effect relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Cohort studies use a select group of families with similar characteristics to explore whether the approach consistently shows effectiveness in family participation, retention, and change, compared to another group where these methods are not used.
Correlation studies are often used to identify whether a systematic and strong relationship exists between two or more variables that improve therapeutic outcome of families. Two examples of a correlation study are:
-better outcomes for families who attend psycho-educational groups along with family intervention sessions compared to for those who do not.
-increased abstinence rates for clients who are engaged in individual and family sessions vs those only attending individual and group therapy.
For those who plan a career in human services, it is important to gain understanding of basic statistics and basics of doing social science research, so that one can at least read and develop some basic analysis of family intervention research. Gathering feedback from families and clients as to what was helpful and what was not helpful should also not be under-estimated as to its importance to assess your own effectiveness. This will help you learn to self evaluate your own practice.
References:
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Framo, J. (Eds.) (1985). Intensive family therapy: Theoretical and practical aspects. 2nd Edition Brunner/Mazel
Lidz, R.W. & Lidz, T. (1949). “The family environment of schizophrenic patients”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949, pp. 332–345.
Mental Research Institute. ( n.d.) About MRI. https://mri.org/about
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L.A., Wolin, S.J. & Reiss, D. (1987). The Alcoholic Family. Basic Books
Wynne L.C., Ryckoff L.M., Day J. & Hirsch, S. I. (1958): Pseudomutuality in the family relations
of schizophrenics. Psychiatry, 21:205-220
Wynne, L. (Ed.) (1988). The State of the Art in Family Therapy Research : Controversies and Recommendations. Family Process Press.

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content gu

In this last discussion, carefully reflect upon the chapter readings, content guides, discussions, quizzes, videos, the assignment, and intervention models. Write and submit a short essay post of about 250 to 400 words and address all of the following steps:
Describe your personal major learning points (aka “learning take-aways”) from this course. Include all significant concepts, learning points, insights and realizations about families, family dynamics, systems theory, family development cycles, intervention models, how working with families differs from individual methods, etc.
Which concepts, models and theories about family intervention did you find especially of value?
Are there mistaken beliefs and misconceptions you once held about families and family interventions that have changed as a result of this course? Please describe what you originally thought and what has changed for you?
How might you continue to apply what you have learned in future courses?
Specifically, how might you apply your new knowledge in your work and/or personal life?
An interesting fact is that family therapy evolved out of research in which family interactions were observed, especially families with members who had a serious mental disorder or substance use disorder. Family interaction research was conducted at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto, California in the late 1950s led by anthropologist Gregory Bateson, with clinical practitioners Virginia Satir, John Weakland, Don Jackson, Jay Haley, and Paul Watzlawick. Peter Steinglass and his associates (1987) conducted studies observing families who had an alcohol dependent member while at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Murray Bowen at Georgetown University observed families within an inpatient setting who had a member who had schizophrenia. Others, including Wynne (1988), Boszormenyi-Nagy and Framo (1985) and Lidz and Lidz (1949) were psychiatrists or psychologists who initially began doing research with families with members affected by schizophrenia. Only later did the above researchers therapeutic methods.
The focus of these many family researchers ultimately shifted to developing family therapy models and family interventions, but left behind the importance of researching the methods. This led to diverse ideas and theoretical concepts, at the expense of scientific research that did not rigorously test these theories and strategies that could explain family processes and facilitate therapeutic change. Such research testing was essential for verifying the efficacy and safety of various family interventions, yet was overlooked for some years.
As the marital and family therapy field has evolved, research and research coursework has been integrated as a requirement of graduate social work, mental health and family therapy programs. Research about family therapy and theory now continues to expand due to the scholarly work of faculty teaching in graduate programs. Research using the scientific method is now a foundation of all family therapy theory and the practices that are developed. A “good theory” is important as it can explain family dynamics, it can make useful and specific predictions, it can support which methods work best for certain populations, the theory can be tested scientifically, and its utility will be supported by ongoing research by independent researchers. Over time, a good theory will evolve as new information is gained from research and practice. However, too often the importance of research has gotten lost and many practitioners dismiss its significance and relevance to their own practice, thinking they know best what to do.
Family interventions and counseling in any form (individual, group, family) should never be practiced based on conjecture, speculation, one’s own personal experience, or based on clinical intuition- “it felt like the right thing to do”. Sound clinical practice must be based on well-grounded theory that has been scientifically validated or at least has evolving scientific support from quality clinical research. Practitioners also need to be able to articulate any theoretical model with which they are using and be able to explain what they are doing and why they are doing it. They also must know the limits of a model, draw on clinical expertise, client feedback, and recognize when their chosen methods are not effective.
Presently, Evidence-Based Treatment (EBT) models are prioritized in therapy. These are models that have been validated and popularized by randomly-controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which individuals receive an experimental treatment are compared with a control group- those receiving no treatment or who receive some commonly used “standard treatment”. The experimental treatment follows a specific protocol which is usually manual-ized (uses step-by-step instructions for implementation) so interventions are delivered consistently across populations, settings, and practitioners. When the experimental group shows a statistically significant response to the treatment as compared to the control group, the treatment is considered to be “evidence-based.”
Another research approach is the use of Case Studies that provide an in-depth examination of one or a few family intervention cases where a specific theory and method was used. While this can be a useful starting point to explore a given intervention method, it has many limitations due to the lack of control for variables that affect each case. Without controlling for these variables, it isn’t possible to identify a direct cause-effect relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Cohort studies use a select group of families with similar characteristics to explore whether the approach consistently shows effectiveness in family participation, retention, and change, compared to another group where these methods are not used.
Correlation studies are often used to identify whether a systematic and strong relationship exists between two or more variables that improve therapeutic outcome of families. Two examples of a correlation study are:
-better outcomes for families who attend psycho-educational groups along with family intervention sessions compared to for those who do not.
-increased abstinence rates for clients who are engaged in individual and family sessions vs those only attending individual and group therapy.
For those who plan a career in human services, it is important to gain understanding of basic statistics and basics of doing social science research, so that one can at least read and develop some basic analysis of family intervention research. Gathering feedback from families and clients as to what was helpful and what was not helpful should also not be under-estimated as to its importance to assess your own effectiveness. This will help you learn to self evaluate your own practice.
References:
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Framo, J. (Eds.) (1985). Intensive family therapy: Theoretical and practical aspects. 2nd Edition Brunner/Mazel
Lidz, R.W. & Lidz, T. (1949). “The family environment of schizophrenic patients”, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 106, 1949, pp. 332–345.
Mental Research Institute. ( n.d.) About MRI. https://mri.org/about
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L.A., Wolin, S.J. & Reiss, D. (1987). The Alcoholic Family. Basic Books
Wynne L.C., Ryckoff L.M., Day J. & Hirsch, S. I. (1958): Pseudomutuality in the family relations
of schizophrenics. Psychiatry, 21:205-220
Wynne, L. (Ed.) (1988). The State of the Art in Family Therapy Research : Controversies and Recommendations. Family Process Press.

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profi

Need to respond to the two students posts below:
#1 Asked by Shelly Odaol (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Inspired to work in a creative team with flexible hours, innovative mindsets, and collaborative ideas?
The book mentions, “one of the best ways to fuel
creativity is to seek ideas from other sources, such as another organization,
because they might have newer and more innovative practices that can be adopted
and used in the community.” Involving the community by sponsoring events or
game nights could potentially build rapport with the citizens over time and
establish networks essential to our organizational goals. We can accomplish
this by following the creative steps to prepare, concentrate, incubate, illuminate,
verify, evaluate, and implement the necessary changes to the solutions through
sincere teamwork (Denhardt, Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 90,
2024).
In terms of teams, I would opt to use self-directed teams
and virtual teams. I choose self-directed teams because I want to empower them
to use their unique set of skills to achieve our team’s goals, allowing them
the space to create amazing work that will help build the team’s confidence and
trust. I also will need the virtual team because I would need outside sources
and ideas to share and implement. Moreover, my self-directed team will be able
to collaborate with them as well with their ideas and questions (Denhardt,
Denhardt, Aristigueta, & Rawlings, p. 320, 2024).
Source: Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (2024). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Cengage Inc.
#2 Asked by Jessica Crews (profile)
Student at Florida State College at Jacksonville
Productivity and employee satisfaction can rise when companies know how to foster creativity in the workplace. How can innovation and critical thinking be fostered by creativity?
As mentioned In the text are many ways to be innovative and how to encourage creativity in any organization such as, encouraging staff creativity by encouraging them to generate new ideas, seek feedback, take on new challenges, and consider alternative options. Keep a creativity journal, seek inspiration, allocate time for imaginative thought, eliminate pessimistic mindset, seek novel experiences, develop skills, and take breaks.
By becoming knowledgeable about and using creative exercises and techniques, you can increase your creativity. Leadership has been argued to be vital in fostering team-derived inclusion (Randel et al., 2018). Methods for fostering creative thinking and related abilities, like idea generation, open-mindedness, and problem-solving, are known as creativity techniques. You can use these strategies for both independent and collaborative tasks at work. Encourage staff members to contribute by putting good ideas into practice and appreciating the thought that went into some others. Inform the worker directly that you intend to put their suggestion into practice. After you see results, formally inform the team that brought about the change. Talking about and praising a good idea in public encourages idea sharing and higher levels of creativity. Members of the team are more motivated to voice their ideas and opinions.
Environments focused on teams or groups are often conducive to creativity. To foster teamwork, permit colleagues to combine their efforts on specific assignments. When they collaborate, they are more likely to use one another as inspiration to generate original ideas. Encourage the use of video chatting so that employees who work from home or in different offices feel like they are a part of the team.
Make sure your organization’s purpose and vision are clear, and communicate them often. Make sure that every employee understands your approach and try to keep it as open and honest as possible. Information sharing strengthens the relationship and fosters more trust between an employer and its staff. Make the company’s long-term objectives and direction clear. Provide information or figures that demonstrate how the efforts of each team impact the company’s course. Having an open environment demonstrates to staff members their worth to the business and motivates them to assist in achieving both short- and long-term objectives.
Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., Aristigueta, M. P., & Rawlings, K. C. (n.d.). Managing Human Behavior in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Fifth Edition. Retrieved from https://platform.virdocs.com/read/533996/23/#/4/2[s9781506382685.i1613]/4,/1:0,/1:0
Source: Leroy, H., Buengeler, C., Veestraeten, M., Shemla, M., & Hoever, I. J. (2022). Fostering Team Creativity Through Team-Focused Inclusion: The Role of Leader Harvesting the Benefits of Diversity and Cultivating Value-In-Diversity Beliefs. Group & Organization Management, 47(4), 798-839. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211009683