The 5-7 pages do not include the title page, chart for facilitator responses, and reference page. Please refer to the attached document for free online groups to observe. The support group can be in-field (e.g., aphasia support, dementia support, laryngectomy group, children with special needs, etc.) OR out-of-field (e.g., Weight Watchers, grief support, cancer survivors, parenting, etc.). Group meetings with little interaction between facilitator and participants (e.g., educational sessions, some Alcoholics Anonymous groups) would not be appropriate for this paper. Please obtain permission from the group facilitator to attend. Your reaction paper will include the following sections: Please reference the book: Luterman, D. (2024). Counseling persons with communication disorders and their families. (7th ed.). Pro-ed (if you have issues accessing the book let me know)
Instruction
Within the sections include: 1. Group type, participants, and facilitator: Please include specific details about the group (type of group, demographic information of participants, numbers of attendees, types of attendees, time of day, place, etc.), the room set up (positioning of seating, lighting, decor, refreshments, as applicable), and the group facilitator. 2. Strengths and weaknesses of the group and facilitator: Please describe what you perceive were the strengths and weaknesses of the support group and strengths and weaknesses of its facilitator. Refer to Luterman (2017) (class text) regarding whether the facilitator skills (i.e., techniques used, see Chapter 6) and group process (see Chapter 7) observed were in line with best practice approaches found in the research literature of the type of group you attended. To support your discussion, please explore three articles from peer-reviewed journals that address counseling theory as it applies to the support group you observed. Your paper would not include a description of the articles’ research methods, but the concepts/results they shared. Try to include articles that focus on the type of group you observed. However, in the event that the type of group you observed is not well-researched, focus on articles related to best practices in group counseling or therapy in general. Make sure you discuss application of each of the research studies to the group you observed. 3. Examples of facilitator responses: Please provide four examples of facilitator responses to participant questions/comments. Please use the chart to organize information for each response. For each example, write the words the participant said and the words of the counselor's response, describe the microskill the facilitator used and the counseling theory underlying the facilitator's choice of microskill/response (with rationale for your determination). Describe the reaction that the facilitator response elicited for the individual who first asked or commented, and the reaction the facilitator response elicited for other members of the group (if they reacted). Reactions can be behavioral, emotional, verbal, or even no reaction. Judge the effectiveness of the counselor's response, with explanation for your judgment. 4. Curative factors: Please name at least three curative factors you observed taking place during the session you watched, with specific examples from the session as evidence of each factor shown. 5. Stage of group development: Please describe the stage of group development for the session you observed (see Luterman, 2017, pp. 124-128). What evidence can you bring to support that opinion? 6. Impact on your Personal Approach to Support Group Facilitation: Conclude your paper with your reactions and ideas regarding how this observation might impact your personal approach to support group facilitation in the future as a speech-language pathologist. Please be specific about the strategies that you would implement from what you observed in the session (or wished you would have observed but didn't). For the four required examples of facilitator responses, please create a chart with the following headings: Participant question/ comment Facilitator response Microskill used Underlying Counseling Theory with rationale Participant/ group reaction observed Effectiveness of response with rationale