Donald E. Ward

Training group workers: Implications of the new asgw training standards for training and practice

Abstract The new ASGW Standards and their evolution are described and contrasted with 1983 Standards. Implications for group work training and practice are presented.

Context for revising the association for specialists in group work training standards

Abstract The revised standards for the training of group workers, recently adopted by the Association for Specialists in Group Work Executive Board (April 1991) are presented, preceded by a context for their development.

The general status of group work training in accredited counseling programs

Abstract In a national survey, CACREP -accredited counseling programs were assessed for compliance with the 1990 Association for Specialists in Group Work standards for group work training, including knowledge and skill standards for core training, and the four group work specializations (task and work groups, psycho educational groups, counseling groups, and psychotherapy groups).

A retrospective of “critical issues”

Abstract In this article the major themes and differences contained in this special issue are summarized with reference to the current and future status of group work.

A model for the more effective use of theory in group work

Abstract A three-level dimension model describes the dimensions of a comprehensive approach to group work within which effective decisions concerning the selection of theories can be made.

Complexity in Group Work

It has been almost a year since the 2005 Atlanta American Counseling Association Convention, which featured Irvin Yalom as keynote speaker. Along with more than a thousand opening session attendees who heard Yalom’s interesting and stimulating address, I was among the approximately 80 ASGW members who later met and interacted with Irv at the ASGW Awards Luncheon, where he received an award for outstanding career contributions to group work after giving his opening address. The experience of hearing and interacting with him, as well as seeing him very graciously accept the ASGW award from an organization to which he does not belong, stimulated me to consider again the complexity of group work and the manner in which ASGW as an organization and its individual members have always embraced complexity as a necessary component of understanding groups and providing quality group services. A good part of this willingness to consider many facets of human experience and interaction is reflected in our openness to people and ideas outside of our primary discipline and professional allegiances (ASGW, ACA, and counseling) and outside of group members and participants representing majority cultural groups and influences. Our openness also extends across classical theoretical boundaries. Irvin Yalom is a classically trained psychiatrist who has spent much of his professional life treating clients in group therapy and writing about group work (1995) and his existential approach to therapy (1980). Most recently, he has written novels describing characters dealing with psychological and existential dilemmas in life and in therapy (2005). Although he very strongly believes that foundational core issues exist in human experiences (which he identified as death, meaninglessness, isolation, and freedom) and in group therapy (which he identifies as his now classic 11 therapeutic factors), he also emphasizes the unique complexity and diversity of every human’s journey

Leadership in Group Practice: Using Past and Current Knowledge to Move Toward the Future

The Association for Specialists in Group Work is an organization whose primary focus is upon conducting groups. As the main outlet for scholarly work of ASGW, The Journal for Specialists in GroupWork emphasizes the publication of articles that describe, explain, conceptualize, and measure ways in which professional group workers think about and act in groups to enhance group effectiveness for the clients they serve. The process of planning, conducting, and evaluating groups is often referred to as group leadership in the broad sense, a very useful and respected term used in a myriad of ways to convey complex meanings and to assist group workers in their quest to understand and improve their professional knowledge and behavior as they provide services to people in groups. This is so fundamental to our professional identity that it may evoke a response of, ‘‘Of course, but what is the point?’’ In the December 2004 issue of The Journal for Specialists in Group Work (Ward, 2004), I alluded to the level of excellence of leadership in practice, training, and work in our professional organizations of ASGW members such as Sam Gladding (former ASGW and now ACA President), Carolyn Thomas (former ASGW and now ACA Treasurer), Bob Conyne and others (ASGW presidents, editors, and ACA Governing Council representatives who have provided outstanding contributions to ASGW and the ACA), and to Gerry Corey, Diana Hulse-Killacky, and Rex Stockton, who have been recognized as three of the first four Fellows by the American Counseling Association. Diana was also one of the four women whose professional knowledge, skills, and leadership are the focus of a DVD describing Four Models for Women in Counselor Education (2003) by Betsy Page, Marty Jencius and ACES. The excellence of the achievements of these and the many other ASGW members and leaders who have and continue

The Challenge of Defining Techniques in Group Work

One of the most important functions a professional organization and its associated journal can endeavor to perform is to provide forums through which professionals can identify and describe conceptual systems for understanding, applying, investigating, and teaching the information of interest. In the case of the Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW) and the Journal for Specialists in Group Work (JSGW), the topic is, of course, working with groups, which renders the function infinitely interesting, complex, and important. In my opinion, an issue that continues to challenge the field of counseling and mental health in general, and group work more specifically, is that of the difficulty of defining and organizing our identification, understanding, application, and study of counselor and=or group worker facilitative and therapeutic behavior or techniques. One of the difficulties is that the language used by mental health practitioners has not been consistently operationally defined in relation to the identification and explication of techniques. The term ‘‘technique’’ has been used when referring to the most general, such as ‘‘the technique of psychotherapy,’’ to the most specific paraverbal microskill, such as minimal encouragers (e.g., ‘‘um-hmm’’), as well as to counselor activities at the wide range of possibilities between these two extremes. Terms such as interventions, skills, microskills, practices, and others have been used to refer to some aspect of counselor activities. At times the purpose or target of the counselor activity has been the focus of the descriptor in such terms as ‘‘free association’’ or ‘‘intentions.’’ It is little wonder that the very complexity of human beings and of the change-promoting activities mental health counselors use to assist others to learn, change,

Regrouping groups: A reaction to waldo and bauman

Abstract The development of the ASGW four-category system for classifying types of group work is described (ASGF 1991,1992). Strengths and limitations of the Waldo and Bauman (1998) proposed Goals and Process matrix (GAP for group work categorization are identified and discussed in relation to the present ASGW system.

Possibilities and Directions for Progress in Understanding and Applying Group Work

The world is becoming more complex. Available information is increasing exponentially. These propositions are generally accepted in modern society. In many ways, current trends in group work are consistent with these assumptions. In the process of reviewingmanuscripts submitted for publication in the Journal for Specialists in Group Work, I am continually impressed by the variety of kinds of groups and their applicationsdescribedbyauthors. Group workers appear to be moving toward adapting principles of group work and extending the use of groups to people, purposes, and problems in contexts barely imagined a short time ago. This trend is consistent with the heuristic dimension of modern group work that began with the excitement about the potential applications and knowledge implications of the original T-group experience in 1946. Lewin’s sudden and unexpected death in 1947, which occurred while the reactions to this novel and powerful group movement were beginning to gain momentum, resulted in a great deal of experimentation with new and unique adaptations of the original model. In the 1960s, when rapid changes in the social climate in the United States stimulated massive experimentation, new types of groups again proliferated. A great deal of effort has been expended by scholars, theorists, and researchers since the 1970s to anchor our understanding of group work in a theoretical base through journals dedicated to group work,