Week 11: The Ending Stage And Evaluation ✓ Solved

Week 11 The Ending Stage And Evaluationthe Ending Stage Of A

The ending stage of a group is just as important as the beginning stage. Effective termination is an important part of the therapeutic process and an expectation of the NASW Code of Ethics (1996). Some members of the group may need further therapy or services, and it is the responsibility of the clinical social worker to assess every member’s needs. Also, the members should feel that some type of closure has occurred, and this is often done through ending exercises. These exercises help the members of the group say goodbye to one another and acknowledge the group’s accomplishments.

Another important part of the ending stage is the evaluation of the group intervention. The NASW Code of Ethics (1996) requires that some type of evaluation method is implemented in clinical practice. The social worker should evaluate the group’s goals and the level of success of the group process.

Paper For Above Instructions

The concluding stage of a group is a critical moment in the therapeutic journey. It is essential not only for the therapeutic closure it signifies but also for the preservation of the progress made throughout the group experience. In my recent group experience, I found the ending stage to be a well-rounded process that offered reflections, farewells, and evaluations that allowed for a comprehensive understanding of our collective journey.

Reflecting on the overall process of the group, I realized that we embarked on a journey that allowed for significant personal and collective growth. Initially, the group was characterized by unease and uncertainty as members grappled with their roles and the dynamic interplay of personalities. However, as we progressed through the sessions, mutual trust and understanding developed, forming a strong sense of cohesion. This gradual evolution was indicative of the stages outlined by Toseland and Rivas (2017), which emphasize the importance of a strong foundation in the early phases of group dynamics to facilitate openness and vulnerability in later stages.

Throughout the group experience, I felt a myriad of emotions, ranging from apprehension in the initial meetings to relief and pride at the conclusion. I was particularly struck by how the group helped to foster personal connections. Being in a supportive environment where each member contributed their unique perspectives enabled a richer discussion of relevant issues. The emotional connections developed over the sessions were palpable and made our termination exercises more poignant.

To effectively evaluate our group experience, I chose to utilize the "Group Questionnaire" method as described by London (2007). This evaluation technique allowed us to assess multiple facets of the group process, including satisfaction, perceived outcomes, and the overall effectiveness of our interactions. Prior to the final session, each member completed the questionnaire, which included both quantitative and qualitative questions designed to capture their experiences.

The results from the evaluation highlighted several strengths within the group, such as the high degree of satisfaction and the recognition of personal growth. Many members expressed that the group discussions provided them with valuable insights and coping strategies that they found beneficial, which aligned with our initial goals of personal development and shared learning. Furthermore, the collective feedback emphasized the importance of engagement and support, both of which were present throughout our sessions.

Nonetheless, as constructive as the evaluation was, it brought to light certain areas that could have been improved. One particular aspect I would have changed in the process is the allocation of time towards group discussions focused on individual experiences. While we did foster a safe space for sharing, some members felt that they did not have adequate time to explore personal narratives fully. In hindsight, I could have advocated for extended group discussions or incorporated additional sessions dedicated to individual storytelling. This shift could have allowed for deeper connections and a greater sense of closure.

This idea resonates with the central theories discussed in our readings. According to Toseland and Rivas (2017), it is crucial for group leaders to periodically assess group dynamics and member satisfaction. Engaging in formative evaluations throughout the process could allow for timely interventions that enhance the group's effectiveness. Additionally, making space for all voices can lead to richer, more varied discussions and a more satisfying conclusion for every participant.

Hence, as we concluded the group sessions, it was vital to focus on the closing rituals that provided a platform for members to share their appreciations and reflections. These rituals served not just as farewells, but as affirmations of the growth experienced by each member. Everyone had the opportunity to express what they gained and to acknowledge the contributions of others, solidifying the connections formed during our time together.

In conclusion, navigating the ending stage of a group is multifaceted and critical to the therapeutic process. The blend of evaluating our experiences, acknowledging our growth, and closing the sessions in a meaningful way contributed to a holistic understanding of the group dynamic. Although I recognize areas for improvement, the overall experience underscored the value of effective group work and therapeutic closure. This evaluation not only reinforces the importance of reflective practice but also serves as a reminder for me as a future social worker to continually assess and adapt to the needs of group members to foster both engagement and support.

References

• Toseland, R. W., & Rivas, R. F. (2017). An Introduction to Group Work Practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
• London, M. (2007). Performance appraisal for groups: Models and methods for assessing group processes and outcomes for development and evaluation. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59(3), 175–188.
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social Work Case Studies: Concentration Year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.
• National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (1996). Code of Ethics.
• Yalom, I. D. (2005). The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
• Corey, G., Corey, M. S., & Callanan, P. (2014). Issues and Ethics in the Helping Professions (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Schiller, M., & Beck, D. (2014). Group Therapy: A Research-Based Guide. New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Kivlighan, D. M., & Caglar, A. (2015). A New Perspective on Group Process: An Investigation of the Group Experience Inventory. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 19(1), 43-58.
• Friedman, M. (2010). The Power of Group Psychotherapy. Psychology Today. Retrieved from www.psychologytoday.com
• Burlingame, G. M., & Fuhriman, A. (2013). The Evolving Nature of Group Therapy: A New Look at an Old Concept. American Psychological Association.