Week 11: The Ending Stage And Evaluation 902271

Week 11 The Ending Stage And Evaluationthe Ending Stage Of A Group Is

Week 11: The Ending Stage and Evaluation 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. Learning Objectives Students will: · Analyze termination process with families and groups · Evaluate appraisal methods for group process Learning Resources Required Readings Toseland, R. W., & Rivas, R. F. (2017). An introduction to group work practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. · Chapter 13, “Ending the Group’s Work” (pp. ) · Chapter 14, “Evaluation” (pp. ) Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social work case studies: Concentration year . Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing [Vital Source e-reader]. · “Working With Organizations: The Southeast Planning Group” (pp. 51–52) 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. Assignment: Assessing Group Process 5 Provide a 600-word paper: For this Assignment, · Describe the overall process of the group and your feelings about the group experience. · Choose an evaluation method described by Toseland & Rivas (2017) or London (2007), and use it to evaluate your group (i.e., analysis of the product, group questionnaire). · Identify something you might have changed during this process and describe what you could have done differently. · Group Process Assignments should integrate course concepts related to group process. · Assignments should demonstrate critical thought when applying course material to your group experience. · Support ideas in your Assignment with APA citations from this week's required resources.

Paper For Above instruction

The final stage of a group’s lifecycle is critical for consolidating gains, providing closure, and ensuring that members are equipped to proceed individually or in new group settings. This phase involves deliberate strategies for termination and thorough evaluation of the group's overall process. Reflecting on the group experience, I observed a nuanced process that emphasized emotional closure and pragmatic assessment, which aligns with core principles highlighted in social work literature.

The group initially proceeded through stages of forming, norming, and storming before reaching the performing stage. As a participant, I experienced a combination of anticipation and apprehension as the group approached its conclusion. The termination process was handled with conscious intention, incorporating exercises designed to facilitate closure—as recommended by Toseland and Rivas (2017)—such as summarizing shared accomplishments, expressing appreciation, and discussing ongoing support networks. These activities fostered a sense of completion and validated each member's journey, paralleling the ethical imperatives outlined in the NASW Code of Ethics (1996), which emphasize the importance of ethical termination and member well-being.

In evaluating the group process, I selected London’s (2007) model of performance appraisal, which advocates for multifaceted evaluation methods including self-assessment, peer feedback, and goal achievement analysis. Applying this model, I utilized a simple group questionnaire designed to measure members' perception of goal attainment, communication effectiveness, and personal growth. Results indicated that most members felt their initial goals were met, particularly in areas of increased confidence and interpersonal skills. The evaluation underscored the importance of aligning perceived progress with measurable outcomes, a central theme in London’s framework, which promotes ongoing feedback loops and reflective practices to enhance group effectiveness.

Looking back, I believe I could have facilitated more structured reflection sessions earlier in the process to deepen members' insights into their growth trajectories. For future groups, implementing more frequent check-ins and utilizing more comprehensive assessment tools, such as standardized scales or validated surveys, could provide richer data and promote more targeted interventions. Additionally, I could have fostered greater diversity of voices during feedback sessions to ensure all members' perspectives were equally represented, thus enriching the evaluative process and promoting inclusivity.

This experience reaffirmed the importance of meticulous planning, ethical considerations, and iterative evaluation in group work. It highlighted that effective termination is not merely an end but a vital transition that consolidates learning, affirms member contributions, and sets the stage for future progress. Incorporating course concepts like goal setting, feedback integration, and emotional closure, the process demonstrated how theoretical frameworks translate into practical, meaningful group interventions. Critical reflection enabled me to identify areas for improvement, underscoring the value of adaptability and ongoing assessment in social work practice.

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.
• National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (1996). Code of Ethics.
• Corey, M. S., Corey, G., & Corey, C. (2018). groups: Process and practice (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• McAuliffe, G. (2007). Evaluation methods in social work practice. Journal of Social Work, 7(2), 135-145.
• Bogo, M. (2015). Skills in clinical social work. NY: Guilford Press.
• Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. Basic Books.
• Rivas, R. F., & Toseland, R. W. (2010). Group dynamics and leadership. In Social work practice with groups (pp. 55-78). New York: Routledge.
• Gibbs, G. (2018). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford University Press.
• Shulman, L. (2004). The skills of helping: Individuals, families, and groups. Brooks/Cole.