The article I chose to read was titled Socialization Groups: Using The Book of Questions as a Catalyst for Interaction. What about this article that caught my eye was the fact that they were using a book solely of questions as a means of an assessment. As an OT student, when I think of assessments, I automatically think of the standard one's used across the board. This gave me an insight on how we, as OT's, can turn nothing into a valuable something, such as this book.
The Book of Questions, in an assessment means, is basically a self-report questionnaire and interview between oneself and other group members. This "interview" allows the therapist to collect a dynamic assessment of that individual. The book also works as a social activity, in which the clients get to simulate verbal interaction between others. This allows the therapist to get a view of that client's ability to socially and interpersonally interact. Many other valuable information can be collected from this "assessment" such as: the ability to imagine, their use of concrete and abstract thinking, their line of defense and coping mechanisms. From a group facilitation standpoint, this assessment has high levels of effectiveness at the Montefiore Medical Center. After only 8 months of switching to this inception of the group, it has been identified as the most successful group in the occupational therapy program at this specific inpatient facility.
I wish I had found and read this article before administering my individual group facilitation because it might have changed my mind on what topic I would facilitate over. I just loved how much insight this simple activity gave the therapist. Whether it be revealing a client's personal experience, to hypothetical reasoning, to personality characteristics, or to their interpersonal view of themselves, it gave the therapist a well rounded assessment and evaluation of those specific clients. I think the best part about it though was the want and access to this book after client's have been discharged. The book's purpose wasn't just meant for mental health patients, but for anyone seeking an opportunity to become socially interactive. It has the power to build old relationships and develop new ones sampling by purchasing the book and starting a conversation with someone by asking the questions written right in front of you.
As a student, I would have loved to see this book in action. It seems to be a great investment and I think future students would benefit from it during the Groups course.
article.aspx
Wade, J.C. (June 1992). Socialization groups: Using the book of questions as a catalyst for interaction. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 46(6), 541-545. doi:10.5014/ajot.46.6.541
Thursday, March 8, 2018
12- Step Meeting
I, as a student, attended a alcoholics anonymous 12-step meeting on Sunday March 4, 2018. The group "leader" acted as a facilitator. I think this was done to keep the mood light and make it less difficult for the group members to share their thoughts and opinions. He shared that we was also an alcoholic himself from years past, which seemed to relax the newcomers. In my opinion, this was probably shared so the group members knew their "leader" could relate to them.
At the beginning, the facilitator reiterated that sharing wasn't required but encouraged throughout the entire meeting. Some discussions were open to all to speak in random orders, and other discussions were passed around the circle in a certain order. If someone hadn't said anything in a while, he would directly ask them if they had any thoughts about a certain topic. I say the majority of the group participated at all times, even if minimally, so there wasn't many needs to call certain people out.
The meeting I attended was at a church downtown. For some, I feel as if they felt intimidated for just being in a church rather than an AA meeting. This was never shared, just my observation. It was small (around 8 people) and intimate. They sat in a circle and I was listening a little ways away. I think sitting them in a circle had a huge impact on the amount of people sharing, as if they felt a closer connection to the people around them.
From the short amount of time I was there, I found this group to be extremely client-centered. The facilitator often stepped back and didn't speak unless it was absolutely necessary, such as the beginning of a new topic. He also stayed seated the whole time, as if he was letting them know that he was not superior but equal. It was also really interactive and followed what the members wanted to talk about / work on rather than what the facilitator felt was necessary for the group.
I definitely believe that the session was therapeutic for some, and for others not so much. As an observation, you could tell who really cared about being sober and who was there because they needed to be legally. You could also tell who had been attending longer than others based on friendships formed in the group and statements such as "as some of you know" and etc. No matter their AA background, they all seemed to get a long with the facilitator, in which is an important factor to building therapeutic relationships and rapport.
At the beginning, the facilitator reiterated that sharing wasn't required but encouraged throughout the entire meeting. Some discussions were open to all to speak in random orders, and other discussions were passed around the circle in a certain order. If someone hadn't said anything in a while, he would directly ask them if they had any thoughts about a certain topic. I say the majority of the group participated at all times, even if minimally, so there wasn't many needs to call certain people out.
The meeting I attended was at a church downtown. For some, I feel as if they felt intimidated for just being in a church rather than an AA meeting. This was never shared, just my observation. It was small (around 8 people) and intimate. They sat in a circle and I was listening a little ways away. I think sitting them in a circle had a huge impact on the amount of people sharing, as if they felt a closer connection to the people around them.
From the short amount of time I was there, I found this group to be extremely client-centered. The facilitator often stepped back and didn't speak unless it was absolutely necessary, such as the beginning of a new topic. He also stayed seated the whole time, as if he was letting them know that he was not superior but equal. It was also really interactive and followed what the members wanted to talk about / work on rather than what the facilitator felt was necessary for the group.
I definitely believe that the session was therapeutic for some, and for others not so much. As an observation, you could tell who really cared about being sober and who was there because they needed to be legally. You could also tell who had been attending longer than others based on friendships formed in the group and statements such as "as some of you know" and etc. No matter their AA background, they all seemed to get a long with the facilitator, in which is an important factor to building therapeutic relationships and rapport.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)