EDP 652
Theories of Counseling
DH 203
Dr. S.
Rostosky
Phone:
257-7880
Office hours
by appointment (231 Dickey Hall)
Purpose
The purpose of this course is to expose the student to a variety of contrasting theoretical models and to provide a foundation for critically evaluating the practical applications of a variety of counseling perspectives.
Learning
Outcomes
By the end of this course, each student should be able to:
·
Understand
how his or her psychosocial and cultural context influences his or her values,
worldview, and, therefore, his or her choice of theoretical framework.
·
Discuss
the similarities and differences among various theoretical perspectives.
·
Evaluate
a primary source that describes a counseling theory.
·
Discuss
professional, ethical, and diversity issues that pertain to various theories
·
Apply
theoretical concepts to case material.
·
Use
critical thinking, personal reflection, and professional writing skills to
explore and begin to form a personal theoretical orientation for use in
conceptualizing work with clients.
Required Learning
Activities:
Required reading:
Corey, G. (2001).
Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (6th
Ed.) Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Corey, G. (2001).
Case approach to counseling and psychotherapy (5th
ed.).
Recommended
reading:
(on reserve in Education Library)
Corsini, R. J. & Wedding, D. (1999). Current Psychotherapies (5th
Ed.). Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock.
Prochaska, J.O. & Norcross, J.C. (1999). Systems of Psychotherapy: A
Transtheoretical Analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Optional:
Corey, G. (2001). Student manual for theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (6th Ed).
Learning
Activities (continued)
Personal Reflection Papers: Each student will
complete a total of five reflection papers (2-3 pages, double-spaced). The
purpose of these papers is to forge connections between important theoretical
constructs and personal experiences and to communicate these connections
clearly and succinctly. Papers will be shared in small groups and responded to
in writing (see handout for details) (20
points).
Theoretical
Orientation Paper: As G. Corey notes, integrating theory, personal values, interaction
style, and specific client needs requires time, attention, effort, and
experience. The purpose of this paper
is to begin this process of exploration and integration.
In Part I of the paper, articulate your own personal
theoretical orientation to counseling.
Draw on your readings, class discussions, and personal reflections. Be
sure to integrate at least two theories (do not regurgitate Corey; Use at least
one “primary source” for each theory that you integrate). Include the key
concepts of your approach, your view of your role as therapist, therapeutic
goals, and central techniques and methods.
Explain why this approach “fits” for you as a counselor
(6-8 pages).
In Part II
of the paper, tell how you would use your theoretical framework as explicated
in Part I to address two of the themes in Ruth’s life (Case Approach,
page 307-308). Again, do not merely
summarize the material in the Case Approach book; instead, show that you can
apply your own theoretical integration (5-6 pages). (40 points). (There is an automatic 10 percent penalty per 24-hours for failing to turn in
two copies of an acceptable draft for peer review on Nov 15. NO EXCEPTIONS!)
Peer-review. (10 points per paper: 20 points total)
Final Exam (20 points): The final will consist of a case example that you will respond to from
two different theoretical frameworks.
You should use two theories that you did NOT incorporate into your
theoretical orientation paper.
Total points accumulated:
90-100
= A
80-89
= B
70-79
= C
Below
70 = E
Papers will be collected at the
beginning of class on the day they are due.
In-class assignments and points cannot be made up if you miss class.
Reflection papers, peer reviews, and theory papers are considered late and will
be penalized 10% of the total point value for each 24-hour period that they are
past due.
Class attendance, preparation, and participation are expected of all
students. Please email or call Dr. R if
an emergency prevents you from attending a class. Excellent work and consistent preparation is expected of graduate
students. A minimum amount of
time you should invest in your out-of-class preparation is 8-9 hours per week
(per class). More than one unexcused absence could result in a lowering of
your grade by as much as 10%.
|
DATE |
TOPIC |
Learning
Activity Due: |
|
Aug
23 |
Overview
and Introductions |
***Each
class period you should come to class prepared to discuss the chapters in the
Theories book and the Case Approach book that correspond to
the topic for the week. |
|
Aug
30 |
The
Counselor: Person and Professional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept
6 |
Ethical
Issues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept
13 |
Psychoanalytic
Therapy |
Reflection paper #1 due |
|
|
|
|
|
Sept
20 |
Adlerian
Therapy |
Reflection paper #2 due |
|
|
|
|
|
Sept
27 |
Existential
Therapy |
Reflection paper
#3 due |
|
|
|
|
|
Oct
4 |
Person-Centered
Theory |
Reflection Paper
#4 due |
|
|
|
|
|
Oct
11 |
Gestalt
Therapy |
Reflection Paper #5 due |
|
|
|
|
|
Oct
18 |
Behavioral/Cognitive
Behavior Therapy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct
25 |
Reality
Therapy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov
1 |
Feminist
Therapy |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov
8 |
Family
Systems Therapy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov
15 |
Integrative
Perspective |
Theoretical Orientation
Paper draft (2 copies) due |
|
|
|
|
|
Nov
22 |
Thanksgiving
holiday (no
class) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov
29 |
Peer
Review Workshop |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec
6 |
Wrap
Up |
Theoretical Orientation
Paper Due |
|
Dec
13(1:00) |
Final
Exam |
|
#1: Write a letter to
Freud. Tell him what you think of his
contribution to psychology and how his theory applies to your life (or how it
does not apply).
#2: Choose one of the
following:
·
In
addition to focusing on the family constellation, Adlerians ask for a few early
recollections. What is your earliest
memory? What meaning does this
recollection hold for you today?
·
Adler
sees us as the actor, creator, and artist of our life. How does this description fit your own life
experience?
#3: Write your obituary. What existential themes are reflected in it?
#4: Think of a person who
seems to meet your definition of fully functioning. How is that person different than other people? What changes would you need to become more
fully functioning yourself?
#5: Gestalt therapists speak about “catastrophic
expectations” that lead us to feel stuck.
We imagine some terrible thing will happen if ____. What are some of your unreasonable
fears? What risks do you avoid taking
because of those expectations? How
might you attempt to help a client deal with his or her catastrophic
expectations?
Scoring guide
for Reflection Papers
|
3 points: |
Paper integrates theoretical constructs and
personal experience. Paper is written
in a clear, understandable way without grammatical, structural, spelling
problems. |
|
2 points |
Paper is lacking in one of two criteria listed
above. |
|
1 point |
Paper is lacking in both of the criteria listed
above |
|
0 points |
Paper was not submitted in a timely manner |
1 additional point will be earned by providing short
responses to share with the small group at the end of each ‘reflection’ period
about what you learned from the exercise.
A few guiding
questions to ponder as you organize your theoretical orientation paper:
q
What
do you consider the most important therapeutic goals? Which theoretical orientations would most guide you in
formulating your goals?
q
What
do you see as your major responsibility as a helping agent? What would you expect of your clients? How do you view the relationship between
you and your clients? Which theories
are compatible with your answers to these questions?
q
What
are your basic assumptions about human nature?
Which approach to therapy comes the closest to your beliefs?
q
Given
your basic assumptions, what procedures will you use with clients to achieve
the therapeutic goals?
Procedure for
Peer Review workshop for drafts of Theoretical Orientation papers:
Prior
to this workshop, please carefully read the two papers you are assigned
and draft typewritten comments addressing the questions below. Bring the two marked drafts and two copies
of your typed comments with you to class for use in your small group.
Class
members will work together in triads.
Each reviewer will summarize their comments and allow the author to ask
questions about the feedback. Each
paper will be discussed for 20 minutes.
At the end of the discussion, each author will receive one copy of the
two reviews to use in his/her next revision.
One copy of each review should be turned in to the instructor at the end
of class to receive credit for the assignment.
Prior to the workshop, each reviewer should address
the following points for each draft:
1. Note with a wavy line in the
margins of each draft all places where you got confused as a reader.
2. Type out your assessment of
the strengths and weaknesses of the writer’s ideas. Assuming that the quality of thinking in a
paper is of utmost importance, respond to the ideas in this draft. Where do you disagree with the writer?
3. Reread the draft, looking
for quality of support. Does the writer
offer sufficient details to support his/her arguments? Has the author incorporated at least two
primary sources in addition to the Corey text?
4. Write out at least two things
that you think are particularly strong about this draft.
5. Note any questions that rise
from your reading of the paper (indicating that an idea may need further
explanation or development).
6. Make three or four directive
statements recommending specific changes that the writer should make to improve
the quality of the next draft.
Grading
criteria for theoretical orientation paper
Quality of Ideas: (25 points)
Integrates
theoretical constructs and personal experiences in a way that communicates a
range and depth of understanding that will positively impact clinical
work. Shows an appropriate sense of
complexity of theoretical issues and an awareness of opposing viewpoints. Incorporates
material from at least one primary source for each theory.
Organization and development: (5 points)
Has an
effective title, a logical and clear arrangement of ideas, effective
transitions, unified and coherent paragraphs, and good development of ideas
through use of supporting details and examples.
Clarity and Style: (5 points)
Sentences
are clear and understandable. Sentence structure is varied, mature, and even
graceful J
Writing Mechanics (5 points)
Absence of
usage and grammatical errors; accurate spelling; careful proofreading;
attractive and appropriate manuscript form.
Erikson, E.H. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.) NY: Norton.
Freud, S. (1955).
The interpretation of dreams. London: Hogarth Press.
Jung, C.G. (1961). Memories, dreams, reflections. NY: Vintage.
Strupp, H.
& Binder, J. (1984) Psychotherapy in a new key: A guide to
time-limited dynamic psychotherapy. NY: Basic
Adler, A. (1964).
Social interest: A challenge to mankind. NY: Capricorn.
(originally published in 1938).
Ansbacher, H.L., & Ansbacher, R. (Eds.).
(1964). Individual psychology of
Alfred Adler (2nd ed.).
New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Rogers, C. (1961).
On becoming a person.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. (1980).
A way of being. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Frankl, V. (1969).
The will to meaning: Foundations and applications of logotherapy. NY: New America.
Frankl, V. (1978).
The unheard cry for meaning.
NY: Simon & Schuster/Touchtone.
May, R. (1953).
Man’s search for himself.
NY: Dell.
May, R. (1983).
The discovery of being: Writings in existential psychology. NY: Norton.
Yalom, I.D. (1980).
Existential psychotherapy.
NY: Basic.
Yalom, I.D. (1989).
Love’s executioner and other tales of psychotherapy. NY: Basic.
Perls, F. (1969a).
Gestalt therapy verbatim.
Moab, UT: Real People Press.
Perls, F. (1969b). In and out of the garbage pail. Moab, UT: Real PeoplePress.
Polster, E. & Polster, M. (1973). Gestalt therapy integrated. NY: Vintage.
Glasser, W. (1998). Choice theory: A new
psychology of personal freedom. NY:
Harper Collins.
Glasser, W. (2000).
Reality therapy in action.
NY: Harper Collins.
Lazarus, A. (1989). The practice of multimodal therapy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lazarus, A. (1997).
Brief but comprehensive psychotherapy: The multimodal way. NY: Springer.
Beck, A.T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and
emotional disorders. NY: New
American Library.
Beck, A.T. (1988).
Love is never enough. NY:
Harper & Row.
Bandura, A. (1977).
Social learning theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986).
Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ellis, A. (1985).
Overcoming resistance: rational emotive therapy with difficult
clients. NY: Springer.
Ellis, A. (1994).
Reason and emotion in psychotherapy revised. NJ: Birch Lane.
Ellis, A. (1996).
Better, deeper, and more enduring brief therapy: The rational emotive
behavior therapy approach. NY:
Brunner/Mazel.
Ellis, A., & Dryden, W. (1997). The practice of rational-emotive behavior
therapy. NY: Springer.
Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Cognitive behavior modification: An integrative approach. NY: Plenum.
Meichenbaum, D. (1985). Stress innoculation training. NY: Pergamon Press.
Brown, L. (1994).
Subversive dialogues: Theory in feminist therapy. NY: Basic.
Jordan, J.V. et al (1991). Women’s growth in connection: Writings from the stone center. NY: Guilford.
Jordan, J.V. (Ed.) (1997). Women’s growth in diversity: More writings from the stone
center. NY: Guilford.
Worell, J. & Johnson, N.G. (Eds.)(1997). Shaping the future of feminist
psychology: Education, research, and practice. Washington, DC: APA.
Worell, J. & Remer (1992). Feminist perspectives in therapy: An
empowerment model for women. NY:
Wiley.
Bowen, M. (1978).
Family therapy in clinical practice. NY; Aronson.
DeShazer, S. (1991). Putting difference to work. NY: Norton.
Haley, J. (1984).
Ordeal therapy: Unusual ways to change behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Haley, J. (1976).
Problem-solving therapy: New strategies for effective family therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mandanes, C. (1981). Strategic family therapy.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mandanes, C. (1984). Behind the one-way mirror: Advances in the practice of
strategic therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Satir, V. (1983).
Conjoint family therapy (3rd ed.) Palo alto, CA:
Science and Behavior Books.
Satir, V. (1988).
The new peoplemaking.
Palo Alto: CA: Science and Behavior Books.