De Jong, P., & Berg, I. K. (2007). Learner’s workbook for Interviewing for solutions 3rd (Reference for assignment).
Assessment aim The aim of this assessment is to assess your ability to interview in the style of either/both a post-modernist approach or Motivational Interviewing approach. It will also assess your ability to critically self-reflect on your performance. A vital competency in counselling is an ability to recognise areas of competence – Assessment details and tasks 6 areas that need further development against a solid theoretical understanding of the model and the skills.
Tasks Task 1: Recording Record a counselling session (with interviewee consent) demonstrating your usage of one or a combination/integration of both approaches learnt in this course. Write out the transcript of your responses and the times they occur.
Task 2: Analysis Provide your analysis of the following areas (using the same format as below). Note that the transcript sections and start and stop times are essential. It is required that when commenting on a skill or section, that you put the start stop time and transcript section as a footnote in the place you are discussing it. If start and finish times relative to the skills in discussion are not included with skill discussions, these sections will not be marked.
1. Introduction to the assignment, including indicating the model/s you are using (1 paragraph)
2. Summarise the client’s story (1 paragraph)
3. Identify and critique interventions (including intervention sets) that you used which are congruent with the approach/es.
4. Identify and discuss interventions (including intervention sets) in the interview that are not congruent with the selected model/s, including analysis on any other areas that may need attention.
5. Summarise the process of the entire interview commenting on where it was congruent or not congruent with the selected model/s.
6. Summarise key learning highlighting what you did that was helpful, what was less helpful, and provide constructive suggestions for what you might have done instead of the less helpful interactions.
Terminology Intervention: A single intentional skill used by the counsellor. Example: The scaling question. Intervention set: A set of skills used by the counsellor. For example, the scaling question with its accompanying follow up questions. Process: How the interview happens. Process may involve identifying whether the interview appeared congruent with the model process or not, or perhaps if there was a process issue such as the client dominating the conversation
Assessment details and tasks 7 the counsellor remains generally silent or passive. It is not focussed on interventions or skill sets, but on the broader process.
Example of segments from part 3 and 4 of an analysis including example times: My use of the scaling question were generally congruent with the model. At 9:15 I used a scaling of confidence question, and utilised scaling follow up questions about how come the client is so high, what helped, and what might help the client go higher (9:20-12:23). This scaling question and the follow up questions were congruent with those recommended by Berg (1996, p.23). My use of the miracle question was a congruent intervention but delivered in a problematic manner. The miracle question is recommended to have a number of features including a reduction of verbal pace, an introduction to the question as being different or unusual, have pauses to help prepare the client for a transition from problem to solution thinking. It also has a structure of when the miracle will occur, what happens (i.e. solved problem), and the discovery of signs a miracle has occurred (De Jong & Berg, 2008). In my miracle question (15:45-16:43) I defined the miracle as life being perfect and did not take into account many of the recommended guidelines mentioned above. The client responded with confusion. Rather than addressing it or amplifying the miracle with further miracle amplifying questions, I returned questioning the client about their problems (16:43- 22:03). This part attempted to utilise a classic SFT intervention however delivered it poorly and failed to follow up appropriately.