Group Facilitation : Functions and Skills

Small Group Research http://sgr.sagepub.com/

Group Facilitation : Functions and Skills L. Frances Anderson and Sharon E. Robertson Small Group Research 1985 16: 139 DOI: 10.1177/104649648501600202 The online version of this article can be found at: http://sgr.sagepub.com/content/16/2/139

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Small Group Research can be found at: Email Alerts: http://sgr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://sgr.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://sgr.sagepub.com/content/16/2/139.refs.html

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

Although the amount of literature on groups is growing at a rapid rate, concise delineation of the functional and skill expectations of group facilitators is relatively rare. This article attempts to articulate and discuss a model based on a specific set of assumptions about causality and effectiveness in interactional groups. The authors discuss personal qualities of group facilitators and propose five major functions and seven skill clusters central to effective group facilitation.

GROUP FACILITATION Functions and Skills L. FRANCES ANDERSON SHARON E. ROBERTSON University of Calgary

of groups in counseling and therapy has become increasingly popular in a wide variety of settings, and this popularity has brought with it a concomitant concern for the training and preparation of group leaders/counselors/facilitators. This concern has led both the American Personnel and Guidance Association (1967) and the Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (1974) to issue documents regarding the use of groups and/or guidelines for the training of group facilitators. Unfortunately these statements have tended to be of such a broad and general nature as to add little to an understanding of what knowledge and skills are required for the effective facilitation of groups, and how such knowledge and skills can best be achieved. Although it is widely agreed that competent group facilitation requires a special body of

The

use

Inquiries or requests for reprints should be directed to Dr. S. Robertson, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada 72N I N4.

AUTHORS’ NOTE:

SMALL GROUP BEHAVIOR, Vol 16 No 2, May 1985 139-156 a 1985 Sage Publications, Inc

139

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

140

knowledge and skills in addition to those required for individual counseling (Dyer and Vriand, 1975; Lechowicz and Gazda, 1975; Smith, 1976; Stokes and Tait, 1979; Williams, 1972), it remains an unfortunate reality that most group training programs are based on individual therapy models. As Yalom (1975) points out: It is not unusual for students to be given excellent intensive individual therapy supervision and then, early in their program, to be asked to lead therapy groups with no special guidance whatsoever. The program directors apparently expect that the student will be able somehow to translate his individual therapy training into group therapy skills [p. 503].

That is not to say that training institutions and experts in the field have ignored the issue. Indeed a considerable amount of literature has been generated on commonly employed training procedures (Berman, 1975; Jacobs et al., 1974; Lakin, 1970; Lakin et al., 1972; Lechowicz and Gazda, 1976).

However, most of these procedures either emphasize one mode of training (for example, didactic versus experiential versus role playing) or ignore some of the theoretical foundations on which the programs have been based. Collectively the literature would appear to contain all of the components necessary for a comprehensive analysis of group facilitator training, but the field lacks a parsimonious synthesis of the relevant material. This article attempts to fill that void by developing a concise framework of background material from which a training model would naturally and logically flow.

In short, the article includes discussions of: (1) The types of groups for which the facilitator is being trained, including what causes effective change in such groups and what personal characteristics of the facilitators are important; (2) the major functions or objectives of group facilitation; and (3) the specific skills or competencies that are required in the effective performance of these functions.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

141

GROUPS: DEFINITION AND CHANGE AGENTS

Massarik (1972) lists 39 types of groups and indicates that this proliferation of approaches makes it difficult to clearly define a simple monolithic set of standards. However, as Lieberman (1976) and Yalom (1975) point out, the goals, processes, and client populations of a wide variety of groups are closely related and often identical. The differences may reflect professional territorial boundaries more than substance. Yalom (1975: xi) states that &dquo;therapy groups which appear totally different in form may rely on identical mechanisms of change.&dquo; This would indicate that it should be possible to develop a single set of standards for group facilitation that would have applicability across a variety of group approaches.

However, to avoid ambiguity, perhaps a definition of &dquo;group&dquo; as it relates to this article would add clarity.

A group is

collection of two or more persons, together with facilitators, whose purpose is to enhance the intraand interpersonal functioning of those persons through an interactive, interpersonal communication process, which may or a

one or more

may not include structured

or

directed activities.

It should be noted that the group orientation on which the definition is based, and indeed the orientation that is implicit in much of this article, is best described as experiential, laboratory, and/or interactional. Furthermore, the client target population is assumed to be primarily adult, although the authors believe that the functions and skills discussed in later sections are applicable to facilitators of children’s groups as well.

Before moving into the major considerations of this article-what constitutes effective group facilitation--it would seem logical to address our assumptions surrounding causality and group effectiveness, including the personal qualities of the group facilitator. These assumptions are congruent with

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

142

leading theorists and practitioners in the field (Dies, 1977; Dinkmeyer and Muro, 1971; Egan, 1973; Johnson and Johnson, 1975; Ohlsen, 1970; Yalom, 1975). A consolidation of these assumptions is as follows: those of

(1) Personal growth is essentially a social process and as such can be most effectively developed through interactive and interdependent relationships with groups of people. In the type of groups defined in this article, personal growth is enhanced through a process of cultural permission not readily available in day-to-day living. Cultural permission implies that individuals are allowed, and allow themselves, to openly and honestly self-disclose their feelings about each other and to give each other feedback as to the impact of their interactive styles. Such self-disclosure and feedback is not normally practiced with people in our daily living, and thus the group experience offers a unique opportunity to gain valuable

personal insights. a number of people gives the opportunity for consensual validation of interpersonal reality; a chance to compare his or her perceptions

(2) Receiving direct feedback from individual

an

of self with those of others and to work toward congruence among a diversity of perceptual content.

(3) The opportunity to risk practicing new behaviors in a climate of trust and psychological safety increases the probability that individuals can increase their intra- and interpersonal effectiveness.

In summary,

we believe that the change agents in groups related to the opportunities to self-disclose feelings about self and others in the group, to give and receive feedback, to consensually validate a variety of perceptions, and to practice new behaviors-all in an atmosphere of acceptance and psychological safety.

Underlying these assumptions is one of a more fundamental nature, which relates to the personal qualities of the facilitator. In other words, certain personal facilitator characteristics are desirable in order that our basic assumptions as are

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

143

to what constitutes constructive

change in groups will be met. importance of facilitator characteristics in effecting change is consistent with that put forward by a number of writers in the field of group work. Egan (1973) states that the group facilitator must be adjusted and congruent with no artificial front and no fear of reacting honestly. Similarly Haiman (1951) indicated that the group leader is a well-adjusted person, secure and confident in his or her own personality and free of compulsions to be dominant. The constructs of honesty, genuineness, and congruence are addressed in virtually all of the literature on counselor education and are supported, along with empathy and acceptance, as being necessary attributes of all counselors, including those who work with groups. Truax and Mitchell (1971), in an extensive review of such research, indicated that such personal qualities may indeed be more important than techniques.

However, as both MacLennon (1975) and Dinkmeyer and Muro (1971) indicate, it is not enough that the individual has these qualities; he or she must be seen by group members to Our view of the

have them. Members must believe that the facilitator has the capacity to lead and that he or she cares for each of them as individuals.

Another area of personal qualities, and perhaps one not so nebulous as the above, relates to what Yalom (1975) refers to as a belief in the efficacy of groups. Lakin et al. (1972: 376) state that &dquo;the trainee needs to understand the unique character of the group as a medium for therapy&dquo;; but one must be cautious with the word &dquo;understand.&dquo; One can understand a construct or set of constructs cognitively, but the implication in most of the literature on personal qualities is that the facilitator must have an internalized personal belief system about how and why groups work. He or she believes in the capacity of human beings to change and in the group as an effective change agent.

There is a variety of terms to describe the personal qualities we believe are necessary in group facilitators, including self-

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

144

self-confidence,

for

others, nonjudgmental acceptance, genuineness, empathy, respect for others, vitality, and maturity. However, as Dinkmeyer and Muro (1971) indicate, a person possessing all of these qualities would indeed by atypical. For our purposes it would appear that the personal qualities for effective group facilitation can be grouped as follows: awareness,

concern

(1) Relationship Stance: The group facilitator displays genuineness, honesty (congruence), acceptance, and empathy.

(2) Self-Awareness: The group facilitator is aware of his or her strengths, weaknesses, fears, natural preferences, and modes of reacting to people in a wide variety of situations.

(3) Belief System: The group facilitator has an internalized personal belief system about helping and about groups as a medium for change.

FUNCTIONS OF GROUP FACILITATION

Following from the previous discussion one could state in simplistic terms that the function of the group facilitator is to create an atmosphere of psychological safety that promotes self-disclosure, feedback, and experimentation with alternate behaviors. Although true, such a global statement belies the complexity of the processes underlying growth and change in the group mode. More to the point, it would do little to enlighten neophyte group facilitators as to their role expectations. What follows, then, is an outline of the major functions of group facilitation; the perceptual/conceptual framework from which the facilitator works; and the rationale behind his or her behavior, techniques, and interventions in the group.

SELECTION AND PREPARATION

In order to

have

a

wisely select group members, the facilitator must clear 4dea of what the goals of the group will be, and

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

145

thus what kinds of individuals will most likely constitute the target population. Therefore, careful consideration needs to be given to what individuals could prevent the group from gaining maximum benefit from the experience. Such considerations need to be dealt with before the counselor conducts his or her initial screening interview so that he or she can ensure as much as possible that the finally selected group has a member composition such that maximum therapeutic and growth potential is available. It is unfortunate that this function receives such minor emphasis in training programs when there is some suggestion in the literature (Yalom, 1975; Lieberman et al., 1973; Schutz, 1961; Harrison, 1965; Ohlsen, 1970) that group composition is one of the most powerful factors in members’ determination of whether or not they benefit from the group experience.

Preparation of members involves pretraining in order to give them an understanding of what will be expected of them and what they can expect from the group experience. The goals, procedures, and methods to be used are carefully articulated in-order to decrease misconceptions. Only through such understanding can prospective members begin to formulate realistic personal goals that will be consistent with the opportunities available in the group.

ESTABLISHMENT OF FACILITATIVE NORMS

The group facilitator ensures the establishment of that will guide and encourage group interaction (for

norms exam-

ple, honesty, immediacy, spontaneity, nonjudgemental acceptance of others, high levels of involvement, high levels of appropriate self-disclosure, expression of affect/emotionality). Of course, inherent in this definition is the assumption that the facilitator will discourage the creation of norms that would discourage, stifle, and block spontaneous interaction among members.

As

related to a group’s interactive patterns tend to be established early in the group’s life, another implication norms

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

146

here is that the group facilitator needs to be relatively active in the early stages (that is, this function will be less important as the group becomes cohesive and has established effective interactive patterns).

The importance of this function is supported in most of the literature on group counseling and therapy. Egan (1973: 37) indicates, &dquo;One of the best things a facilitator can do is engage in the kinds of behavior that make for good group interaction.&dquo; In a similar vein, Yalom states: He endeavors to establish a code of behavioral rules, or norms, which will guide the interaction of the group.... It is the group therapist’s task to create a group culture maximally conducive to the proper type of group interaction [Yalom, 1975: 107].

article outlining the problems of beginning group psychotherapists, indicates that among those students who lack success as neophyte group facilitators are those who &dquo;could not promote or allow interaction among members, consequently blocking group development and movement&dquo; (p. 360).

Williams (1972), in

an

DEVELOPMENT OF A COHESIVE GROUP CLIMATE

Group cohesiveness is usually defined as &dquo;the sum total of all the factors influencing members to stay in the group&dquo; (Johnson and Johnson, 1975: 233). Yalom ( 1975) indicates that group cohesiveness is &dquo;a necessary precondition for effective therapy&dquo; (p. 47) and adds that &dquo;the therapist must recognize and deter any forces which threaten group cohesiveness&dquo; (p.

106). Bednar et al. (1974) list self-disclosure, meaningful group participation and empathy, and warmth and genuineness at both the group and individual level as important elements of group cohesion.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

147

Developing a climate of cohesiveness is in reality interrelated with the encouragement of group interaction in that group cohesiveness is enhanced by frequency and quality of interaction, and interactional quality is facilitated by group cohesiveness. It is thus extremely important that the group facilitator promote a cohesive climate wherein members will feel comfortable, psychologically safe, and willing to take risks.

As Williams (1972: 359) points out, a cohesive group &dquo;provides both a vehicle for increasing and deepening examination of individual feelings and conflicts and an experimental ground for interpersonal development.&dquo; CREATION OF AN INDEPENDENT INTERACTIONAL NETWORK

In order to maximize interpersonal growth in a group, it is important that members interact freely with each other rather than speak to or through the facilitator. In short, the facilitator relinquishes responsibility to the group so that a leaderdependent network is not maintained. The facilitator who sets himself up as the center of interactions &dquo;stifles the initiative of the participants, and initiative ... is central to the process&dquo; (Egan, 1973: 35). Relative to this need to give autonomy to the group is the Yalom and Lieberman (1971) study in which groups with the highest number of casualties had leaders who, among other characteristics, had extremely high stimulus input, were intrusive and authoritarian, and frequently structured the events of the group and took over from members.

A note of caution needs to be made here in that the group facilitator needs to recognize that premature execution of this function is antithetical to the development of group cohesiveness. Although in the beginning the facilitator helps direct members’ attention to each other, he or she must expect to

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

148

be the person to whom most verbalizations are addressed until the members have had an opportunity to &dquo;feel out&dquo; the group and identify their roles.

EXAMINATION OF GROUP PROCESSES

The group facilitator assists the group in examining and understanding the cognitive and affective experiences of the group. Lieberman et al. (1973) found that the most important factor in promoting member learning in groups was the facilitator’s ability to present conceptualizations that gave meaning to what members were experiencing. Johnson and Johnson (1975) strongly state that unless a person develops process-observation skills, he cannot become an effective leader; further, without feedback on its process, a group cannot function effectively for long [p. 43].

This function is perhaps the most difficult for a neophyte facilitator to perform, and perhaps logically so as the knowledge and skills required for its execution are the most difficult to obtain. In order for a facilitator to develop effective process-observation skills he or she must possess a model or models that provide the conceptual/perceptual framework from which to operate. Effective group facilitators do not operate on an ad hoc basis, using gut-level feelings as the stimuli for their interventions. As Lakin et al. (1972: 380) indicate, such a basis would likely lead to the facilitator’s missing &dquo;critical opportunities to make helpful interventions&dquo; and indeed &dquo;he may even work destructively, against the therapeutic process, without even realizing it.&dquo; In short, it is imperative that group facilitators (1) understand how people are helped in groups; (2) have sufficient knowledge of models of group therapy to enable them to understand what happens

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

149

in groups, and (3) be able to articulate their own implicit giving model as it relates to the group situation.

help-

SKILL REQUIREMENTS

In addressing functions one is actually building a framework, a conceptual foundation that gives the facilitator a

&dquo;feel&dquo; for his or her role in the group. How he or she performs or executes this role is another matter, and not a small one at that. Although an understanding of conceptual/perceptual functions is necessary for effective group facilitation, it is inadequate without the concomitant skills required to move the group and its members in a manner and direction that will ensure maximum benefit for all involved. Following logically from the assumptions we have made about groups, about agents of change in groups, and about the functions of the facilitator, a number of skills that are seen as being central to effective group facilitation may be delineated.

ATTENDING

actively listens to what is being said in Attending, or active listening skills, include:

The facilitator group.

the

(1) maintenance of eye contact; (2) physical attentiveness through body posture; and (3) verbal following behaviors, such as clarifying, paraphrasing, summarizing, and reflecting.

This cluster of skills is basic to all counseling processes.

Attending behaviors are as basic a set of skills in group facilitation as in individual counseling, with the added difficulty that there is more to attend to and thus more margin for error.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

150

COMMUNICATING CLEARLY

The facilitator displays verbal facility in all communications and minimizes incongruency between his or her verbal and nonverbal behaviors. A group facilitator who cannot communicate ideas and feelings accurately and clearly will promote confusion and diffusion, both of which are antithetical to the growth process in groups.

MODELING

The group facilitator must model the kind of behaviors that help members achieve their stipulated goals and the goals of the group. Although specific member or group goals will vary from group to group, the literature is replete with discussions of the behaviors that the group facilitator must be able to model (Bednar et al., 1974; Dies, 1977; Egan, 1973; Johnson and Johnson, 1975; Lieberman, 1976; Pino and Cohen, 1971).

Based on our assumption that the group and individual goals relate to personal growth through an interactive communication network, the facilitator models at least those behaviors that are basic to effective interpersonal communication, such as concreteness, appropriate self-disclosure, immediacy, giving and receiving feedback, nondefensiveness, and maintenance of a here-and-now focus.

Modeling is a skill most closely associated with the functions of encouraging group interaction and developing a climate of group cohesiveness. Although modeling by the facilitator will occur throughout the life of a group, it is most important during the early stages when the norming process is prevalent and when members are developing their interactive styles and patterns.

LINKING

The facilitator points out the similarities and differences in the cognitions and emotions of group members. Lifton

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

151

(1972: 166) indicates that the linking function &dquo;helps the members see the common concerns and facilitates identification between members.&dquo; Although it is important in all of the functions outlined, it has special import in creating a nonleader-dependent interactional network. As with other skills, linking is of primary importance early in the life of the group and of lesser importance as the group establishes fluid interactive patterns.

INTERPRETING

The facilitator is able to understand and communicate the underlying cognitive and emotional meaning of statements and experiences, both verbal and nonverbal, and at the intrapersonal, interpersonal and group levels.

This skill is most closely related to assisting the group examine and understand its experiences but will also be required in establishing an independent interactive network and to a lesser degree in all other activities. As MacLennan (1975: 178) points out, the facilitator must be expert in understanding &dquo;underlying feelings, themes and dynamic interactions.&dquo;

Similarly Egan He

states:

helps participants

focus

on

the way the group is

working

(or not working), the style of each individual’s participation (or non-participation) and the issues that are facing the group (or that the group is not facing). As a participant-observer, the facilitator attempts to reveal to the group its own dynamics and to clarify whether the individual participants are or are not achieving the goals of the group [1973: 11].

Recognizing prevailing group themes and subthemes in order help group members develop meaning from their discussion is, as has been stated earlier, one of the most difficult but important skills for a group facilitator to learn. In order to rpake effective interpretations the facilitator must not only have a high level of attending and communication skills but

to

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

152

also must be able to covert

synthesize

a

vast amount

of overt and

material.

REGULATING

The facilitator ensures that the activities of the individuals a group, and of the group as a whole, are congruent with (1) individual and group goals; (2) the ability (especially affective) of members to participate; and (3) the developmental stage of the group. Inherent in this expectation is that the facilitator is able to monitor the pace of group activities such that individuals do not become confused, frightened, or isolated. For example, the facilitator ensures that in

(1) individuals

or

subgroups do not dominate and that &dquo;silent&dquo; participate and have the opportunity

members are invited to to do so;

(2) agreed-upon norms are not violated or changed without group consensus;

(3) members maintain a here-and-now focus; (4) members operationalize an interpersonal feedback model effectively ; and situations detrimental to a member or the group are stopped (5) and discussed.

Regulating the group’s activities is basic to the effective functioning of the group and involves virtually all of the competencies of group facilitation. The facilitator regulates the group’s activities by modeling, questioning, clarifying, reinforcing (or not reinforcing), reflecting feelings, making process comments at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and group levels, teaching, linking, summarizing, confronting, and giving feedback. In short, the facilitator chooses from a broad repertoire of skills those that will have the most beneficial effect on the activity of the group into which he or she wishes to intervene. Implicit is the assumption that the most beneficial intervention may be no intervention, and the facilitator needs

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

153

develop regulating. to

a sense

of when this is the most effective way of

FACILITATING CLOSURE

that interpersonal and group issues resolved and facilitates the group’s movesatisfactorily ment into new areas. The necessity of facilitating closure will occur on a continuing basis during the life of a group. It requires that the facilitator be able to recognize issues and to help members work through these issues to ensure resolution.

The continuance of unresolved issues in a group can block its progress and decrease the interaction among members that is so vital to growth.

In summary, we have identified the skill clusters for effective group facilitation as being attending, communicating clearly, modeling, linking, interpreting, regulating, and facilitating change. Implicit and explicit in these clusters are the specific competencies required to ensure that beneficial change agents are active. To a large degree these are technical skills that can be learned and effectively used given that the facilitator has an internalized (and preferably personal) belief system about the efficacy of groups.

The facilitator

ensures

are

CONCLUDING COMMENTS

Although the amount of literature on groups is growing at an increasingly rapid rate, attempts at concisely delineating the functional and skill expectations of group facilitators are relatively rare. There is no doubt that leading writers in the field are concerned about the issue of what constitutes effective group facilitation, and indeed a comprehensive review of the literature indicates that there is significant agreement on what are thought to be core facilitator functions and competencies. However, what the field appears to be lacking is

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

154

consolidation of the varied positions into a parsimonious model of facilitator objectives and skills. In this article we have attempted to present such a model based upon a specific set of assumptions about what makes interactional groups effective.

We have suggested that the major functions of the group facilitator are (1) selection and preparation of members; (2) establishment of facilitative norms; (3) development of a cohesive group climate; (4) creation of an interactional network ; and (5) examination of group processes. It is further suggested that central to the execution of these functions are seven skill clusters, namely: (1) Attending; (2) Communicating a

clearly; (3) Modeling; (4) Linking; (5) Interpreting; (6) Regulating; and (7) Facilitating closure.

We

ting of

are

to

not unaware of the difficulties involved in

develop

a

single

attemp-

set of standards to meet the needs

broad base of group approaches. However, we believe strongly that our definition of &dquo;group&dquo; and our assumptions about effective change agents in such groups can be comfortably embraced by a majority of group facilitator educators.

Furthermore, we believe (indeed it is our primary purpose) that such background material can provide a theoretical and practical framework from which to build a comprehensive model of group facilitator training, including a criterion-based evaluation package. Not only should such a cohesive training package lessen the dysfunctional &dquo;fear-of-the-unknown&dquo; syndrome in group facilitator trainees (Lakin et al., 1972; Smith, 1976), but it would almost assuredly provide the field with a better base for the empirical study of facilitator impact and a

effectiveness.

REFERENCES American Personnel and Guidance Association (1967) "Standards for the preparation of secondary school counsellors." Personnel and Guidance J. 6: 96-106.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

155

Association for Counsellor Education and Supervision (1974) "Standards for the preparation of school counsellors and other personnel services specialists." J. of Employment Counselling 11: 133-144.

BEDNAR, R. L., C. WEET, P. EVENSEN, D. LANIER, and J. MELNICK (1974) "Empirical guidelines for group therapy: pretraining, cohesion and modeling." J. of Applied Behavioral Science 10: 150-164.

BERMAN, A. L. (1975) "Group psychotherapy training: issues and models." Small Group Behavior 6, 3: 325-344.

DIES, R. R. (1977) "Pragmatic leadership in psychotherapy and encounter group research." Small Group Behavior 8: 229-248.

DINKMEYER, D. and J. MURO (1971) Group Counseling: Theory and Practice.

Illinois: Peacock.

DYER, W. W. and J. VRIAND (1975) Counseling Techniques that Work: Applications to Individual and Group Counseling. Washington: APGA. EGAN, G. (1973) Face to Face. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

HAIMAN, F. S. (1951) Group Leadership and Democratic Action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

HARRISON, R. (1965) "Group composition models and laboratory design." J. of Applied Behavioral Science 1: 409-432.

JACOBS, E., D. BROWN, and A. RANDOLPH (1974) "Educating group counselors: a tentative model." Counselor Education and Supervision 4: 307-309.

JOHNSON, D. W., and F. P. JOHNSON (1975) Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

LAKIN, M. (1970) "Response to Coulson." Counseling Psychologist 2: 34-38.

---,M. A. LIEBERMAN, and D. S. WHITAKER (1972) "Issues in the training of group psychotherapists," in M. Seligman and N. F. Baldwin (eds.)

Counselor Education and Supervision. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

LECHOWICZ, J. S. and G. M. GAZDA (1976) "Systemic group counselor training : mastery model." Counselor Education and Supervision 16: 99-106.

---(1975) "Group counseling instructions: objectives established by experts."

Counselor Education and Supervision 15: 21-27.

LIEBERMAN, M. A. (1976) "Change induction in small groups." Annual Rev. of Psychology 27: 217-250.

---, I. YALOM, and M. MILES (1973) Encounter Groups: First Facts. New York: Basic Books.

LIFTON, W. M. (1972) Groups: Facilitating Individual Growth and Social Change.

New York: John Wiley.

MacLENNON, B. (1975) "The personalities of group leaders: implications for selection and training." Int. J. of Group Psychotherapy 25, 2: 177-183.

MASSARIK, F. (1972) "Standards for group leadership," in L. N. Solomon and B. Berzon (eds.) New Perspectives on Encounter Groups. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

OHLSEN, M. M. (1970) Group Counseling. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

PINO, C. J. and H. COHEN (1971) "Trainer style and trainee self-disclosure."

Int. J. of Group Psychotherapy 21: 202-213.

SCHUTZ, W. (1961) "On group composition." J. of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62: 275-281.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010

156

SMITH, E. J. (1976) "Issues and problems in the

group supervision of beginning problems." Counselor Education and Supervision 16: 13-24.

STOKES, J. P. and R. C. TAIT (1979) "The group incidents questionnaire: a measure of skill in group facilitation." J. of Counseling Psychology 26: 250-254.

TRUAX, C. B. and K. M. MITCHELL (1971) "Research on certain therapist interpersonal skills in relation to process and outcome," in A. E. Bergin and S. L. Garfield (eds.) Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. New York: John Wiley.

WILLIAMS, M. (1972) "Limitations, fantasies and security operations of beginning group psychotherapists," in M. Seligman and N. F. Baldwin (eds.)

Counselor Education and Supervision. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

YALOM, I. D. (1975) The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy. New

group

York: Basic Books.

---and M. Lieberman (1971) "A study of chives of General Psychiatry 25: 16-30.

encounter group

casualties." Ar-

L. Frances Anderson

is a Ph.D. candidate In educational psychology at the University of Calgary. She has a private psychological practice, specializing in individual and group therapy. She is a sessional lecturer in group therapy and group processes at the University of Calgary.

Sharon E. Robertson

is Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Calgary. Her research interests are in the areas of group therapy and family life education. She has published numerous articles in the family life education and counselor education fields.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on September 22, 2010