Critical Incidents in Counselor Education. Группа авторов
he do it from an inclusive stance. With CRT in mind, Professor Dixit reflected on his teaching approach to this point. He then explored potential strategies that could accentuate group counseling and group work while also drawing from the MSJCC. Ultimately, Professor Dixit wanted Carla to explore the issue of being disconnected from her group not only to help her become more self-aware but also to facilitate the development of her professional identity. If this approach did not work, Professor Dixit knew he would need to pursue a more direct strategy, such as having a formal discussion with Carla and encouraging her to seek out her own counseling outside the group experience. At this time, Professor Dixit believed he should place his trust in his pedagogical approach, as this might engage and elicit Carla’s strengths and resources within a communal experience.
Actions and Outcomes
Prior to the next class meeting, Professor Dixit decided to use a teaching strategy known as the 3-2-1 assignment (Rutherford, 2002) designed to help students form independent, critical thoughts about material and share their learnings with others (Alsamadani, 2011). Professor Dixit sent out an announcement to all students and emphasized the importance of mindfulness and intentionality when reading the assigned chapters. He explained that after they had read the chapters, he wanted them to (a) identify three words that captured the essence of the chapter, (b) develop two questions around challenging aspects of the reading, and (c) summarize one concept from the readings that had been experienced in a meaningful way during the counseling group.
When the class met the following week, Professor Dixit intentionally formed eight breakout groups of two or three students each so no breakout group consisted of members from a single counseling group. These breakout groups would serve to build a communal experience within the classroom. He asked the students in the breakout groups to share their reflections from the 3-2-1 assignment and any other thoughts associated with readings focused on the stages of the group process. Carla shared that her one meaningful takeaway was how she was afraid of the storming stage. There were things she wanted to express to her group, but she did not feel comfortable doing so. The other two students in Carla’s breakout group expressed similar thoughts and feelings.
Before making an announcement to end the breakout groups, Professor Dixit instructed students to “jot down one or two important or meaningful points from this breakout session.” He invited the students to rejoin as a whole class for that day’s lecture. As a supplement to the stages of group, Professor Dixit discussed Johari’s window (Luft, 1961) and connected the stages of group with how likely a group member was to expose content that was contained in each quadrant of Johari’s window. “For example,” Professor Dixit explained, “during the forming stage, it is more likely that group members will expose aspects of themselves that are held in the arena quadrant, the area that is open to yourself and others. But folks are not as likely to share aspects of themselves that are contained in the façade quadrant, as the group members have yet to develop the norm of pushing one another to be authentic. Authenticity typically arises when the group creates an environment of true trust, and this happens as a result of the storming stage.”
Professor Dixit went on to discuss Johari’s window in more detail and then returned students to their breakout groups. He encouraged them to discuss how the points they had identified in their initial breakout session fit within Johari’s window and group stages. He also challenged them to consider implications of their new learning for their development as professional counselors (i.e., an intersectionality of their identity development).
When she rejoined her breakout group, Carla shared that she was hesitant to disclose aspects of herself that were contained in the façade section of Johari’s window (aspects known to self but not known to others); however, she recognized that she was able to share in the breakout group because students in the group were connected around the idea of not feeling “totally safe.” Carla also made the connection that to be OK with the storming stage as a facilitator, she needed to be OK with going into the storming stage as a group member.
In her next counseling group reflection, Carla described her experience of sharing the effect Johari’s window had on her understanding of self. Although she was nervous, Thomas, the group facilitator, helped her “to make links with various group members.” She also described how her courage in talking about age differences created “external and internal conflict within the group, but the conflict led to deeper and honest conversations.” She concluded her reflection by noting that group dynamics “are now shifting toward the transition stage of group development” and that she was “more open to trusting the group process . . . even if the journey is challenging.”
Conclusion
When interacting with students who demonstrate resistance or difficulty engaging with class content, structure, or experiences, counselor educators must examine the process of teaching and learning. Just like counseling, teaching warrants reflection and intentionality. As demonstrated in Professor Dixit’s work with Carla, having a sound pedagogical approach helps counselor educators be reflective and also invites opportunities to use dynamic teaching strategies. As a result, the classroom becomes a community in which comprehensive learning is the shared goal.
Reflection Questions
1 What concerns might you have about a student who does not participate fully? What are instructors’ responsibilities when encountering students who participate minimally?
2 How did Professor Dixit encourage his students to explore their subjective understanding of self?
Critical Incident Response
Olga R. Dietlin and Jenny L. Chien
This case highlights the importance of considering the unique experiences and challenges of graduate students who enter master’s studies with significant life and career knowledge. Counseling programs attract a high percentage of older adult students (Schaefers, 2012), and experiences like Carla’s are likely to occur.
Older adult students sometimes display characteristics such as “respect, experience, enthusiasm, perfectionism, rigidity, greater need for faculty support, and a high number of demands external to the program” (P. J. Jordan, 2018, p. 5). Carla’s discouragement, disconnection, and resistance, coupled with her conscientiousness, mirror these characteristics. Older adult students may struggle to consider feedback from students who are younger than themselves, and they may have a tendency to “talk down,” be “motherly,” or show impatience with younger students (P. J. Jordan, 2018, p. 113). Older adult students may also have a tendency to develop stronger bonds and be more comfortable with same-age peers than with their younger colleagues (P. J. Jordan, 2018). Improving collegial relationships, rapport, and a sense of safety for older students is important. Professor Dixit needs to monitor and discuss these group dynamics to ensure all students are engaged in the experiences they need to be effective counselors. This would include exploring and challenging assumptions about commonalities and differences between groups.
In keeping with the MSJCC (Ratts et al., 2016), Professor Dixit could support Carla and encourage group development by exploring students’ beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and skills. An exploration of beliefs and attitudes includes self-growth experiences as recommended in the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014, Standard F.8.c.). Students should be encouraged to understand their experiences of self and their personal perspectives before beginning learning experiences (C. D. Chan et al., 2018; Melamed et al., 2020). This can be accomplished using case vignettes and reflection activities (Mitcham et al., 2013).
Professor Dixit may also introduce the concepts of bracketing and broaching. “Bracketing revolves around the counselor’s ability to take [their] own personal values and set them aside—suspend them—but not give them up or change them” (Kaplan et al., 2017, p. 116). This is a necessary skill for students to develop as they work with peers with different values and life experiences and transition to working with clients. It will be important for Professor Dixit to