Search results

The last chapter examined evidence based relationships from the perspective of emotional expression and the inner experience of the practitioner in relation to the client. In this chapter, I am introducing the first of a number of variables situated in evidence based relationships. Empathy, congruence, unconditional positive regard, and the real relationship will be discussed. I have chosen to categorise these four variables together due to their significant overlap and interaction with each other in terms of practice and research. This chapter does not attempt to provide an exhaustive description of each factor. Rather, I provide a very brief overview of the variable, provide an analysis of the research behind each, and highlight Top Tips that can guide the practitioner in their development.

Meaning-centered education situates meaning at the center of teaching and learning (Kovbasyuk & Blessinger, 2013). By incorporating learning objectives from additional learning domains – namely the affective domain – meaning-centered learning should enhance students’ personal and professional identities, as they reinforce existing knowledge through the continuous conscious acquisition of knowledge across learning domains. For this study, instructors integrated the human resource development (HRD) constructs of Level 1 and Level 2 evaluations into an online doctoral strategic planning course to achieve three goals: (A) increase student engagement, (B) assess affective domain learning outcomes, and (C) practice innovative teaching to reinforce creative meaning-centered learning. Infusing an online curriculum with affective learning domain outcomes and weekly formative assessment activities allowed instructors to monitor and address affective attributes. Results suggest that the implementation of Level 1 and Level 2 evaluations as weekly formative assessments increased student engagement. Extended analysis promoted a deeper understanding of the roles that emotions and attitudes play in online learning. Affective learning outcomes were attained as these additional weekly exercises promoted meaning-centered collaboration with students while decreasing the power-related distance between learners and instructors.

Supervision is considered the signature pedagogy and after direct client practice it is rated as the number one learning and development method by practitioners. However, as we set out in this chapter, the relationship between supervision and client outcomes is not a strong one. Drawing on the use of routine outcome data, we demonstrate how clinical supervision can be improved when both practitioner and supervisor demonstrate an attitude of humility and a willingness to learn from the data they collect. Using these data to enhance supervision by improving client outcomes and to inform deliberate practice (DP) is the hall mark of the effective twenty-first century practitioner and supervisor.

In the previous chapter, I introduced the reader to the ideas and research of the common factors. The common factors are varied and have demonstrated to have small to large effect sizes depending on what variable is being examined. In this chapter, I categorise four more evidence based relationship variables which tend to be more task orientated and aligned to the therapeutic alliance. Indeed, the therapeutic alliance, goals and collaboration, alliance rupture–repair, and feedback-informed care are four trans-theoretical factors that can contribute greatly to outcomes. At the same time, when poorly established they can and do impact negatively on client outcomes. This is not an exhaustive overview of the literature, rather each variable is briefly discussed, the evidence supporting the effectiveness is highlighted, and Top Tips are provided to assist the development of the practitioner.

Deliberate practice (DP) is an innovative training method for improving psychotherapy skills acquisition and expertise in the twenty-first century. I introduce the reader to the principles and processes of DP and the rationale for its use. The concept of DP is not new, indeed it is used to support the improvement of performance in diverse areas, from sport to music. However, its application to psychotherapy is still in its infancy. Firstly, I provide the rationale for including DP as a method of therapist training based on research that illustrates that many of the current criteria that we use to identify expertise have little to no added impact on client outcomes. Additionally, some of the limitations of current traditional training regimes are outlined, along with the emerging evidence base for DP as a training method that can help improve the acquisition of therapeutic skills and expertise.

In the previous chapter, the reader will have become familiar with the idea of screening for traumatic experiences within organisations as a way to identify those who may benefit most from interventions and support. In this chapter, I present an overview of the trauma therapy literature in the first instance and then explore some of the debates regarding specific trauma-informed treatments versus general therapeutic approaches. The multicultural competency literature is discussed, and the multicultural orientation approach of cultural humility, cultural opportunity and cultural comfort is highlighted in a practice context. This chapter concludes with a case study vignette that brings it all together with a clinical example of what trauma-informed therapy through a multicultural lens might look like. As such I operationalise choice, collaboration , trust and transparency, and cultural principles from the trauma-informed care literature. Although applied here to specific trauma-informed organisations, some of the methods and processes that I unpack can be used in non-specific organisations where social/case managers are employed and wish to operationalise choice and collaboration in a structured way.