 |
 |
|
The National Corrections Training Institute [NCTI] identifies eight keys to change, which we believe need extrapolation and enhancement. These keys to change are not "in and of themselves" wrong; but they certainly could be improved. The keys fail to identify areas such as unconditional positive regard or opportunities for role performance such as altruistic & productive roles; if we cannot be productive and give to others we probably cannot think well of ourselves and the downward cycle begins, empowerment through personal responsibility and responsibility for others.
The National Corrections Training Institute [NCTI] identifies eight keys to change, which we believe need extrapolation and enhancement. 1. To develop an individualized understanding for the relationship between values, attitudes and behaviors as they relate to the decision making process. We would suggest that while the values, attitudes and behaviors labels are stylistically useful in helping people understand the concept, they are inherently simplistic and potentially misleading. Decision making in regard to behavior is rarely conscious and people rarely are aware of their own values. All experience is both screen and screened by unconscious valuation of former experiences. As these experiences and their interpretation build up over time, the bottoms-up [data driven] process of evaluating experiences as experience becomes a top-down [theory driven] process which evaluates the experience from a philosophical, theoretical hypothesis about experiences in general. However, these theories or beliefs are rarely conscious as habitual patterns of thinking become unconscious over time and are rarely considered from a conscious perspective. The cognitive change process deals exactly with the issue of making unconscious processes conscious. This is done by helping the person identify and become aware of thoughts in situ, when the action is happening, recording the number and frequency of habitual thoughts in situations where they have diminished the opportunity to reach personal goals and to dispute the cognitive errors that may exist. Thus, the values might be described as personal goals. If we can help the individual begin to think about and decide on personal goals we have moved the arrow of time away from the past and towards the future. Second, we help them way the thoughts and feelings they have when certain events or relationships occur. Third, we help them evaluate whether the actions they took based on their thoughts and feelings helped them reach their goals, and finally, we help them decide whether they would like to develop new thinking habits in order to increase the potential of reaching their goals. If so, we provide the supports necessary to either change their thinking patterns or improve their behavior repertoire or both so that they will be more successful in reaching personal goals. 2. To initiate an intrinsic commitment to change. This is patently problematic. If such intrinsic commitment to change exists, they will change without us. The problem is that people with problems in living want things to change, but do not want to change themselves. Invariably, they believe that the problem is outside of themselves and much of the human service intervention process confirms that judgement. When we talk about client resistance, we imply that they are doing something wrong without ever recognizing that it may be we who is doing something wrong. People with problems in living have an intrinsic commitment to achieve personal goals; they simply don't know how to achieve them and find themselves constantly confronted with 'helpers' who want them to achieve something else. If we start with the development of a personal vision, we will have helped the person begin to bring to consciousness what is important to them and to define their own personal goals. Once such goals are conscious, the individual can choose to pursue them or pursue something else. Which ever goals they choose to pursue, they will see us as helpful if we can provide them with skills which improve their chances of reaching personal goals.
Having an incompetent person feel good about his/her incompetence is probably worse than having them feel incompetent and worthless. At least in the latter, there is a dissonance for change. Self analysis comes from a comparison of self to people around you. People can and do, however, make errors in judgment and if these occur, a helper may be useful in disputing and clarifying. On the other hand, the appraisal may be correct. Here a helper can teach skills towards competency. What produces self-esteem and a sense of competence, is not the absolute quality of experience, but the perception that one's own actions controlled the experience. Once a person becomes competent in some areas, their appraisal of self is likely to improve. As it improves, other improvement in competence become possible. Finally, a person may need to accept that they are not as competent as others in many areas, but that they are doing the best that they can and that the continuation of that process is valuable and useful. 4. To maintain a supportive environment where rapport and trust create a fertile field for trial and experiment. This is almost too large to get your arms around. Yes we need a change environment which is supportive - but we also need to provide high positive expectation. Such high positive expectation may create a certain amount of stress. An environment without stress is not an change environment. As articulated elsewhere, expectation of is two kinds: ought to and will. The expectations should not be of the ought to kind, but rather of the belief in the person kind. I know you will improve your behavior because you are a good person with problems in living who is seeking skills to reach your own personal goals kind. The self fulfilling prophecy of the helper should be that I expect [believe in] improvement. Create the future. As John Schaar states, "The future is not a result of choices among alternative paths offered by the present, but a place that is created - created first in mind and will, created next in activity. The future is not some place we are going to, but one we are creating. The paths to it are not found but made, and the activity of making them changes both the maker and the destination." 5. To use the group process to assure that each individual is actively involved in the change process. While group process is certainly useful, this implies that one to one is not. Rather, group process is less expensive than one to one and has additional potential of helping the person with problems in living see themselves in others - a one step removed level of objectivity. In addition, the group offers roles and reinforcement [which may or may not support the right things]. 6. To use a standardized curriculum that directs the learning process and assures consistency in the acquisition of appropriate information. Like the prior key, standardization is important when you are dealing with groups which public agencies do because of costs. However, individualized curriculum is certainly preferable since it can be matched to the intrinsic motivation of the persons personal goals. Providing individualized opportunities within a group environment requires either 1) a suffiently large population that you can group those with similar individualized needs or 2) the development of flexibility within the group process. The first raises issues of hetero or homogenous groupings which are far to controversial to discuss in this context. However, we believe that there is significant learning that occurs when people understand that not only are their people like them, but there are people who are different: and that's okay. 7. To use a personality typing system that breaks down barriers and builds self-esteem. This makes assumptions that we doubt can be proven. Knowing my personality type may reduce my self appraisal and cause me to decide that I can't gain by participating. The personality typing for staff, is highly significant, since helper's who don't understand their own style and how it affects other people are often not helpful. Whether or not personality typing of people with problems in living is useful is not clear to us and therefore, we would not dispute its use. However, we are clear that it is not a necessary component in enabling positive change.
The keys to change fail to identify areas such as unconditional positive regard, opportunities for role performance such as altruistic & productive roles; if we cannot be productive and give to others we probably cannot think well of ourselves and the downward cycle begins. Empowerment through personal responsibility and responsibility for others. These keys are not "in and of themselves" wrong; but they certainly could be improved. It would seem only fair to offer the opportunity for others to analyze and find fault with our own principles and to that end, I would suggest the following: Staff Keys:
They are fiduciaries in the sense of personal beneficence: they
act only on the behalf of others, never for the self interest of
themselves.
Service Keys
I believe that the National Corrections Training Institute and I are really on the same track. Their programs appear to be very good, although like most human services delivery there is little clarity of expected outcomes and therefore little documentation of success or failure. It is the quest for continuous quality improvement which both the Institute and I are addressing which drives our willingness to share our values and beliefs. If my analysis provides any reconsideration, it is valuable even if it reaffirms their values and yours.
|
|
|