This article was downloaded by: [University of North Texas]On: 29 November 2014, At: 19:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal for Specialists inGroup WorkPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usgw20

Realities of Teaching GroupCounselingJeffrey A. Kottler aa California State University , FullertonPublished online: 12 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Jeffrey A. Kottler (2004) Realities of Teaching GroupCounseling, The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 29:1, 51-53, DOI:10.1080/01933920490275385

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01933920490275385

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

9:31

29

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Realities of Teaching Group Counseling

Jeffrey A. KottlerCalifornia State University, Fullerton

In this critical response, the author discusses some of the realities of teachinggroup counseling that reflect the different professional contexts for our work.Ethical conflicts, abuse of power, dual relationships, and informed consent arementioned.

Keyword: teaching group leadership

SOME REALITIES OF TEACHING GROUP WORK

I have taught group work classes for the past 20 years, probablymore than 50 times at a half dozen different universities and trainingcenters in North America, Asia, Europe, and South America. Duringthis span of time, I have witnessed cycles of ebb and flow in the debateabout the relative merits of having faculty teach experientially basedgroup courses. There was a time when such laboratory groups wererequired, and indeed many students were hurt in this process justas they were during the encounter group movement of the Sixties be-fore safeguards were put in place to protect student rights.

The arguments proposed in this article are both familiar and well-worn. I am not sure what is proposed that is all that new, much lessuseful. In the past, some of the loudest critics against laboratory-typeexperiential training groups, those who were most vehement aboutprotecting students from so-called exploitation, struck me as thosewho were most afraid of intimacy, and most afraid of their own im-pulse control. They believed that learning group leadership was aboutmastering content, learning theory, and understanding research, butfound little value in actual experiences of being in a group as a client,and then as a counselor.

Jeffrey A. Kottler is professor and chair of the Counseling Department at CaliforniaState University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to JeffreyKottler; Department of Counseling; CAliforni State University, Fullerton; Fullerton, CA,92834-6868; phone: (714) 278-7537, fax: (714) 278-4456; e-mail: jkottler@fullerton.edu.

THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK, Vol. 29 No. 1, March 2004, 51�53

DOI: 10.1080=01933920490275385

# 2004 ASGW

51

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

9:31

29

Nov

embe

r 20

14

I know I’ve made a career out of belaboring this issue, but it bogglesmy mind that anyone thinks that he or she can become a group leaderwithout knowing what it is like being a client. And I tell my studentsthis point over and over again: ‘‘How the heck do you think you’regoing to convince your clients to take risks, to be open and authenticand real, when you are unwilling to be so yourself ? How can youask group members to open up, to share themselves in honest ways,to own and work on their issues, when you are not willing to do thesame?’’ Would it be easier for students in such an experience if a fac-ulty member were not in the room? Certainly, but I am not so sure thateasier is better. That is a lie; I am certain that easier is not better.

The author has accurately represented my position in her article inthat I do not know how to teach people to lead groups without givingthem the opportunity to experience group and practice leading groupsunder supervision. Furthermore, while there are indeed someprograms that have access to doctoral students or outside consult-ants who can lead these groups, those alternatives are not available toother programs. Moreover, these structures have problems of their own.

We sometimes forget that dual and multiple relationships are notalways a bad thing; they can add richness and complexity to life. Infact, there are many places where I have worked among indigenouspeoples in Africa, North and South America, and the South Pacific,where group leaders are expected to have multidimensional relation-ships in order to intervene in culturally appropriate ways. In ourown dominant university cultures, multiple relationships are mostproblematic when they are exploitive and when someone is in a pos-ition of power and takes advantage of others in a dual role.

Historically, our field has had a legacy of abuse, figuratively and lit-erally ‘‘screwing’’ clients and students. That is why we have instituteda number of safeguards to protect student = trainee rights: (a)informed consent so that students know what they are getting into,(b) the right to pass so they are not coerced into saying or doing any-thing that might be hurtful to themselves or others, and (c) that theyare evaluated not on what they say (or do not say) but on the productsthey submit for grading.

I am not presuming that what works for me and my students, in myprogram, would work for you in yours. But then, I am not interested inimposing my vision of excellence in training group leaders on anyoneelse. I do agree with the authors that we must protect the rights of stu-dents against ethical conflicts and abuse of power. I just do not see theanswer as being as simple as delegating responsibility to others, es-pecially doctoral students who do not have the same levels of experi-ence and expertise as faculty (not to mention presenting other dualrelationship issues).

52 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK/March 2004

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

9:31

29

Nov

embe

r 20

14

In summary, while I do disagree most strongly with the positiontaken by the author, I object even more passionately to the tone thatimplies that what some professionals are doing in one institution thatworks well for them should be applied to everyone else’s educationalcontext. Certainly there are ethical challenges that we all face, regard-less of the structures we use. The key for me is not what we are doingbut how we are doing it.

Kottler / REALITIES OF TEACHING GROUP 53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Tex

as]

at 1

9:31

29

Nov

embe

r 20

14