|
|
A new course web page has been added
under Assignment Resources - Examples of Case Study Papers. An
excellent case study paper is available for viewing, entitled
"The Application of Cognitive Therapy to a Case of
Bereavement."
NOTE: This particular combination
of client scenario and theory cannot be selected for future case
studies.
Case Study
Chapter 1 of Theory and Practice of Counseling and
Psychotherapy introduces the hypothetical client Stan, who is
struggling to overcome emotions, self–perceptions, and behaviour
patterns that are hindering his ability to be the person he wants to
be. At the end of each theoretical chapter, the text revisits the case
of Stan to illustrate the conceptualization of client problems, the
types of therapeutic goals established, the nature of the therapeutic
relationship, and the application of each theoretical model. In
addition, Case Approach to Counseling and Psychotherapy
follows the case of Ruth from each theoretical perspective.
The Case Study assignment will encourage you to integrate your
conceptual knowledge of the various theoretical models with insight
into a case–study application of those approaches. The Case Study is
the major course assignment and should be 15 to 20 double–spaced,
typed pages. You will be graded both on your knowledge of the
theoretical model(s) you select and your ability to apply that
knowledge to a particular client scenario. Review the “Specific
Criteria and Grading Matrix” below to ensure that you understand the
expectations of the assignment.
For this assignment, select a hypothetical client scenario from
Chapter 16 of the Student Manual that accompanies the
text. Choose one of the six “Additional Cases for Practice”
that describe a range of clients with a variety of different
problems. These descriptions are brief. You may flesh out the scenario
in any way you choose, as long as it is consistent with the synopsis
provided. You may want to elaborate on family background, health,
current interpersonal relationships, past experiences, coping
resources, and so on to support your understanding of the problem and
your approach to facilitating client change. Be creative, drawing on
what you have learned from the cases of Stan, Ruth, and others
throughout the course.
You must also select a particular theoretical model to work
with. While you are not required to select the model that fits best
with your own perspectives and worldview, you may find it easier to
develop and present your case study if the model makes some intuitive
and experiential sense to you. Select one primary theory to
work with, although you may draw on techniques of other approaches if
you like. (Developing your own integrative model is beyond the scope
of this course.)
Once you have selected a client scenario and a primary theoretical
model, begin to develop your case study based on the criteria outlined
below. Make use of the course texts and at least three other
resources. (The supplementary readings at the end of each unit are a
good source for other resources.) You are expected to draw on ideas,
express them in your own words, and organize them in a way that fits
your particular case study. Do not simply paraphrase text
materials. You must also properly reference your sources. (See
“Citations and References” further on.)
Begin thinking about your client scenario by week 10 of the course,
just after completing the Midterm Exam on Sections II and III (see the
“Suggested Study Schedule” in this Manual). At that point,
skip ahead to Chapter 15 in Theory and Practice for a summary
of the various approaches to see which model might fit with your
worldview and the scenario you have selected. You may reverse the
order in which you complete Sections IV and V of the course to make
sure you cover the theoretical model you have selected by week 13 of
the course. By week 14, you should have developed an outline and
begun to flesh out your case study. At that point, review Table 16–1
in Theory and Practice and Table 14–1 in Case
Approach to see how the various approaches address the cases of
Stan and Ruth, respectively. These tables may provide insights into
the development of your own case study. You are advised to submit your
Case Study assignment by week 16 of the course so that you avoid a
pile–up of evaluation components at the end of the course.
Criteria for Developing
the Case Study
Use the following questions as guidelines for developing the
various components of your Case Study, focusing on what you see as
most relevant for the client scenario you have selected. Feel free to
address any additional questions appropriate for your case study.
Include illustrations from your client scenario to support your choice
of theoretical model(s), the way you conceptualize the client problem,
and the way you approach the counselling process with that particular
client. You are not expected to produce a dialogue between counsellor
and client, although you may include small examples of dialogue to
illustrate your points. Your case study must be presented as an essay,
not in question and answer format. You may organize your essay around
the major headings provided, or develop your own organizational
structure. Please note the specific grading criteria and weighting of
each section.
Key Concepts
Which theoretical model have you selected to work with
this client, and what is the rationale for your selection? What is the theory’s view of human nature, and what are
the underlying assumptions of that approach? How does this particular view of human nature fit the
client scenario you have selected? What themes represent the core struggles in this client’s
life? How does the theory’s view of human nature and problem
development help you understand how the client’s problems have
developed? What are the primary characteristics of this approach?
What are its major areas of focus and emphasis? What are its
fundamental ideas? What implications do the key concepts have for your work
with this client? What will you focus on? How much emphasis will you place on past experiences, the
here and now, and the future? Where will the emphasis of therapy
lie—thoughts, feelings, behaviours, or interpersonal
relationships?
The Therapeutic Process
What therapeutic goals will you set with this client? How
do those goals support or reflect the basic constructs of the
theoretical model? In the context of your theoretical model, what role will
you assume as a therapist? What will your main tasks or functions
be? How active or directive will you be? When will self–disclosure
be appropriate? How much? What will you expect from the client? What is the
client’s role in the therapeutic process? How do you expect this
client to react to that role? What type of relationship will exist between you (the
counsellor) and the client? How much responsibility for client
change will each of you assume? What challenges do you anticipate in establishing your
relationship with this client? How will you address those
issues? How are your values, attitudes, worldview, and beliefs
similar or dissimilar to those of the client? How might differences
in perspective affect the counselling process? What is the role of interpersonal, systemic, or cultural
factors in the client’s problems? What other individuals or systems
in this client’s life might become important to the therapeutic
process?
Techniques and Procedures
What are the major techniques and methods associated with
this theoretical approach? Which therapy activities are most appropriate for your
client’s problems? What is your rationale for this
selection? How do these strategies fit with the client’s gender,
family, cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds? What
potential barriers exist? How might you overcome those
barriers? What client resources, coping strategies, personal
strengths, and other characteristics may facilitate the counselling
process? What specific steps will you use to implement the
selected therapeutic techniques with this client? What changes do you anticipate in the client’s thoughts,
feelings, behaviour, relationships with others, and
environment?
Evaluation
Why did you select this particular approach for this
client? Did your decision making reflect objective criteria or your
personal preferences or worldview? How well do you anticipate this approach will work with
this client, under these circumstances, addressing this particular
presenting concern? What are the potential limitations of this model in
addressing the needs of this client? What other approaches might you use to supplement the
conceptual framework or counselling process you used here? Which models or techniques would work less well with this
client, and why? What are your model’s strengths and weaknesses?
Specific Grading Criteria for
the Case Study
Select a hypothetical client scenario from Chapter 16 of the
Student Manual that accompanies the text. Select one primary theoretical model to work with. Conduct a
focused literature search of primary research, and review articles
on this theory. Develop your case study based on the criteria outlined
for key concepts, therapeutic process, techniques and procedures,
and evaluation (as noted in the previous pages). Your report should be a 15 to 20 double–spaced,
word–processed or typed pages, using a standard 12–point font
size. This assignment requires demonstration of knowledge,
comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and
evaluation. A well–prepared report will comprise three major parts:
introduction, body of the report, and conclusion. It will start
with a title page and end with a reference list. This assignment is
intended to develop your skill in analyzing, synthesizing, and
evaluating psychological counselling theories and to further the
development of your skill in writing a scholarly psychology report.
The report is to be written in APA style, which you may research by
referring to The Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th ed.), the AUPR Writing Skills
resources, your text, and the articles you selected. At the
400–level, you are expected to use APA format for the overall
format, including title page, abstract, in–text citations, and
reference list. The following Marking Matrix delineates the
expectations for this assignment.
Grading Matrix
| Abstract |
Concise summary of research paper. |
5 |
5 |
| Wordy summary of research paper. |
4 |
|
| Unclear or confusing summary. |
3 |
|
| Incomplete or inaccurate summary. |
1-2 |
|
| No summary. |
0 |
|
| Introduction |
Concise statement of the rationale, purpose, and structure. |
5 |
5 |
| A well–written, interesting rationale or background statement,
which includes either the purpose or the structure. |
4 |
|
| A well–written, interesting rationale or background statement
in which neither purpose nor structure is described. |
3 |
|
| A wordy statement of the rationale, purpose, and structure;
includes information either unnecessary or better placed later in
the paper. |
2 |
|
| Poorly written, with neither purpose nor structure described. |
1 |
|
| No introduction. |
0 |
|
Body:
Key Concepts |
Theoretical framework and core constructs clearly identified
(knowledge and comprehension). Demonstrated fit between
model selected and particular client scenario (application and
analysis). Identification of client problems (core themes) in
a manner consistent with the model selected (application and
analysis). |
10-15 |
15 |
| Two of these three key areas covered. |
5-10 |
|
| One of these three key areas covered. |
1-5 |
|
| No key areas covered. |
0 |
|
Body:
Therapeutic Process |
Selection of appropriate goals and description of the
therapeutic relationship that is consistent with both the
theoretical model and the client scenario (knowledge and
comprehension). Appropriate identification of worldview,
value, or cultural issues (application and analysis). |
10-15 |
15 |
| Both of these areas covered, but not fully. |
5-10 |
|
| One of these key areas covered. |
1-5 |
|
| No key areas covered. |
0 |
|
Body:
Techniques and Procedures |
Identification of strategies or techniques associated with the
model selected (knowledge and comprehension). Clear
rationale for the appropriateness of particular interventions
selected (application and analysis). Sensitivity to
particular client characteristics (application and
analysis). |
10-15 |
15 |
| Two of these three key areas covered. |
5-10 |
|
| One of these three key areas covered. |
1-5 |
|
| No key areas covered. |
0 |
|
Body:
Evaluation |
Critical assessment of the model and processes selected
(synthesis and evaluation). |
15-20 |
20 |
| Discusses some limitations and strengths of the model and
processes. |
9-15 |
|
| Limited discussion of limitations and strengths of the model
and processes. |
0-8 |
|
| Discussion and Conclusions |
Clear, logical conclusions drawn from the literature review
with well–founded recommendations for further research. May include
some creative thought. |
5 |
5 |
| Clear, logical conclusions drawn from the literature review
with limited recommendation for further research. |
4 |
|
| Clear, logical conclusions drawn with no recommendation. |
3 |
|
| Unclear or illogical conclusions, or no conclusion. |
0-2 |
|
| Style |
Consistent use of the current APA3 style in title page, body of the
report, citations, and reference list. Excellent organization,
grammar, spelling, and punctuation. (A well–organized report may
use headings and/or clear, logical transitions to shift from one
section to the next.) | 9-10 | 10 |
| Consistent use of APA style in all four elements. Generally
well written (logical, clear) with a few minor errors in grammar,
spelling, or punctuation. |
7-8 |
|
| Consistent use of APA style in three elements or inconsistent
use in four elements. Logical and clear, but has many errors in
grammar, spelling, and punctuation. |
4-6 |
|
| Use of APA style in two elements. Some confusion or lack of
clarity in organization and writing. |
1-3 |
|
| Use of APA style in fewer than two elements. |
0 |
|
| Sources |
Accurately discusses and integrates the main findings of 10 or
more primary research or review articles. |
9-10 |
10 |
| Accurately discusses and integrates the main findings of 5-9
primary research or review articles. Other articles summarized may
be primary or secondary sources. |
5-9 |
|
| Accurately discusses and integrates the main findings of 1-4
primary research or review articles. Other articles summarized may
be primary or secondary sources. |
3-4 |
|
| Accurately integrates only secondary sources. |
2 |
|
| Incomplete, inaccurate discussion of secondary sources. |
1 |
|
| No articles summarized. |
0 |
|
| Total |
|
|
100 |
Note: The descriptors that appear in parenthesis
and in italics within the Body: Key Concepts, Body: Therapeutic
Process, Body: Techniques and Procedures, and Body: Evaluation are
referenced from Bloom’s Taxonomy.4
Citations and References
The citation system outlined in the Publication Manual of the
American Psychological Association (5th ed., 2001) is the most
easily used, economical, and widely accepted system in psychological
circles. You may borrow a copy of this manual from the Athabasca
University Library or from another library at which you have borrowing
privileges. You may also find useful links to writing resources
through the Centre for Psychology home page at
http://psych.athabascau.ca/. Click on Psychology Resources (AUPR),
located in the left column under Online Resources. Then click on
Writing Resources link, located in the second paragraph or the bottom
of the left column, under Other Useful Sites.
3 The most current
is APA style, 6th Ed. (2009), but you may also use the 5th
Ed. (2001).
4 For more
information re Bloom’s Taxonomy, see http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html
or http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/program/hndouts/bloom.html.
|
