Running head: 1

Joseph A. Cerniglia

University of South Carolina

2

Analysis of the Practice Model

The reciprocal, or interactional, model of social work practice with groups is especially

relevant to the purpose and goals of a mutual-aid support group designed as an intervention with

public school teachers. This model involves three main functions: “The first is to help members

identify the strengths they bring to the group (harnessing strengths). The second is to help them

use those strengths to build a community conducive to mutual aid (group building). The third is

to teach them to engage in mutual aid (teaching purposeful use of self)” (Steinberg, 2004, p. 22).

To apply this to a teacher support group, the facilitator would draw upon the individual

teachers’ strengths. Teachers with many years of experience or unique experience in difficult

environments could bring the strengths of that experience. Newer teachers, conversely, might

offer insight into emerging theoretical perspectives and an outsider point-of-view. The facilitator

would also draw upon the sense of community; highlighting common struggles and a sense of

shared purpose. Teachers have a unique appreciation of the importance of “purposeful use of

self” and it would be imperative that the facilitator redirect that towards engaging in mutual aid.

Assessment

Member group functioning can be best assessed, in terms of a teacher support group,

through member observations of the self and of other members. This would take place as

confidential and anonymous questionnaires toward the beginning of the group (pre-test), every 9

weeks (formative assessment), and at the end of the year (post-test). Likely questions for this

assessment would include a self-anchored rating scale (Toseland & Rivas, 2012, p. 239) and

observational ratings about other members’ functioning to contribute to whole group cohesion

3

measurement. This will also contribute to evaluation and scientific inquiry to be discussed in

later sections.

Operating from a place of empowerment, the facilitator would allow members to

determine those areas of knowledge, specific skills, and relevant values that are most appropriate

to gain from the mutual-aid group and form assessment models based on this input. This

formative-style assessment would allow for the most specificity and flexibility. Rather than an

imposition of a social work or societal perspective on the benefits of this mutual-aid group,

teachers would be given the opportunity, for once, to determine their own standards of

accomplishment and functioning.

Intervention

The interactional, mutual-aid model approaches intervention utilizing ecological systems

theory and its emphasis on growth and development of group members, members’ ability to offer

mutual-aid and modifying the overall social environment (Toseland & Rivas, 2012, p. 52).

Although the teachers, in this case, are the target of the interventions, this will have a

reverberating effect on the students, administration, and overall school climate. Drago-Severson

(2012) argues that through improvements in school climates, which focus on adult collaboration,

student improvement and growth enhancement also take place and take place persistently.

The interventions of this model would allow teachers to demonstrate and convey best

practices for working with students in a variety of situations. Another intervention strategy would

be the venting of frustrations and the easing of stresses by means of facilitated empathetic

understanding and bonding through shared stressful experiences. This intervention model would

actually incorporate all of Toseland’s and Rivas’ treatment group typologies: “support, education,

growth, therapy, socialization, and self-help” (2012, p. 21).

4

Evaluation

In order for the evaluation of efficacy to take place, determinations about the goals of the

group need to be specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time-limited and, most

importantly, generated by the group members. Furthermore, the facilitator’s role in directing the

flow of the group meetings over several sessions is vitally important. Effectiveness of the

interventions will be measured based on changes to the baseline data gathered during the pre-test

and formative assessment phases, culminating in the post-test evaluative results. As previously

discussed, the efficacy evaluations will take place in the form of a self-reporting questionnaire.

In addition, it is relevant to maintain reliability and validity as described by Toseland & Rivas

(2012, p. 441) as analyzing “the same phenomenon in the same way each time the measure is

used,” and that it “measures what it purports to measure.” This standard of evaluation will be

accommodated by establishing a baseline pre-test that is reflective of the group-generated goals

and is consistent throughout the formative assessment and post-test phases. Finally, the

evaluation must reflect those changes directly attributable to group intervention and exclusive of

external, corollary factors.

Evidence-Base

The mutual-aid model has a significant evidence base that demonstrates its broad

efficacy. Vattano (1972), one of the parents of the mutual-aid model, demands clients be seen as

coworkers. This call is for an empowerment of clients consistent with the Code of Ethics of the

National Association of Social Workers (1999). Teachers represent a group familiar with a social

change model and are uniquely attuned to this function. Directing the change towards each other

as teachers and to the overall school environment fits within Vattano’s (1972) “power to the

people” approach and identifies teachers as perfectly suited to a mutual-aid relationship.

5

In fact, empirical analysis determined that such groups “have a robustness that will be

useful to social workers in service delivery, administrative, and policy positions” and “[These]

groups often are stable, proactive sources of support and help” (Wituk, Shepherd, Slavich,

Warren, & Meissen, 2000, p. 163). Further evidence displays their relevance as one of many

tools available for social workers as explained by one survey in which ninety-five percent of

social worker respondents referred clients because they “could benefit from an opportunity to

help others with similar concerns” (Toseland & Hacker, 1985, p. 236).

Application to Diverse Populations

One benefit of mutual-aid groups is their diversity “in terms of organizational structures,

group membership, and methods of helping group members” (Wituk, Shepherd, Slavich, Warren,

& Meissen, 2000, p. 163). The application of a support group model can apply to nearly any

group with the professional and effective facilitation by a professional social worker. It is the

modification of this model to fit the needs of teachers that best expresses its adaptability to suit a

wider variety of population groups.

There are, however, some shortcomings in terms of applicability. One study found that

group membership tended to be underrepresentative of minorities with an average 8.8% ethnic

minority membership (Wituk, Shepherd, Slavich, Warren, & Meissen, 2000, p. 160). This could

be mitigated by developing cultural sensitivity insofar as the facilitator “becom[ing] familiar

with the backgrounds of [the] client group, gain[ing] knowledge about [the] particular cultural

communit[y],…[and] acknowledg[ing] the effect of societal attitudes on members” (Toseland &

Rivas, 2012, p. 138).

6

Contribution to Scientific Inquiry

The model of a teacher support group is one that could contribute to the scientific

evidence base and could be replicated in other school environments outside of Sandel

Elementary School. To best apply this model to other environments, the facilitator will also serve

as a scientific inquirer, utilizing the knowledge gained from the experiences with this particular

group to conduct research practice. The facilitator will take the evaluations of this group and

generate research evidence based on the efficacy findings. This practice experience, in the form

of qualitative and quantitative evaluation data, will contribute to scientific inquiry and expand

upon a research question of, “Is a social worker facilitated teacher support group model an

effective intervention for teachers of children in a public school environment?” and if so, “What

measurable effects are generated from such an intervention?” The most important contribution is

the effect this intervention has on the schoolchildren who represent a secondary intervention

target. The measurement of these effects within this individual group will provide a strong basis

for further research on a broader scale.

Conclusion

The reciprocal model has a strong evidence base and clearly broad and diverse

applicability. Applying this model to a teacher population group, especially one where teachers

face dramatic hardships in working with socioeconomically deprived students at great risk for

underachievement. The benefits of a support group for individuals in a helping profession allows

for a system of support which has been demonstrated to improve the quality of care offered by

said professionals (Drago-Severson, 2012) and provides a secondary ripple effect, from an

ecosystems perspective (Toseland & Rivas, 2012), on the population served by these prospective

group members and on the overall environment itself. The utilization of a mutual-aid model

7

represents implementation of an empowerment intervention and conforms to the guidelines

established by the NASW Code of Ethics (1999) which guides social work practice. This model

represents a grassroots approach to intervention which further honors Vattano’s (1972) seminal

and time-tested theoretical perspective. Finally, this model allows for contribution to the social

work knowledge base in a measurably reliable and valid method.

8

References

Drago-Severson, E. (2012, March). New opportunities for principal leadership: Shaping climates

for enhanced teacher development. Teachers College Record, 114(3), 1-44.

National Association of Social Workers. (1999). Code of ethics of the National Association of

Social Workers. Washington, DC: NASW Press.

Steinberg, D. (2004). The mutual-aid approach to working with groups: Helping people help

each other. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

Toseland, R. W., & Rivas, R. F. (2012). An introduction to group work practice. Boston: Pearson.

Toseland, R., & Hacker, L. (1985, May-June). Social Workers' Use of Self-Help Groups as a

Resource for Clients. Social Work, 232-237.

Vattano, A. (1972, July). Power to the people: Self-help groups. Social Work, 7-15.

Wituk, S., Shepherd, M., Slavich, S., Warren, M., & Meissen, G. (2000, March). A topography of

self-help groups: An empirical analysis. Social Work, 45(2), 157-165.