response to Peter Howie

[bernard widlake]

I would always include: - 
Did the protagonist esperience sufficient SAFETY? 
Were boundaries clearly delineated and maintained?
Were the group members co-opted into the process in a way which em-powered them?
Was anyone hurt and not attended to?(I speak from experience of failing to note someone who was affected, and being helped out by another group member who did notice)
Was the director sufficiently supported by t he  group or was he or she able to request that support?

I am sure there are more, and that questions could be  drawn together under headings to simplify and focus the process. But I like the start this and Peter's email has offered.                                                                                                                  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Peter Howie 
  To: grouptalk Listserv 
  Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 3:21 AM
  Subject: Quick ways to evaluate the efficacy of a psychodrama and session


  Hi All, 


  Running an advanced training group recently, I invited some of the trainees to be examiners and subsequently a few questions arose. Chief amongst these was "what are some of the simple heuristics or rules of thumb that a person could apply to determine if their work was adequate?" These rules of thumbs are ones that allow other considerations and structuring to follow after. This is the list we developed and I invite any of you to add some more. The list so far: 
    1.. The outcome for the protagonist is a good one 
    2.. The quality of the sharing is high (it is deep and relates to the drama) 
    3.. The openness of discussions in the group following the drama 
    4.. Adequacy of the role reversals (i.e. was the protagonist able to really get into some of the roles of others in their system and see themselves through those other's eyes?) 
    5.. Relationships in the group 
    6.. The protagonists drama progresses the group concern or other group themes or situations 
    7.. It increases the happiness of the planet (The buddhist approach) 
    8.. The spontaneity of the group is increased 
    9.. The is an increase in the spontaneity of the protagonist 
    10.. The production was done fully and the systems explored 
    11.. The functioning of the director was OK 
    12.. The relationship between the director and the protagonist was maintained and developed 
    13.. The groups resources were well utilised


  Some of these could easily be seen as different ways of saying the same thing. But that's the value of a rule of thumb - it is easy to apply and can be applied in different ways. Rules of thumb are also dangerous to rely on because they are only ever general. But most people create their own rules of thumb as short cuts and ways of making sense of the world. Any extra rules of thumb you have developed would be greatly appreciated.


  Cheers


  Peter in Brisbane






  Peter Howie B.Sc, TEP 
  Managing Director
  The Moreno Collegium for Human Centred Learning, Research and Development
  0411 873 851
  www.morenocollegium.com.au









------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Grouptalk mailing list
  List at grouptalkweb.org
  http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20100219/10ad9227/attachment.html>