Discussion Thread Responses

PACO 506

(2) Student Discussion Postings

La Toya Maddox

Spirituality in Counseling

The article ‘Spirituality in Counseling: A Faith Development Perspective” is a very informative, insightful and interesting read. The author takes James W. Fowler’s Faith Development Theory (FDT) and utilized it in counseling. Principally, Fowler’s Faith Development Theory “(FDT) is a stage model of spiritual and religious development that allows counselors to identify both adaptive qualities and potential encumbrances in spiritual or religious expression.” What’s more, Fowler also created seven Stages of Faith. Importantly, the author believes the combination of Fowler’s Stages of Faith and FDT would be highly resourceful in counseling. Essentially, the incorporation of both Fowler’s FDT and Stages of Faith will allow counselors to examine what level of faith their client is currently demonstrating, while being able to successfully plan to advance their stage to expound on their strengths to transition to another level; or evaluate their weaknesses without alienating spiritual growth. Particularly, in the case studies mentioned in the text, the levels of faith were instrumental in properly deciding how to move forward in counseling. Not to mention, the article also discussed assessing clients with unexpected life crises. Mainly, the author believes the understanding and acknowledgement of the level of faith and development of spiritual, as well as religious foundation assists in providing successful assessments for clients and plans for progression for stage transition and/or spiritual growth.

Altogether, the significance of Fowler’s FDT model can be summed in Entwistle’s (2015) text which states “without models our ability to understand our world would be severely limited.” Fortunately, a limited client is unacceptable for me. My prayer is to make sure all my clients are psychologically healthy, spiritually advanced and emotionally strong.

William Norris

Train them up in the Way they should Go

The idea of integrating secular psychology and biblical, pastoral counseling is often considered confounding, confusing and downright agitating. The article, “Teaching Christian Integration in Psychology and Counseling Courses,” begins a simple redirection of the seemingly baffling step of integration by beginning the integration not as counselors begin their careers, but as they begin learning. Garzon, Hall, and Ripley ascertain that the proper method to fully integrating nouthetic counseling and secular psychology is by teaching by means of the attachment model, where said professor mentors said student through instruction and experience.

[1]

Randall Sorenson’s theory of what works best to successfully integrate psychological and nouthetic counseling stems from the idea of one’s relationship between the instructor and student and absorbing actual experiences within said process.

[2]

While a simplistic idea, the attachment method serves to begin true integration of secular psychology and biblical counseling in the best, most innocent place with the instruction of knowledge and meeting said knowledge with experiential activities.

[3]

The attachment model helps to project the professor’s faith onto his/her student, leaving both professor and student open to emotional transparency and “clear boundaries on both ends.”

[4]

Allowing this interpersonal relationship provides students with the ability to see faith being intertwined from the beginning and thus allowing the proper scenery to utilize this in their chosen field after graduation.

[5]

In addition to a clearer openness and comprehensive relationship, four integrative levels are highlighted: (1) exploration between secular psychology and nouthetic counseling, (2) personal, experiential integration, (3) citing sources that explicitly integrate the two, and (4) emphases on the purpose of integrating the two and providing substance for doing so.

[6]

Author Entwistle references this theory by citing K.E. Farnsworth’s description of integrating the two practices as a comprehensive solution. Farnsworth theorizes that this integration involve discovery, verification, and relation.

[7]

Sorenson’s attachment model conclusively involves the discovery, verification, and relation of Farnsworth’s process by the professor teaching (discovery), verification (experience), and relation (the intimate relationship between the professor and student). Essentially, this model by both Sorenson and Farnsworth encapsulates Christ’s Earthly ministry by showing the life lesson, experiencing the life lesson, and relating to the person in a loving way (Matthew 28:19-20).

PACO506

DISCUSSION ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS

The student will complete 4 Discussions in this course. The student will post one Thread of at least 300 words by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the assigned Module. The student must then post 2 Replies of at least 200 words by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the assigned Module, except Module 8: Week 8, in which Replies will be due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Friday. For each Thread, students must support their assertions with at least 2 scholarly citations in the correct writing style format. Each Reply must incorporate at least 1 scholarly citation in the correct writing style format.

PACO 506 Discussion Replies Assignment Grading Rubric – 50 points total

Levels of Achievement

Criteria

Advanced –

Satisfies Criteria

with Excellence

Proficient –

Satisfies Most Criteria

Developing –

Satisfies Criteria Incompletely

Below Expectations –

Does Not Satisfy Criteria

Not Present

Points Earned

Content

70%

(35 pts)

33 – 35 pts

30 – 32 pts

27 – 29 pts

1 – 26 pts

0 pts

Replies Content

Each reply focuses on a meaningful point made in another student’s or instructor’s thread. Each reply provides substantive additional thoughts regarding the thread. Each reply to a student’s post provides one strength and one weakness found in another student’s original post. Each reply is clear and coherent and includes at least one citation from class or outside materials. Christian worldview implications and/or biblical themes and principles are duly noted.

Each reply focuses on a meaningful point made in another student’s thread. At least one reply provides substantive additional thoughts regarding the thread and an explanation of why the student likes or dislikes the idea presented in the thread. One strength or weakness of fellow student’s threads are included in the replies. Most replies are clear and coherent. Christian worldview implications and/or themes and principles are limited and only partially incorporated.

Each reply minimally focuses on a point made in another student’s thread. Replies could be more substantive regarding the thread. Replies lack some clarity and coherence. Strengths and weaknesses of fellow student’s threads are not clearly included in the replies. Minimal Christian worldview implications and/or themes and principles are included.

Neither reply directly focuses on a point made in another student’s thread. Replies are not substantive regarding the thread and lack depth, clarity and coherence. Strengths and weaknesses of fellow student’s threads are not clearly included in the replies. Minimal or no Christian worldview implications and/or themes and principles are included.

Not Present

Criteria

Advanced –

Satisfies Criteria

with Excellence

Proficient –

Satisfies Most Criteria

Developing –

Satisfies Criteria Incompletely

Below Expectations –

Does Not Satisfy Criteria

Not present

Points Earned

Structure

30%

(15 pts)

14 – 15 pts

13 pts

11.1 – 12.9 pts

1 – 11 pts

0 pts

Organ-

ization, Writing Style, Sources (10 pts)

10 pts
Two replies must be present and each reply includes 200+ words. Replies are correctly formatted. References and in-text citations are correctly formatted and use the correct writing style.

9 pts
Two replies must be present and each reply includes 100-199 words. Replies have some correct formatting. Where applicable, references and in-text citations have nearly accurate formatting and use the correct writing style.

8 pts
At least one reply must be present and includes at least 100 words. Replies are minimally or not correctly formatted. Where applicable, references and in-text citations are minimally or not in correct format and do not use the correct writing style.

1 – 7 pts
At least one reply must be present, but one or both replies are less less than 100 words. Replies are poorly constructed with multiple formatting errors or minimal formatting present and references are missing altogether.

0 points
Not present

Grammar and Spelling

(5 pts)

5 points
Spelling, grammar, and punctuation are correct. Sentences are complete, clear, and concise. Paragraphs contain appropriately varied sentence structures.

4.1 – 4.9 pts
Some errors with spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Sentences are presented as well. Paragraphs contain some varied sentence structures.

4 points
Spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors distract. Sentences are incomplete or unclear. Paragraphs are poorly formed.

1 – 3 pts
Significant grammatical errors are present with little or no evidence of proofing. Paragraphs are poorly formed.

0 points
Not present

Total

Advanced

46 – 50 pts

Proficient

42 – 45 pts

Developing

38 – 41 pts

Below Expectations

1 – 37 pts

0

Professor’s

Comments