A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE PSYCHODRAMA CERTIFICATION PROCESS

Edward Schreiber edwschreiber at icloud.com
Mon Jan 26 07:47:34 UTC 2015


WIth all this discussion, which is fine and helps, but the issue is that the process is significant and Dale for the ABE
has already discussed the history with us on this site.  Rather than go on, it might be wise to meet first hand and face
to face with the ABE at the ASGPP Conference, the ABE Conference Hour.  Face to face asking and getting the process
in understood for such a change.  European versions of the ABE have orchestrated such other certifications; no reason we
can't once we get the ducks in order.

Ed

On Jan 23, 2015, at 1:12 PM, Buds wrote:

> I agree with Anath's suggestions. The older thesis piece as part of the certification  was quite interesting and painful to me as while I certainly recognized its importance I hated having to do academic writing of any length. Still it gathered your thoughts and made for some critical analysis of what you thought you knew. 
> 
> Presenting it to the membership at annual meetings at a panel for feedback before publication would be an interesting addition. Who or what body would approve the thesis for going forward and completion etc?
> 
>  I received my approval  on two proposals directly from Dr. Moreno who then insisted that I present them later publicly at two international forums. ( one of the two,"Creator Envy," has yet to be completed or presented. ) In the chaos of the 1st International congress of psychodrama and Sociometry in 1968 moved to Baden by Vienna from Prague due to the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia, my lack of presenting it there was not missed.)  I presented the other as a substitute presenter for Lew Yablonsky who had been unable to attend the congress in Vienna. It was "Sociometry in Action with Street Gangs," presented at the 4th International Congress of Group Psychotherapy in 1968 to an audience of a few hundred who undoubtedly had come to hear Yablonsky. It was being translated simultaneously  into French and German and I nearly pooped in my pants. I was so nervous that the translators kept prompting me to speak slower. All I could think was, " Are you kidding? I want to get off this stage as quickly as possible before anyone has the chance to hear me clearly and criticize my presentation." This was especially true for me as I was an unknown second stringer so to speak substituting for a world renowned highly regarded clinician. It was one of the only two times in my life I had stage fright. The other is about an interesting dilemma of developing a specific performance anxiety having to do with blowing the Shofar on Yom Kippur after having done it so well on Rosh Hashanah. If anyone is interested in that story, write to me back channel. 
> Be well, Bud
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jan 4, 2015, at 11:27 AM, Rebecca Walters <hvpi at hvpi.net> wrote:
> 
>> Very interesting conversation. I will tell you, the biggest challenge to the students at HVPI in getting certified is not the exam, it is trying to find places to run psychodrama groups. Group work has been on the decline in the past fifteen years…psych hospitals and out patient day programs where many of us got a lot of experience no longer want anything other than DBT for their very short term stays. There used to be many people running groups in my area, including Judy Swallow and myself. Now I think there is only one other person.
>>  
>> I don’t agree, Dave, that a short certificate for Sociometry is wise as I think that Sociometry takes more training than that…it is where things can often blow up in a group, when people start getting really honest about their relationships with the people in the group. Sociometry is far more than group building warm ups and protagonist selection. ….but I do agree that a shorter certificate for sociodrama would be terrific. I think this was one of the things the board floated and there was not a lot of interest from the TEPs. I think a good move might be for someone to contact Dale and find out what was actually proposed a few years ago.
>>  
>> At Beacon and at Westwood Institute (the Sattens) and currently, I think, at the Toronto Center, there was a several step certification process. One could become a certified as a trained auxiliary, an assistant director and finally as a director and then a trainer. I always thought this made a lot of sense because as it is now it can take many  years to get any professional acknowledgement. Many people give us along the way.
>>  
>> Anyway, just a few thoughts.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Rebecca Walters
>> Hudson Valley Psychodrama Institute
>> 156 Bellevue Road
>> Highland, NY 12528
>> 845/255-7502 
>> Please note new email address: hvpi at hvpi.net
>> Visit our website at:  www.hvpi.net 
>>  
>>  
>> From: List [mailto:list-bounces at grouptalkweb.org] On Behalf Of thana ag
>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:30 PM
>> To: list at grouptalkweb.org
>> Subject: RE: A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE PSYCHODRAMA CERTIFICATION PROCESS
>>  
>> Apology for the unedited email.
>> In short I think  it is a good idea to revise the certification process . Create   one  less painful, and less expensive, which may result in  more certified candidates.
>> Instead of a written exam -  a written thesis, which will both benefit the journal,  introduce the new trainers  into the community via their contribution. plus encourage  research opportunities, and  creative contribution to the method.
>> 2. Renewing open sessions during the Annual Meeting and providing them as an opportunity fro candidates to direct them ,while being observed by senior trainers, who will be available to critique it later. Little cost will be involved.
>>  
>> Happy New Year,
>> anath garber,TEP
>>  
>> > Subject: Re: A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE PSYCHODRAMA CERTIFICATION PROCESS
>> > From: anathga at hotmail.com
>> > Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2015 20:05:34 -0500
>> > To: hvpi at hvpi.net
>> > CC: list at grouptalkweb.org
>> > 
>> > I played a role in establishing the Board of Examiners and the initial process of certification, which was not as cumbersome as it became over the years. 
>> > Sadly my involvement in the process stopped, but I often wondered whether we would attract more candidates by making the certification process less painful and less expensive, while at the same time ensuring high quality training. 
>> > Originally, at Moreno Institute in Beacon one was certified via the approval by J. L or zerka plus publishing a thesis. That requirement could be very helpful in keeping the journal going and acquainting the PD community with a new Trainer. 
>> > a better use of time and money than the written exams,? Some brilliant responses are read only by the examiner. 
>> > For many years the Annual ASGPP
>> > Meeting offered open sessions, so a needy /troubled etc participant could use the method to resolve an issue. These could be directed by the candidates , offering the interested public view of a session, what certification process entails: plus creating challenging enough environment for conducting a session It would be very easy to have senior PD trainers present to evaluate the performance, with most likely no fee, as they would be already at the Meeting. 
>> > That may expand the Annual Meeting
>> > scope of offerings , possibly beefing up attendance with prospective trainees. 
>> > Anath Garber TEP
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> > 
>> > > On Jan 3, 2015, at 2:13 PM, "Rebecca Walters" <hvpi at hvpi.net> wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > Not long ago the American Board of Examiners floated some ideas for possible changes or additional certifications . I don't remember the details but I do know that we teps were surveyed, there was very little response and so nothing much came of it. Quite disappointing. If my memory serves me, Mario was part of the initiative.
>> > > I would think that people interested in changing the certification process might consider running for the American Board of Examiners. If things run on a platform changing the certification process, and they win, that might be an effective way to begin to create change.
>> > > Sent on my Virgin Mobile Phone.
>> > > 
>> > >> On Jan 3, 2015 1:29 PM, National Psychodrama Training Center <nptc at snet.net> wrote:
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> On Saturday, January 3, 2015 9:35 AM, John Nolte <jhn.nolte at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > >> From: Remer, Rory <rremer at email.uky.edu>
>> > >> Date: Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:27 AM
>> > >> Subject: RE: A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE PSYCHODRAMA CERTIFICATION PROCESS
>> > >> To: "nolte.jm at gmail.com" <nolte.jm at gmail.com>, Grouptalk <list at grouptalkweb.org>
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> I think John has many good points about reviewing and addressing the examination process. Discussion is warranted. I do disagree with a number of the suggestions--primarily with an oral exam. So discussion would be a good idea. (My experience with oral is that, although they get more depth, then tend to have a problem with breadth, and sharing/distributing time among participants. Certainly both written and oral exams have their strengths and weaknesses.) Perhaps this item could be put on the agenda for the Board session (or annual meeting) in April, AS A STARTING point. I wouldn't expect much closure.
>> > >> ________________________________
>> > >> From: National Psychodrama Training Center [natpdtngcent at gmail.com]
>> > >> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 3:29 PM
>> > >> To: Remer, Rory
>> > >> Subject: A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE PSYCHODRAMA CERTIFICATION PROCESS
>> > >> 
>> > >> This is the main title of the message
>> > >> A SUGGESTION TO REVISE THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS
>> > >> 
>> > >> To: Members of The Board of Examiners in Psychodrama, Sociometry and Group Psychotherapy
>> > >> Trainer, Educator, Practitioners
>> > >> Certified Practitioners
>> > >> From: John Nolte, T.E.P.
>> > >> Subject: A Suggestion to Revise the Certification Process
>> > >> The Board of Examiners in Psychodrama, Sociometry and Group Psychotherapy was established almost 40 years ago, and the certification process, beyond grandfathering, was begun shortly after. Although elaborated upon, it has remained pretty much the same since. My experience as both a member of the Board and as a trainer is that the certification process is cumbersome and onerous for all involved: trainers, trainees, Board members, and those who read the written test answers. I would like to suggest that the time has come to consider a revision of the certification process. Since the establishment of the Board a wealth of experience with certification is available that could serve that purpose. I would like to propose that the Board invite all those who have taken part in one way or another in the certification process to offer suggestions on how it could be improved.
>> > >> Because I think that people who suggest what others should do should undertake the task themselves, I am attaching my ideas for revising certification. I am sure other trainers and certified practitioners can generate many more ideas, and some must be better than that which I am proposing. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?
>> > >> 
>> > >> 
>> > >> My Proposal for a Revised Certification Procedure
>> > >> Application Forms: There are only three pieces of information that a trainer, primary or secondary can provide that are relevant to the certification process. They are:
>> > >> 1. The relationship to the trainee, how long trainer has known trainee, and the extent of training with him or her;
>> > >> 2. Confirmation of trainee's calendar of training with this and other trainers;
>> > >> 3. Endorsement of the trainee, indicating that the trainer is willing to stake his or her reputation as a trainer on the trainee's competence as a psychodrama director and his or her ethical behavior.
>> > >> Examination
>> > >> Rather than a written examination, I propose that the candidate for certification meet with a committee of three members of the Board of Examiners (or previous Board Examiners deputized for this purpose) for an oral examination. I think that such a meeting for an hour or an hour and a half can more effectively measure a candidate's grasp of knowledge of the areas now covered by the written examination. After the examination, the Examiners can decide whether the candidate has succeeded or not and inform him or her directly. The oral examination would reduce the many hours involved in preparing the examinations for grading as well as the hours spent in reading examinations by the graders. Most importantly, the candidate could receive an almost immediate result instead of waiting for months as things now stand.
>> > >> Oral examinations could be scheduled to take place during the Annual Conference of the ASGPP. The four days offer many opportunities for examining committees to meet with prospective candidates. By deputizing others as examiners and by using small committees, the task should not be too burdensome for individual Board members. If necessary, another opportunity for undergoing the oral examination could be arranged, probably in a different area of the country at a different time of year.
>> > >> III. Demonstration of Directing Skill (On-Site)
>> > >> In lieu of the current practice of on-site observations, I would like to suggest that the Board organize and offer several workshops of six to nine sessions. Each session would be directed by a candidate for certification. One, preferably two Board members (or other deputized observers) would conduct a thorough processing session following each drama. Participants in the workshops (seven to twelve) could be recruited by the Board from people in training for certification who could attend at a small or no fee, and in return would accrue training hours. In addition, they would have the advantage of participating in the certification process in advance of undergoing the it themselves. Another possibility is to conduct several of these sessions during the Annual Conference of the ASGPP. In that case, I would recommend different groups and observers for each such session.
>> > > Grouptalk mailing list
>> > > List at grouptalkweb.org
>> > > http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>> > 
>> > Grouptalk mailing list
>> > List at grouptalkweb.org
>> > http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>> Grouptalk mailing list
>> List at grouptalkweb.org
>> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
> 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/20150126/568d1218/attachment.html>


More information about the List mailing list