INSTITUTE FOR REALITY THERAPY
The Institute was founded in Los Angeles in 1967 and from the
beginning we have taught the practice and concepts of reality therapy here
in one week intensive seminars. Since that time we have expanded to where
we now teach all over the U.S. and Canada. We have a large and expanding
faculty who can offer one week seminars anywhere in the U.S. and Canada
if there is a group of ten or more who wish to start training. This faculty
also teaches in a variety of less intensive formats to any interested group or
organization.
For information,
call or write the Institute at: 11633 SAN
VICENTE BLVD., LOS ANGELES, CA. 90049 (phone 213-826-2690) or
contact the board member from your region.
ONE WEEK
INTENSIVE
PROGRAMS
Experience
tells us that the concepts are best taught in one week
intensive
seminars where the participants
become deeply involved in
discussions, demonstrations,
and role playing. In Los Angeles Dr. Glasser
personally
leads these weeks. We now offer two of the three weeks
necessary for certification in the field because of the prohibitive expense of
coming to Los Angeles for all the training. We constantly evaluate and
(,
upgrade our training program both to improve its quality and to keep its
\
cost as low as possible.
\
On the first day there is an introductory lecture where you have the -'--'
chance to ask questions and interact with the instructor to clarify in your
mind both the theory and the practice. Different faculty members have ~
different styles of how they teach this basic material but all do it in a way ~
that gets you involved in the ideas actively. The remainder of the first day ("-<
and the rest of the week is mostly spent in small groups with a teacher for
each group. In these small groups of 7-11
there is chance for much
~'
personal attention and for a great deal of role playing under the direct
supervision of your teacher. We urge you not to worry about this necessary V
aspect of our training. There is no way that therapy can be learned without .'~\
the active experience of doing it.
(J
.
-
.
h.: :,
At the end of the week each participant
is given an individual C)i
evaluation of how she or he progressed in the small group. For those who \,---.,LJ
wish to train further a supervised practicum is worked out. There has never (
been a problem with this procedure but we continue to work on it so that it
becomes more standardized.
Any problems that arise from any aspect of
our training can be referred. directly to Dr. Glasser.
CERTIFICA
TION
After two weeks of training separated by at least six months and the
successful completion of the second practicurn period (each practicum is at
least six months) the practicum supervisor recommends the candidate for
certification.
This process is necessary because we do not want people to
come to certification and fail. The number of people certified is now over
800.
(Continued
inside hack cover)
yqslsr1T yfilssR to ISn1uoL
rser redmerqez
r .alll
etnsmoo
t .laV
10 eldaT
.O.M ,lsaasl8 msilliW
lsbnuo=t bns tnsbias1Cf
,(qs1sriT '(tiissA tot stutitanl
.bvlS erneeotv ns8 eea t t
et>ooe AO ,aslsgnA aoJ
eree-ess-ers 10 oeas-ess-ers
alo':>9110 to bla08
,{q81a11T,{filaaR lOt eturltanl
~
Jn5mmOJ 2'101ib3.
[
1522SlD msiIIiW m0l15gs225M
~
"fI0215Q 11oon :11SID 5r1T gnionslsfl
"fI0215Q ffIOlqffI,{25viliwQn bns
8
1fI5ffIl£~l1Tl£ilmbi2551 ni ,{q£15r1T '{!ils551
ni ,{qBl5r1T '{1i1£551
X:lsw!iJ 55fI51WSJ
1522SlD msiIliW
gniblodduw
.3 115do51
,,ta Ott·ritt>et ,nsaa08 snsiO '.6'06(\60
,S8t liI'ia nswsnots>ias2
.nootsxesz
e'ieo·'i'it>·aoe
M
2qU01D loolb2
rb5dlsO rilu5I
01
noiraA ni 51Ulis1' 1lJorlliW zloorl:l2
~~
520q1uq A rlliW 5fIilqi:)2iO
gfIUOY .1 no l
o~
'{qS15r1T '{lils551 ni 2:lirl13.
nihslvl rrsrrnovl
2fIsv3. .ff SfIfIOO
·oig csee ,ls>insM asl1sriO ·.\a6s{\hJoG
ataee sbilOl=t .sqrns'I ,bsoA boow
lsgb3 ten ,lslliM '(sA ·.6ohsffi6biWl
.0M .aevojD lstadsW ,.W bsoA
,(8) essr-rae-sre .arrea
(H) eSO'i·tae·l>te
lot erurttant ,stniM ,(slllsL ·."SO(\\JG
,notauoH ,msliM oO'le ,.lsvsO IstnsM
oeso-ese-erv ,SOO'i'i asxe'I ,notauoH
cl>l>Bt ,nnsM Si01SM ·.\asw{\\\JoG
,tnsmunoM ,ysW s:Jns=t ns>i0l8
sees.rss-eoe .seros .0100
nitlsM ,soilCf nitlsM :\asw\'\\'o~
snnsvsA t>l>l>,.tanl RlanO aSlloqsO
.nasW ,smss2 ,eat> st8 ,31i1bvl8
eaae-ssa-eos
nsa eeatt .aews+l blsnoiR ·.\8SW
.lilsO ,aslsgnA teo.l ,.bvl8 srneolv
vroe-osa-ers .esooe
H
2101udillf10J 10-' zenilebiui)
10 lSeY eno rot oo.a:e :anoitqi1:>adu2
aelqoo elgni8 .alSSY owt lot OO.ttee
~t rebro rnernvsq bnsa .eueei ieq oO.£ee
.iotlbe srlt
xw-esr
lIiH tlO=i
,sts>l IA :\a6s{\\,O~
,Ot'iOt .Y.1iI ,als>inoY ,sunsvA
880t·ee'l·MB
a'sntlsM tnuA .ltnstoe.J '(ls8 ·.\asw'oiWl
.III ,t2SlO=t >ilSq ,.svA nlstasW 'i'it>S
to'iS·'1t>'i·Ste .ee-oe
bsralolvl .q '{l1SJ
ai yqslsr1T
ytilseR
to Ismuol, sliT
arquoaunsrn to nottsotlduq
ot berosrlb
-qoleveb vtoertr .rtorseest
gnimsonoo
sl1t to anoirqhoaeb
oltloeqe 10 .tnern
ytilssA
to notraonqqs
tutaeeooua
.epnlrree
blsit ni aelqlonhq
yqslsriT
noiraoilduq
tslottto ertr et lsrnuo] atrtF
.yqslsriT '{tiissR rot eruntant srit to
,OT3 ,ysnonsM ritsdssil3 '.81'3\'\\0
.eoe stiu8 ,.bvlS naeoO .3 OOt
,S080e .lilsO ,ri:Jss8 gnoJ
t cB'I-cel>·e t S
gnitssM IsunnA ritlUO=t
IstoH pnlnisr'F notliH
notauoH to ytialsvinU
asxe'I ,notauoH
seer .or-s vlut,
mort OC to arol ni sldslisvs SlS atnilqeA
lsvehret
no noitsrrnctnl
.rorlbe ertr
.rasupet noqu bertelrnut ereoo
-ni bns 8elm gniaitlelfbA
:gnlalhel/bA
.iorlbe
ertr mort eldsltsvs
notrsrrnot
owt rasel ts betrlrndua ed raurn I(qoO
be ri aeb
10 s onsvbs
ni artrnom
.stsb noifeoilduq
sr!t yd bien tligilyqOO
:anolaalmle'l
to nsq olil .vqsrsrff yHlssR 10 lsntuol.
vsrn euaei eirtr ni gnill.isqqs eloins '(ns
rennsrn vns ni oeouborqei
10 beau ed
noiaalrmeq nerrhw tuoritiw tevsoetsrtw
to S2S:> ertt ni rqsoxe . ronbs snt to
ertr ni bsibodms
anoltsroup
tend
.WSiVSl 10 sloitlS
ai vqstertf
ytilssA
to lsrnuol, srff
lsdmstqs8
ni I(llsunns·imsa
berteilduq
blsq sgstaoCJ aaslO brlrff .ri:>lsM bns
.oinO ,tns>l rs
:a:>ittO Ishotlb3
ytilssR to tsrnuot.
IlsH stiriW Ote
ylia19vinU stst8 tns>l
~l>Sl>l>oiriO ,tns>l
saaS·S'i8·atS .enorlqele'I
,{qslsnT
bns benpieeb
asw rsvoo sriT :1eI/OO
oirtO ,tns>l to saorst. hsri8 vd beouboiq
ertr ts beqolevsb ngiasb ertr no bsesd
ao.I ni vqaiert'F ytilssA
rot etutitenl
.asIS{lnA
Editor
Lawrence Litwack
Kent, Ohio
Editorial Board
Alex Bassin
Tallahassee, Florida
Assistant Editors
Alice Randolph
Burton, Ohio
Thomas Bratter
Scarsdale, New York
A MESSAGE FROM WILLIAM GLASSER MD,
PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR REALITY THERAPY
Sam Buchholtz
Brooklyn, New York
C. Loleta Foster
Kent, Ohio
Kyle Conway
Independence, Missouri
Naomi Glasser
Los Angeles, California
Perry Good
New York, New York
Saskatoon,
Diane Gossen
Saskatchewan,
Canada
Robert Wubbolding
Cincinnati, Ohio
EDITOR'S COMMENT
This issue represents the fulfillment
individuals - the establishment
of a means
practice of Reality Therapy could be widely
planned as a semi-annual publication issued
year.
of a dream held by many
by which the principles and
disseminated. The Journal is
in September and March each
Articles are actively solicited that present theoretical, research-based,
and/or specific descriptions of the application of RT principles in a variety
of field settings. All articles receive blind review by at least two members of
the national editorial board. Contributors are asked to follow the guidelines
presented in this issue, particularly in reference to the use of the style guide
of the American Psychological Association and the elimination of the use of
sexist pronouns.
Reality Therapy is an action approach to helping relationships.
It is
hoped that articles in the Journal will help to demonstrate
the wide
applicability of RT principles. With the support of the Institute for Reality
Therapy, the Journal will also serve as a vehicle for the interchange of ideas,
programs, and practices in relation to RT, and will serve as a means to
announce new developments at the Institute.
We would welcome ideas and inquiries about the Journal. We would
also welcome proposals for special issues dealing with the applicability of
Reality Therapy to schools, correctional
institutions,
etc. Although the
birth pangs of the Journal were difficult, our feeling is that the new baby
will rapidly grow.
2
I wish to express my appreciation
to Larry Litwack and his staff at
Kent State for making this journal happen. To me it is further proof that we
are making a substantial contribution
to the behavioral sciences. I wish to
invite anyone interested in these ideas to send in your questions or
comments on the articles. Larry will see that they reach the authors and I
assure you that they will be answered.
Reality Therapy was developed first as a therapy to fill a void that
seemed to exist when I and Dr. G. L. Harrington were faced with how to
teach an effective treatment method to the front-line staff who worked with
hard core delinquents and long term hospitalized mental patients. This
beginning is described in the 1965 book REALITY THERAPY and is as
valid today as when it was written. By this time, however, Reality Therapy
has been used successfully in every conceivable situation and a description
of this wide application is beautifully described in the 1980 book, WHAT
ARE YOU DOING, edited by Naomi Glasser.
In most instances, however, practice precedes the theory but, as I
worked, lectured, and taught RT, theory has emerged. In fact the first
paper in this issue is devoted to an expansion of a social theory of human
behavior described in my 1972 book, THE IDENTITY SOCIETY. The
concept of Wubbolding, that there are stages of success as well as failure, is
pertinent to the latest wholistic theories of health and relevant to much
recent thinking.
Although I continued to try to develop a psychological theory to
support RT it was not until I read, BEHAVIOR:
THE CONTROL OF
PERCEPTION,
by William T. Powers, Aldine, Chicago 1973 that I
realized that Powers book, about how our brain functions as a control
system, had the potential for a biologically based, psychological theory of
RT. In consultation with Powers my latest book, STATIONS OF THE
MIND, emerged this year, a book which is the systematic beginning of a
usable theory both to support and explain RT. But it does far more than
that, it also explains how our brain works in a way that this information can
be used in every aspect of our personal and professional life. I am extremely
excited about these concepts, and I personally welcome inquiry from
anyone who wishes to dialogue with me about them. It is only through a
searching exchange of ideas that we can make progress in our field and I
promise to respond thoughtfully
to any of you who wish to learn more
about this relatively new theory of behavior.
3
2
~
rpGlGlOLC
[0
pG rrzcq
CXCjn2IAG[A lOl
!2 s urctpoq
lPGl9bl,
2rrcP
9
q}gl
cOlJcGbrmrpSSf!OU
MG9j<UG?2 HUq t9!JmG
at
92 2[9r!C'
J5G9P[A .LjJGl9bA
ro
DO \\
icbjscc
Ctl6'nLG
2(LOu6'
Ol;\:l.OU suq
fjJSC 2[LGufiljJ
Ol 2nCCG22lrr[
qo
blGC!2GIA rpc
suq
UOf cpsusc
fa [jJG CPSl! !2 fa [lGJb [jJG bl.9cr!pOUGl
!WblOA!lJfi'
92 qG?cL!b[IOU2
q!2Cn22Gq
pG[OM
at
fa (MopfimG2
ru b!B'mG
rpG <fgfiG?
ol
IPSU
SC[1!Gf,!ufi'
!U S MG9j< Ol
J
,HG qG2!5:UCq
ro
"bs!u
rpc
LS!l!u!i
Ol M)JO !2 COUlLOJJlU5: tal
0l WOlG 2bGcq,!C pGpSA!Ol2
lGJ91G
10 GOllGCf am
UHpGl
GjJ9J.1 ".LpG
W9UUGl'
rubrrr
!Il 9
MP!CP 9 bGl?QU GYP!P!!?
B92JC
couccbf2
at
[)G9I!CA
IU rue pl91IJ' •• .LpG 2[S'5(;'2 oj 2!lGufirp
Ol WGCG2?
qcacupcq
PG]OM)' MG
MG9](IJG22 (3Uq
IU rpc zwfiGZ 01. 2U.GlJlifP 32
psuq: III OrtJG!. MOlqZ'
31G lGCG!A!uli' OU rpe; 0WGl
M)J9r MG M3IJr OU OUG psuq
(Mpsr
pA am
pC;)J91\10l' 97. 2GbIJ IU
9Uq {pc iubnr MG
(bG1CGbrrH1J GUOL) pGfMGGIJ
Me; 9lG COUfLOJI!IJIi lOl)'
srrcurbr fa fig!lJ nrbnt ' !'G' to cr02G [)JG 5:sb
IIJ '2\11\1.0\.\'2. ()\ \\1(; \f\.I,IH\ (01922Gl'
J a8 J)' am pG)J9A!OL !2 2GGUH2
lGCGUqA' ~)JG b2ACJJO]OffIC9J P92!? tal J5GS]lfA .LpGlsbl,
)JH2 pGGU
tOlwnPJlGq'
WOlG
I.fIll!JJllJe;ur SJJq 2[lGUg!]],
(lGcoliu![!ou)
9lC uroar PGlbtnl
q[2CfI2?Gq
!U rpc
\5\1;\1\I,\h
qGAGJobJUfi'
!U 9C[1!GA!ulr ~JUq llJS!U[9!lJ!ufi
HIG qJGOlGf!CSJ
(VI'
(lOlq'
J 0.1(>'
Joj5)'
ro
(OrS22Gl'
sbbpcq
to
fa
01922cl'
I (}80) 9Uq
rpc
WGllfSJ jJC9jCP'
!IJ t9Q'
[0
la(8)'
(LG9rWe;U(. at
rpc
COLlGQ!OU2
9IJq
erg22G!.
qcacupcq
M)JGlG 01922GL
SUf[1LOboJolr!C9]
pH2G?'
lG2rrJ!2 CGJJrGlGq urcrpoq
J (80)' bflLI)JGLWOlG'
suq
.LpG lG9QGJ.2 at
suq
psz
31W02f
WbGI.A!2!OU
llJGIl[SJ
suq
o.I1CI.I1\1\1\\, O\\\()'
*.\..\11:.I:\l'I\\lo\. I? \;f??OC.I.IJ.\(i.b\.o\I:.??m:'
bOlq
!f PS2 SI20 pGGU 9bbJ!Gq'
GAGlA sabccr
] (80)'
(01922Cl'
2GXn91 suq
J1GSlfP
qUifi
(0]922Gl'
]<lJOM rpsr
~C9J![A
CCl\I\J'tl:.\I\1'& D£bl:\\.\\l\I:.\J\'
at
rpc
h\GLG
pGW
Io~i'l:
bLOtG22!01JS12 fpGW2GJAG2 U/-,rrppo]q!uf.i'
llJ9usfie;wGur
fa
Ia~Q)'
(OJS22GI.'
2OG!OIOfi!C9]
p92G lOl [)J!2 blSCqCS[
EqG]M!C)J' J (80)'
surrqorc
[0 pm.u-onr'
bLOLG2210IJ2
'20('I.G\h
.LjJG
t-
::J:
m'S;
aJ
_~o
m
<
(\)
m~
92 SU
jJGlb!lJ5
10 I.G]9QOU2plb2
bLOP]GllJ2
raQ~)'
10
.L]JGwbl,
(0[922Gi'
ecpoojz
p92 PGGIJ
D
N:J
>-
"'t-;,
:-::::-:._,._._
t
WOO'
C
<D
J
6
W
~
-
'6
[
~
tr
<111:
"
·2 ~
:;;
o
'::
o
__
>
m
m
:s:
~~
m [
51i!
""~
o
m
a:
tr
a.'"
rr......
r~
.~'1;
tttt
0.
.r;
g-
0
I
,~
I
I
>--
1
'i
I
<.
I
: ~
m
..,
t:J:
m
a::
<t
tr
>-
m•
'0
1
a:
Q
~
'"
~"c"'
0
g>
~
-
c"
i'
~
'I
C>~:5.
~
~,:;
g." n•
i'
~'
N~~
.0 ~
g
nN
C
'to
~
•. -_....
.>
co
()
m '" >----
..-...... -
o
8
er
,!,,,,
I
~,
.)
~g",al orr
S
G
I
I
o
<C:;il
1:::0
'"C..,
0
i5
a-
---------.- .
rn x
m .~ ~
!
(
1
~
~]n-
I
m
:J '~
o .s
'"
!;,:
I
~~
I
-
i
m 1:
-
:ri
,
•
.
C\) 0
()
1
I
g
eo
::>
i1
'"I
c
E
t:
I
1 ~
c
-er
cv
m
1 ro
1 ro
';
°
~~
"
:;;
-
t-
~
:~
~
>-
(\)
<c
a:
1'2
'".
<t:
CT
:::l
1
"
'iG
IT
'W-
m
<c
•
o
I
I
(J
...,
:::,
!
IT
;j,
I ~
I~
rr-
I
.1:
tn
_J ~
I,
I
;c;
t-
o
rr
I
a>!.
CT
eo
,
I
•. 0
J~
'.
_ •••_-
i
I,
;;s
, ~
~~""\H\'
0,<.
'"
'0
",0
t~
~ ~
N
m
I
o
:
'--'--1 _
~.c.
0
I
dl ~
-g;~"§
",0
x
~-I
I
')';-,.'\1.."..
:;!
>o
..
".L-;r;'::Io~
•
1)
~;.~~,~
<(0)-
,
,
,:
~:~rr~
~ 1:;'7,!: -..'-"-"'' ',
e-
•.• rr-
~
,
~
>-"'8
-;::: .~
I
I
-
SM
r- 0..,
o
,
£I
~~c4ii
'p-'
.q
N~
~~~
so'"
I- .~>-
-
. !
~.
SS
_C\)~
o
E--l
~~
.!:'i)
~o
<cOE
-s~
~!!lo
a:>~
a::
(J1G GllJbpS2!2 au blSU2 fa GUjJ'ruCG ant !qGUq(A f[1LOrrlr)J [OAG HUq 2GJl-MOl(P
om, cnu.cur
2OC!G(A 92 ouc IU MP!CP ant !qGIJP[A UGGq2 9!.G bLOW!IJGUf' ~pm:'
210MIA
rr-'-,
0
g~
.",
;di
m'"
<ctr
suq
[pG PS2!C
WCCG22 92 qGAGJobllJGUf91
LO r)JG C).19l1 bicacurcq
W9UUGl
"
m
uioic
2bGCltA
rpc L!5:PI J9pGJGq ~\\\\I\\l;l:\bG\''2.0\1
sqqinouz
~~
a:
i),
l[1GlsbA.,
su
[)Gg[lrA
bO'2.I\I)il:>'2f1\.\.\\}\OUI bl;\.?,o\.\·
[PC OUG !)5:fJlG au
MjJO !2 filOM!U'5'
Ill,
LSCf !jJS[
!U 2).10LI' [PS[
rr2[lS[G2
OJG C).19l[ CjG9LfA
110MG"Gl'
IIJG 2[LGu8rp
sqqmoua
If !2 uor
!2 "filsqrrsI'
"LjJG2C CjJ9U'5G2' rpGlGtOU;'
at fpG2G
lJJG lOllOM!Il5:
0t
JGU 2!qC
JJJn2'
fiWMfj"J'
qG".GlobWGursl'
If !2 sbbicbusrc
.LPG/I qo'
fa cOUCGbrrr91!SG
bntboec
lJlG
lpG
blOP[GW2'
rpc
suq
CPS[ qGCGl!019[!OU
WCCG2?'
[)G9J1rA lJJGwbA'
L9[).1Gl qJ9U
JspGJGq
tSnrru:;'
nb
bO!Uf2
pG!u"fi '5wqmfj
91G lGfilG221AC'
rpst [jJGlG SlG 2[9fiC2
2!6'm at 2flGU1iqJ suq
IpGOLI, ot
2[sfiG2'
at
10 !UCLGS2G bGl20U9[
tnl[).1GL
WCCG22 pc 2GGU 92 1U"01,,!u8
lGWcq!9nOU
rpc
C~JU pc nzcq
-
"';;! 0\
li:go~
!:::
.5 m
'" (\i ~
r-.~0: f;;
:S:~Qm
>-o"Q'!er:r?;
!E
:r: ~
'.
I.
'l'j't:<;!>'/Il
.
N
•••... ""m
f'
L -.~.~\..,.~.
'j, '../"ft.
~ru
mm_
c
~ .
s: ~
~~
'
c.
'
.....
,
I/'.-
'.fl.,
.,
I
.
~..f.;,.2i~IJ'."
'''.'
o
~,
~o
~••
".
:.' ~0..
'"
'" /
IT
~~
:0
••
1/----.
ro
.?"c'
en
C
n
~
;;
1....-
____ J
w
nON
;z!
"f",'JhW,\. {\\Jlhl:.\.'1.I(},'
b~ ~
~r!:
E
2:;
f:{OpSlJ
E' Mnppolq!Ua
°t
.•
"HD Hb021..llAE2AWblOW bEH201lln
B"r~II1CI&.1C lHE CH"Hl= HDO 11 bE~20IlL~
l:1(;fIlG
J
balance is illustrated and strength is seen as a process and an effort resulting
in gradual growth. (Figure 2).
·t;.d 11l1lC.,.\
I'hcr.rpv.
COp\·
of the complete
,·hart mav be obtained
h\ \\rilin!!
10
the lu-titute
for Reality
A.
00 It Person
Just as {he firs I phase of weakness is "I give up" resulting in "Give up
Person ". the first phase of strength is attained when {he person begins to
"do if ", i.e. begins to control for input in a strong way, no matter how
minimal. Such effort might be expressed in a desire to improve, following
through on initial plans, or in many other ways.
Figure 2
Success Identity, Strength,
Responsibility, Self Discipline
POSITIYF
SYMPTOM
PERSON
DO [T PERSON
Belonging-Love
Belonging-Love
Gaining Worth
Recognition
Gaining Worth
Recognition
Having
Fun
Constructive
Actions:
Assertive,
Altruistic
and
and
Having Fun
"1
''I'll do
it."
Rational and
Positive
Thinking
want
Healthful
Activities:
Diet,
Exercise, etc.
10
improve. "
B.
Positive
Positive
Addiction:
Positive
Feelings
Being Free
Being Free
FULFILLED
PERSON
Running
Meditation
Elc.
Symptom Person
1. Acting Constructively:
Just as a weak person controls by means of
anti-social behavior, the strong person controls for input through
positive actions. These positive actions could be of at least two
kinds; assertive or altruistic. Assertive actions are designed to help
persons express themselves, contribute to their own self-enhancement, etc. Altruistic actions are those designed to contribute more
explicitly to the welfare of others, e.g. being involved in volunteer
programs, doing a favor for another person, etc.
6
2. Positive Feelings: Just as weak persons control their input by
depressing, shaming, guilting, resenting, angering themselves, the
strong person controls for input in a strong or successful manner by
hoping, trusting, self-accepting, paticnce-ing , joying, ctc.
3. Rational Thinking: Just as weak persons control for input by
psychotic or at least negativistic thinking (the eternal pessimist '),
strong persons control by thinking in a rational way. They can think
things through, are open to experience and can learn from it, can
look at the bright side of life, and can evaluate the world in a mature
way.
4. Healthful Activities: The person who is weak often controls by
getting sick to a greater or lesser degree. On the other hand, the
strong person controls for input through health giving activities, e.g.
diet and exercise. Often persons who are "Negative Symptom
Persons" do not take care of their physical needs. In my own
counseling, I have encountered
many persons characterized
by
several of the negative symptoms. If they have not taken care of their
basic health needs, they are helped to work out a plan to do so. And I
insist they make a plan to bathe on the day they come to see me. This
is for my benefit as well as thcirs l! A person controlling for health ful
input will also get proper exercise. Of course, "proper"
should be
understood in a very wide sense. Yet, if persons give a specific and
sufficient amount of time to exercise, they can eventually achieve the
stage of Positive Addiction, or at least, a "Pre-P. A. State."
It is important to note that the description of "Positive Symptom
Person" is a summary. These ideas will be further developed. Also, it must
be stated that no one is completely weak nor completely strong. Therefore,
if someone's control for input is characterized by positive syrnptons, he/she
can still grow in these symptoms. There are degrees of each sympton just as
there are degrees of strength.
In summary, the two stages of strength are explicitly formulated
to
help emphasize that just as weakness can gradually increase, strength can
also gradually increase. This concept can be illustrated by these additions to
the chart.
Bibliography
Edclwich, J., Burn-Out. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1980.
Ford, E., Why Marriage? Niles, Illinois: Argus Communications,
1974.
Ford, E .. Whv Be Lonely? Niles, Illinois, Argus Cornrnunicauons
1975.
Ford, E., For the Love of Children. New York: Doubleday, 1977.
Ford. E .. Permanent Love. Minneapolis.
Minnesota: Winston Press. 1979.
Glasscr . N .. What /Ire You Doing? New York: Harper & Row, 1980.
Glasser. W .. Reality Therapv, New York: Harper & Row. 1965.
Glasser. W., Schools Without Failure. New York: Harper & Row. 1968.
Glasser, W., ldentitv Societv. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Glasser. '1/., Positive Addiction.
New York: Harper & Row. 1976.
Glasser. w., Both- Win Management.
New York: Lippincott.
19S0.
Glasser, W .. Stotions of the Mind. New York: Harper & Row, 1980.
Wubbolding,
R., "Reality Therapy as an Antidote 10 Burn-Out."
AmeriCIII/ Mental
Counselors Association
journal.
1979. I. 39-43.
7
Heult h
REALITY THERAPY IN RESIDENTIAL
TREATMENT
Larry P. Molstad*
* The aurhor is associated with the Lutheran Social Service/Lake
Superior in Duluth,
Minnesota
the fact that Reality Therapy could be easily understood by staff and that
with practice, staff could effectively utilize it without extensive training.
Reality Therapy appeared to be a common sense approach to problem
solving that stressed highly the here and now rather than an individual's
past. Reality Therapy also emphasized an individual's responsibility for
his/her own behavior; we considered this and the previously mentioned
factors as being vitally important in the treatment process.
In reviewing the literature
which has been published on Reality
Therapy, it is almost impossible to find any information pertaining to its
utilization in the area of residential treatment; this article will address this
speci fic area.
Once Reality Therapy had been chosen as the mode of intervention, the
next step in developing the program was really two part: staff training and
program policy development. For the purpose of this article, each process
will be considered separately.
In 1976, following close to a total staff turnover, the author assumed a
social work position within the private sector of residential treatment. The
facility Vias a physically new structure which had been designed to serve up
to forty-eight
emotionally
disturbed
adolescents.
Runaways
occurred
almost on a daily basis, fist fights between residents and aggressive acts
toward staff were common,
theft from local stores, staff and fellow
residents took place frequently and the damage to the recently completed
facility had become extensive. Therefore, as a new staff, our first task was
to stabilize Ihe program and to bring it back to a functional, treatment
oriented level.
Staff, from cooks to social workers, need to become familiar with the
concepts of Reality Therapy. It is essential that all staff have some
knowledge of the principles so that all members of the treatment program
are working from a unified therapeutic base.
Initially, as an administrative
staff, we had to decide upon and outline
totally new program policies which later were to be approved
by the
Department of Public Welfare prior to re-liccusing the program. One of the
major areas which we were required to address was that of our treatment
approach.
The attempts at treatment intervention
under the previous
administration
had been based upon the Transactional
Analysis model.
This modality had not served the needs of the program well as it was too
cognitive of an approach to the residents' understanding of their past and
present behaviors and was often beyond their scope of comprehension.
The
analyzing of interactions,
communications
and games was far more
pertinent (0 the staff than the residents; therefore a continuation
of this
approach was decided against. The possibility of establishing a Positive
Peer Culture program was considered but this approach was also rejected.
It was decided that perhaps administratively
what our goals were to be for the adolescents who
Once this task was accomplished
we could then
approach that seemed to facilitate most readily
goals.
we should clearly identify
would enter the program.
decide upon a treatment
the achievement of these
Whether or not administrators,
psychologists or social workers would
like to admit it, a great deal of treatment occurs or may occur as the
residents have contact with support staff. The cooks or maintenance
personnel can offer activities that are frequently sought by the residents as a
pleasant diversion from the regular daily routine. When enjoyable activities
can be tied into developing
increased responsibility,
it dramatically
increases the effectiveness of the treatment program.
In familiarizing
staff with the concepts of Reality Therapy,
an
overview of the approach is essential and an introduction to the basic steps
is required. Once the staff have an introductory
understanding,
they can
practice and sharpen their skills through role playing with one another and
critiquing each other's work; it is important to encourage positive feedback
to one another as success encourages utilization and skill development.
If feasible, it is highly desirable to have program staff attend one or more
of the intensive Reality Therapy training weeks offered by the Institute for
Reality Therapy. Once several program members have been trained they can
then assume responsibility for the training of other program staff.
In our particular setting all of the social workers were trained at an
intensive week and then a two-day in-service program was designed to
provide the staff with a basic working knowledge of the Reality Therapy
approach. Utilized were lecture, Reality Therapy video tapes, discussion,
and a great deal of role playing in order to provide a basic working
foundation.
As we discussed program goals, they continuously centered around
providing quality child care for the residents, the development
of good
relationships, the establishment of an increasingly healthy sense of identity,
increased decision-making
skills, continued education,
and overall the
development
of a strong sense of individual responsibility.
With this
information
clearly in mind, we again considered
various treatment
modalities, and, at this point, we were impressed by the basic principles of
Reality Therapy and how they were related to the goals which we had
considered essential 10 program development, We were also imnressed bv
Administrators,
child care workers,
program
teachers and the
maintenance
personnel were included in the seminars. Following the
introductory
seminars, it became the responsiblity of the social workers
who were also the team leaders to see that the treatment approaches
implemented were consistent with the Reality Therapy principles and to
oversee staff training with regard to their particular unit.
8
9
Since residential treatment generally has such a high rate of staff turnover, it is essential that new staff are trained in the application of the
approach quickly. This can be accomplished
in many ways: required
reading of the available books on Reality Therapy;
the viewing of
introductory
tapes on the Reality Therapy approach;
observation
and
participation
with trained staff members in individual, group and family
sessions; participation
in scheduled two-day seminars for new staff as
numbers make it feasible to arrange such.
discussion of logical and reasonable consequences for not adhering to the
rules. Staff, of course, must assist with this process and must make the final
decisions. Once the policies are totally formulated, they should be clearly
written out stating the policy and the consequence; a copy should be given
to each resident and to all new incoming residents. From a treatment
perspective, it is productive to request a volunteer from the group to review
policies with each new arrival as this helps to develop relationships and
fosters increased invovlement with others. Staff must review the policies
with the new resident a second time to clarify any misunderstandings.
11 is important that the "front line" staff develop skills in individual,
group, and family work utilizing the Reality Therapy approach and
although the steps seem relatively simple they are deceptively so. Staff will
require feedback, reinforcement,
encouragement
and tactful correction as
the learning process occurs.
Once the rules go into effect it is imperative that all staff members
implement them as agreed. This can be difficult at times when group
pressure opposes the implementation
of a set consequence. When policies
are not adhered to and unacceptable behavior is tolerated or glossed over,
then the opportunity
to assist the residents in developing increased
responsibility is lost and the program is weakened.
The development
and implemention
of program policies which are
based upon the Reality Therapy concepts can occur simultaneously to the
training of program staff. Obviously, every program has policies which are
formulated administratively
or that may be designated by other governing
structures. These policies must be accepted and interpreted to staff and
residents alike with a realistic explanation of the rationale behind them.
Staff should be clearly aware of why specific rules exist so that they may
knowledgeably
discuss the need for them with inquiring
residents.
Generally, residents can accept a reasonable explanation for the existence of
a particular rule when staff take the time to discuss them in an open, honest
manner. Certainly, it should be expected that from time to time almost all
policies will be challenged by program residents and staff must respond
appropriately
to such challenges.
Periodically, the group and sometimes the program policies must be
reviewed and discussed with the residents. This is necessary since from time
to time the need for specific policies can change. Also, as new residents
enter the program it is important for them to feel a sense of involvement in
policy formation. The process which occurs when staff and residents engage
in a dialogue over policy formation has numerous treatment implications: it
increases the feelings of involvement in the program, it helps to develop and
solidify relationships between the residents and staff and it fosters the
development of a healthy identity when the residents feel that adults believe
they have something of value to contribute to the program. For many of the
residents, it is the first time that anyone has taken the time to really listen to
what they have to say.
The Reality Therapy approach lends itself to individual, group and
family interventions;
each of these should be a part of any quality
residential program.
There are numerous program policies which are not prescribed and
which residents can help to formulate. When residents are allowed and
encouraged to have input into policy development, there is a definite sense
of involvement and this sense of involvement increases the likelihood of
their adhering to the rules. Having input into policy formation does not
mean making the final decision and the residents must be aware of this from
the onset of the task.
In our setting, assignment to one of the four living units was based
upon sex and age initially, although we later developed a coed treatment
unit for the older adolescents. Each treatment unit was required to adhere
to certain established program policies but each unit also had the flexibility
to develop policies that pertained directly to their individual unit as long as
they remained in keeping with the Reality Therapy concepts.
Each treatment unit openly and realistically discussed the needs with
the residents for rules and assisted them in understanding that there were to
be definite consequences for negative behavior. The issue of punishment
versus consequences
was discussed and most of the residents could grasp
these concepts. Following this discussion the residents were asked, "If this
is your living unit, what policies do you need to maintain yourselves
responsibly in order to work on your present problems while you are here?"
The discussion can often go smoothly or it can become heated; it is the
staff's responsibility
to facilitate such a group meeting in an orderly,
productive manner.
After
much
discussion,
policies are proposed.
10
The next step is then
.'
In our setting the social worker had responsibility
for doing the
individual treatment with each of the residents assigned to his/her treatment
unit. The focus of weekly individual sessions was generally the present and
they were directed toward developing relationships, evaluating behavior,
developing problem solving techniques, formalizing resident plans, and the
development of increased resident responsibility. At times the sessions were
oriented just toward general discussions or mutual interests in order to
foster the development of the relationship.
Group sessions were scheduled daily during the week following the
close of the school day. A period of one hour between school and group
time appeared to increase the effectiveness of the group meeting. Group
meetings, like individual treatment,
were oriented toward the present.
Generally, a session would be opened by a review of the school day
discussing any problems occurring with the teachers, peers or the academic
work. Following a discussion of the school day, any subject which one of
the residents wished to discuss or which staff raised was acceptable.
Common group subjects were peer problems, sexual issues, responsible or
irresponsible behavior, disciplinary actions, family difficulties, aggression,
11
home visits, individual
check outs (a privilege
responsible residents up to six hours independently
planning, etc.
allowing established,
off grounds), future
Group sessions were generally run by the social worker, with one or
two of the child care workers assigned to a particular participating unit. The
child care worker's were frequently encouraged to run the meetings under
the social worker's direct supervision.
At certain times, the child care
workers were solely responsible for group sessions when a crisis would
occur which necessitated
a group meeting in the absence of the social
worker. Since child care workers were given the responsibility for group
meetings and individual meetings, as the need developed, it was essential
that they have a thorough working knowledge of Reality Therapy and have
practiced it in both individual and group settings.
Group sessions can be difficult, and discipline is a major factor if any
serious work is to be accomplished.
It is preferable for one person to have
the major responsibility for group interactions and that individual must be
in control of the group at all times; he/she can control and facilitate the
group actively or passively as he/she senses the need. Leadership does not
develop easily or immediately, rather it is a process occurring with time and
the group must develop a sense of trust in the leader. New and inexperienced leaders are not readily accepted by a group and will often be
challenged quickly. It is helpful for new leaders to have the support,
initially, of an experienced and accepted leader.
In group sessions an experienced leader does not feel the need to be
actively involved directly in all of the interactions. An individual who feels
secure in a position of leadership can remain passive when the group is
handling itself in a productive,
problem solving fashion.
Group leaders must also be strong enough to withstand strong pressure
from the group or [0 challenge a well-liked, powerful member of the group
when it appears necessary. When the group is out of hand, the leader must
be strong enough to demand discipline and responsible actions. If this
cannot be obtained, the group should immediately be terminated and all
members restricted to their rooms with the clear understanding
that when
they are ready to seriously resume the group, they should inform one of the
staff and then a group meeting can again be attempted; the responsibility is
then placed upon the residents. It must be impressed upon the residents that
not only do they have responsibility for themselves as individuals but that
they also have a responsibility
to their group as a whole.
Family therapy also utilizes the Reality Therapy concepts and the
meetings should be oriented toward the present rather than the past.
Changes in family relationships,
activities, and types of interactions are
common areas of discussion.
It is necessary to help all family members
assess their behavior and evaluate how it may be part of the overall
problem. In preparation for a return home, visits should be planned for the
residents at certain intervals and when earned by responsible behavior. Each
visit should have definite goals planned by the resident to be accomplished
during their stay and the visit should be reviewed immediately upon their
return.
12
Staff should focus on developing skills around short and long term
contracting with residents. Staff need to learn the importance and value in
immediate follow up, not accepting excuses, and in never "giving up."
Staff should assess how they attempt to develop relationships and consider
how they can become increasingly effective in this area. Skills should also be
developed in utilizing peer counseling whenever feasible and in finding
acceptable areas outside of program confines where the residents can
become involved as their behavior grows increasingly responsible. Finally,
staff should attempt to utilize their sense of humor in their interactions with
the residents. When this can occur, it allows the residents to see the more
human
side of staff, and humor can often make a frustrating,
overwhelming situation seem less so to both residents and staff.
.
If a residential treatment program is based upon the Reality Therapy
concepts, then discharge planning should not be predetermined and based
solely upon the length of a resident's placement. Rather, discharge should
be open ended and based upon the increased level of responsibility
as
indicated by the resident in various areas within the institution, within the
family (if plans are for a return home), within the school setting, the local
community, etc. Discharge discussions should include the resident, the staff
working with the resident, teachers, the family and any county personnel
involved such as probation officers or social workers. Staffings should
generally be scheduled at least every three months in order to monitor the
individual
progress of each resident and to keep everyone involved
informed with regard to treatment planning.
Discharge planning should include provisions for on-going family
support through the institution or local family service centers, educational
planning, possible resident involvement in support groups, etc. Generally,
discharge planning and follow-up have been the weakest areas of residential
treatment programs and this is without question an area that needs to be
addressed in the future if quality programs are to be developed and
maintained.
In our setting, when the responsibility
for eventual discharge was
turned over to the resident, behavior improved greatly. Residents took the
program more seriously and worked harder towards the goal of discharge.
As residents were held accountable for their actions and as individual and
group responsibility was stressed, the damage to the facility and the
property decreased quickly and drastically. Damages which were done by a
resident became their financial responsibility and outstanding bills had to be
paid in full prior to discharge; means of earning money or repaying a bill by
working it off were made available to the residents.
The basic aim of this article was not to provide an in-depth program
analysis. Rather, it was intended to present an overview indicating how
Reality Therapy was implemented and utilized effectively over a severalyear period in one specific program. Hopefully, the article will suggest how
these concepts may be implemented in other residential programs.
13
Basically, the kids fall into three groups:
REALITY THERAPY IN SCHOOL GROUPS
Ruth Dalbech*
I. Maintenance groups. These are the ones who can get and keep things
going well if they are seen every week and taught how to keep all top of
the three areas.
2. Groups
th 0,. is aSS()Cfuled
F!ug\{u!t: /1 riz.ona.
*TlI<'
([/I
with the Coconino CUI/IIII//Iliry
Guidance
Center,
with more problems. They may have been caught once stealing
or breaking the law in some way or are having problems at school but are
not yet repeaters.
3. Hard-core recidivists - These are kids who have been in trouble again and
again, at home, at school and in the society.
Because I have been so enthusiastic about Reality Therapy, I have tried
using it in many situations, one of which I would like to describe.
Since half of my work in the Community Guidance Center is to work
I decided in 1975 to organize Junior High youths into groups of
four that could meet in one class period at school (one hour a week). There
are currently 15 groups in two junior high schools. These students are referred
by many people, counselors, teachers, principals, juvenile corrections, vice
principals, par-ents and sometimes by the young people themselves. Three of
four students typically are failing or having problems in one or more of the
three major areas of their lives, school, horne and social life. The other one
is a success person, gettng along well in all areas. The groups are sometimes
segregated according to gender. Each student is given 15 minutes of group
time each week (this is somewhat flexible), and I use the Reality Therapy
method, "What are you doing? Is it working? If it isn't working, what do
you think you need to do to get things going better? - let's make a plan,
and then, will you do it?" A good amount of time is also spent checking out
what the successes are and what is working. I always have a university placement student who is learning Reality Therapy working with me, and we
spend some time getting to know these kids, making friends with them. At
the point of making a plan, the other group members are asked to
participate. "What would help Jim? What have you done that has worked?
How do you manage to get along with your dad?" Or, "How did you bring
your English up?" Or, "What can you do to get off pot?" etc. This is where
the "put-together"
kids really help.
w it h youth,
The things noticed over these past five and a half years, are that Junior
High students will much more readily take comments about how to
establish and maintain responsible behavior from peers rather than from
adults. If a girl says to a peer, "Go ahead and run away if you want. You'l!
just end up down in Juvenile. Why don't you just stay here and we'll help
you make things better," it has a tremendous impact. I briefly record the
plan so we can start there the next week, and I bring these records to each
group.
14
These groups are conducted with the school counselors (and the intern)
who come and go as they must, but I am always there to provide the
continuity.
(The counselors are involved because they need to see the
students, if necessary, between group meetings at school). These counselors
have been favorably impressed, as have the school administrators with this
process.
The groups are conducted all year with kids being moved out (and
others in) as they themselves feel they are ready to maintain on their own.
Many times over the past years, students have come back on their own
saying, "I think I need to get back into a group". This perhaps is because
one of the continual messages is, "Don't let yourselves fail. Pay attention to
failure areas and do something about them."
I settled on the Junior High because in working with adults I realized
we were letting them get into the water upstream and then pulling them out
downstream half dead. Junior High age seemed to be the point at which
youth were first facing major independent choices.
This group counseling program is now well-established
and has
demonstrated
that Reality Therapy works when set up this way in the
schools.
One disadvantage is that we really don't have the time we need with
each group member. However, since parents and teachers are reticent to let
kids out of more than one class period per week (we rotate these) we do the
best we can with the length of time we have.
One of the major contributions of this program, in addition to getting
young people to evaluate their lives and to make plans to do better, is
having people in their lives who care enough to listen to them and to help
them with what they are doing. It is also a "safe" place where they can say
what they need to say and know that, with certain exceptions, this will be
confidential.
"Secrets" arc often divulged in these groups, with the kids
being good about confidentiality.
In this day when parents spend I Vi
minutes out of 24 hours of quality time with their children, this and the
Reality Therapy approach has proved to be very effective.
15
4. To provide the background
for building a school
environment
in which the staff and the pupils may deal
realistically with their problems through the resources at hand.
SCHOOLS WITHOUT FAILURE IN ACTION
Funds were provided through a grant awarded by the Department
Cultural and Educational Services of the State of Maine to this author
Project Director. These funds were used, in part, to employ the services
the Educator Training Center in Los Angeles, California,
to assist
providing training for the school personnel related to the concepts
Schools Without Failure and to provide for the utilization of the services
and continuous professional support from the University of Maine.
Donna B. Evans"
"The author is Acting Dean of the Graduale School and Professor
Education at the University of Maine at Orono.
of Counselor
Nationally,
the problem of children failing in school is of serious
concern. This points to the need for an approach to education which
encourages children to experience success in school. The term currently in
vogue for such school experiences is "humanizing
education",
which
implies that within humanistic
educational programs there are specific
attempts to meet the intellectual, social, and emotional needs of children.
Educators are taking seriously the challenge in Silberman's
Crisis in the
Classroom: "What tomorrow needs is not masses of intellectuals, but
masses of educated men - men educated to feel and to act as well as to
think" (p. 7) (1970). Silberman (1970) further reminds us that the "false
dichotomy between the cognitive and the affective domains can only cripple
the development of thought and feeling". (p. 8)
William Glasser has also presented
humanized
education in his book,
for humanizing
education for children, Glasser has outlined procedures,
strategies and
techniques for making this philosophy work in classrooms. Techniques and
strategies are within the bounds of many types of school organizations and
can be personalized to each school and classroom.
Schools Without Failure (1969). In addition to a philosophy
Aspects of the techniques reported in Schools Without Failure were
adopted during a three week summer School Without Failure for two
consecutive
summers
in the Brewer, Maine, Elementary
Schools in
conjunction
with the College of Education at the University of Maine at
Orono. The children, teachers, and parents experienced three weeks of
successful school experiences.
As a result of these experiences, there was felt a need for in-depth
expansion of the educational
experience within the Brewer Schools and
Brewer Community,
incorporating
theoretical and practical application of
the "Success
Oriented School"
concept which encompassed
the total
Elementary School Curriculum on a year-round basis.
Some of the anticipated
outcomes
of this effect were as follows:
1. To provide opportunities
for principals and teachers to
develop a positive, personal philosophy of education so they
may develop their own "Success Oriented School".
2. To provide ways for building constructive communication networks within the school and between the school and
community.
3. To provide a process for developing classroom skills and
procedures needed by teachers and principals to implement a
success-oriented
curriculum.
16
1
I
of
as
of
in
of
of
There were six main purposes of the Brewer Public Schools project.
They were: (a) To plan, develop, and institute a system-wide program of
Schools Without Failure at the elementary level in Brewer, Maine; (b) To
infuse aspects of career awareness into the model; (c) To provide training
for the school personnel in the selected school system using principles of
Reality Therapy and Schools Without Failure and the services of the
Educator Training Center; (d) To provide for utilization of the services of
and continuous professional support from the University of Maine at
Orono with the project director; (e) To develop a plan for evaluating the
Schools Without Failure model in Brewer; and (f) To plan phases II and III
which were to develop and institute system-wide programs of Schools
Without Failure at the junior and senior high levels in Brewer, Maine.
The program was built on involvement, relevance and thinking. Much
time was devoted to attitudinal
change, communication
skills, group
processes, and problem solving. The focus was on meeting the needs of the
individual schools related to the above and to assist principals and teachers
in developing appropriate
implementation
skills in their school and
classroom.
The academic year began the week preceding the opening of school.
Faculty and staff members of the Brewer School System were invited to
participate in a 2\12 day workshop. The project paid salaries for these
teachers to attend. In addition, support personnel from the school system
also attended the August workshop.
Data Collection - Pre-Test
A pre-test battery was administered
to the staff during the August
workshop days. The purpose was to collect information
related to the
population of adults involved in the project. The test battery included:
benchmark data for staff including familiarity with theory and concepts of
the Schools Without Failure concept, current practices implemented
in
classrooms, and attitude toward career education.
Because of the previous "Success Oriented School" experiences in
Brewer, only 9 of the 79 respondents said they were not familiar with the
concepts of Schools Without Failure, while 13 reported they were only
vaguely familiar.
17
Data Collection
- Post-Test
The major purpose of the project was to focus on aspects of Schools
Without
Failure related to discipline,
increase communication
skills
through the use of classroom meetings, and increased student responsibility
for self. Therefore, the data collected during the second half of the project
year employed teacher observation.
A questionnaire designed to evaluate teachers' reactions to the Schools
Without
Failure project was distributed
to the teachers in May. The
instrument consisted of eight open-ended questions and eight attitude items.
Seven of the attitude items were taken from the pretest forms given to the
teachers in August. The teachers were then asked to respond anonymously
to the questionnaire.
Approximately
one-third of the 56 elementary staff members who
completed the preschool workshop the preceeding August responded to the
post questionnaire.
No attempt was made to elicit responses from the nonrespondents.
The time of the year and teacher morale were two factors
considered
in not having additional follow-up of all participants.
The
openness of the responses both negative and positive would indicate a cross
section of views was achieved.
Results
The teachers were asked what features of the Schools Without Failure
project worked well for them. The list of aspects identified by teachers in
rank order by frequency of mention is incuded in Table I.
TABLE 1
Rank Of Order
Features of Success Oriented School Project
Which Worked Well For Teachers
Rank
I
2
3
4
5
Feature
Classroom Meetings
Approach to Discipline
Positive Approach
Students Taking Responsibility
Enrichment Activities
The most frequently mentioned feature that worked well for teachers
was the classroom meeting. The classroom meeting is a key activity involved
in the principles of Schools Without Failure. Teachers and children liked
classroom meetings and became especially deeply involved in this aspect of
the program.
The second part of the first item related to whether teachers made any
change in their teaching techniques or instructional strategies as a result of
the project.
Forty-four
percent of the respondents
said that they had not.
18
said that they had, while 28OJo
In general, many of the teachers had taken the Summer Schools
Without Failure course which the author had provided in the school district
for two consecutive summers prior to this academic year effort and had
already been using some of the concepts. Some teachers stated that
although the techniques were not new to them they "put different stress"
on them as a result of the project. For those who felt the program had an
impact on their teaching, having students accept more responsibility about
their learning,
involving students
in planning,
the use of natural
consequences, and the positive action program were the techniques listed.
The third aspect of the first item was to find out from the teachers
whether they saw any changes in their students. Seventy-eight percent of the
teachers said that they did. Primarily
the teachers saw a greater
development of responsibility by their students and more positive attitudes.
Those who did not find a change felt that there was a lack of consistancy
and support from the administration.
Aspects of Project Which Did Not Work Well
The teachers were asked to identify the aspects of the Schools Without
Failure project that did not work well for them.
Twelve teachers gave some comments to this question. The feature
listed most often was lack of "follow-up".
Teachers felt that there was not
the support they had hoped for from the parents and administration.
Several teachers identified classroom meetings as an area which didn't work
well for them. Some teachers had difficulty in using students to judge
discipline problems.
Unexpected
or Unanticipated
Results
The third question to the teachers was whether they had any
unexpected or unanticipated
results from being involved in the project.
Twleve teachers responded to the question. Two of the teachers wrote
positive comments about success in handling behavior problems and the
utilization of classroom meetings.
Negative aspects listed by the teachers were the negative reaction of
some parents to the project, the problems with the tests used for evaluative
purposes and the general breakdown in communication
between teachers,
administration
and parents about the project.
General Project
Evaluation
The teachers were asked three additional
project evaluation which included:
questions
related to general
1. If you were asked to set up a similar program in another school
system, which features would you include? The responses included:
Classroom meetings, concept of discipline as opposed to punishment,
student participation
in rule making and classroom planning, written
evaluations instead of grades on progress reports, encouragement
of selfdiscipline, enrichment activities, and parent meetings.
2. Which features would you avoid or eliminate? The responses
included: Daily classroom meetings, and no feature would be eliminated.
19
3. What aspects or features not a part of the Success Oriented Schools
program this year should be considered for inclusion? The responses
included: more frequent enrichment activities, earlier inclusion of parents,
and increased administrative
support.
In general,
teachers
felt that there needs to be more parent
involvement, especially from the start, more administrative
and outside
support, and a "time-out room" or program for discipline problems.
The teachers were asked to respond to eight attitude questions on
Glasser's concepts. Seven of the eight items selected were utilized in the
pretesting program completed in August. The summary of the responses to
the items is provided in Table 2. In general there was no major changes in
attitude by the teachers. The teachers, in general, felt that the concepts
postulated by Glasser would help them as an educator improve their role in
school. Very few teachers disagreed with the major tenets of Glasser's
theory.
One new question was included, question eight, which asked if teachers
felt that Glasser's
concepts would be helpful in developing a career
education
program.
Fifty three percent of the teachers felt Glasser's
concepts would help; forty seven percent were unsure.
TABLE 2
Pretest - Posttest Comparisons
Teachers' Attitudes Toward Glasser's
Item
SA
A
?
DA
SDA
May
Aug.
56<\'0
53<\'0
33 <\'0
33%
J I<\'0
14<\'0
0070
0<\'0
0<\'0
0070
2. H we eliminate failure in
schools, we will increase
the involvement of students
in education.
May
Aug.
28"70
40070
56070
42070
11%
13%
0%
6070
0070
0°10
3. Schools must start providing
success for students.
May
Aug.
53"70
46070
41070
41070
6070
8070
0";'0
6070
0%
0070
4. The development
of responsibility is achieved through
strong, positive emotional
involvement with a responsible
person.
May
Aug.
50"io
50070
50070
38070
0070
9070
0"70
4070
0070
0070
5. Rules carefully understood
and firmly enforced are proof
to students that we care that
they learn and become responsible.
May
Aug.
61 "70
66070
33070
28070
0070
3%
60"10
2070
0%
0070
6. Students
involved
May
Aug.
39"70
49070
61070
45%
0070
5070
0<\'0
1070
0070
0070
7. Teachers need to learn what
other teachers are doi ng in
career education at their
grade level or subject area.
May
Aug.
1 1070
[90"ioj
72070
I 7 <\'0
I I 070
0070
0%
0070
0070
8. Glasser's concepts are helpful in developing a career
education program.
SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, ?
May
6010
47070
47%
00/0
0°10
=
Unsure,
20
DA
=
Disagree,
SDA
& Recommendations
Several planning sessions between the Superintendent,
the Elementary
School Principals, the Special Education Directors, the Elementary School
Counselor and the Project Director eventuated into a plan to work more
intensively with the participating schools regarding discipline; and to work
closely with the leadership team on all aspects of the program. The Project
Director did work with these staffs as requested.
It was further decided not to hold the scheduled March 23, 1979 InService Day but to use those funds to pay Dr. William Glasser to speak to
the Brewer teachers for an in-service afternoon. Dr. Glasser spoke to the
Brewer faculty on Thursday afternoon, October 4, 1979.
A proposal was written to seek funds to continue the project at the
junior high school with a stronger emphasis on Career Education and a less
strong emphasis on the terminology
associated with Schools Without
Failure. It was the recommendation
of the Project Director that the
continuation of this project rest with local control; i.e.: the Junior High
School.
It was further recommended that the elementary staffs be encouraged
to continue aspects of the program which were beneficial and include new
aspects deemed to be important and as they related to the evaluation.
of
Concepts
I. Glasser has ideas that will
help me as an educator improve my role in school.
should become more
in their own education.
Summary
= Strongly
As a result of this project, staff members have been encouraged to
interact more positively with children, to identify clearly the needs of
individual children and to encourage children to grow up behaving in a
responsible manner.
8IBLIOGRAI'HY
Glasser, W .• The Identity Societ v. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Glasser, W .. Reality Therapy: A New Approach {() Psvchiatrv . New York: Harper 8.: Row.
1965.
Glasser, W., Schools Without Failure. New York: Random House, 1969.
Hawes. R. M., Realit v Therapv in the Classroom.
Unpublished
Doctoral Disserrat ion ,
University
of the Pacific,
1970.
Silberman, C. E., Crisis in the Classroom. New York: Random House, 1970, pp. 7-8.
Disagree
21
DISCIPLINE WITH A PURPOSE
the resolution of problems and difficulties. IF they feel they arc failures and
that no amount of effort on their part will produce a successful experience,
they will irrationally attempt to develop identies.
Jon I. Young*
'The author is Associate
Denton, Texas.
Professor
of Education
at North
Texas State University.
Almost everyone, parents, teachers, administrators,
even kids, admit
that discipline in the public schools "ain't what it used to be." Teacher
surveys consistantly rank the need for better discipline as a high priority
item for inservice training. What has caused this major concern within the
educat ion community?
Dodson (1970) suggests that one of the contributing
factors is that
st udents no longer respect, or fear, the established system. Whereas
teachers defer to administrators
and administrators
defer to parents,
everybody is afraid to upset the kids. Consequently,
the basic sense of
respect is missing from the lives of students.
Glasser (1972) proposes yet another perspective on this problem. He
suggests that a significant psychosocial change has occurred with students.
A decade ago, students were interested in achieving goals but now they are
more concerned with developing identities. Yet the educational system is set
up to encourage goal achievement behavior, and many students refuse to
participate
without first developing a useful and satisfactory
personal
identity.
Although
these two explanations
for student
related
problems seem to be different, a careful examination of the two
shows a common concern. The educational system has failed to
the changes occurring in society and to the student's perspectives.
of change is further compounded by the lack of education courses
on effective disciplinary
procedures.
We seem to be caught
defeating spiral that takes us further away from a solution.
The Problem
discipline
positions
adjust to
This lack
focusing
in a self
of Discipline
As with any problem, solutions are possible only after
clearly defined. Until this is done, disciplinary action is
effective. In this case, the problem has two facets: (I) What
student misbehavior? and (2) What is the desired outcome
action?
the problem is
only randomly
is the intent of
of disciplinary
Addressing the first facet of the problem, Dreikurs (1971) identifies
four major purposes of misbehavior.
These four purposes in order of
severity are: (I) attention; (2) power; (3) revenge; and (4) helplessness.
Dreikurs insists that these misbehaviors can be dealt with effectively if the
purpose is recognized. He postulates that a self defeating spiral occurs
because many of us have only one response to misbehavior and that
response is to punish. If it doesn't work, then do it harder and longer.
Glasser (1969) concurs, indicating that a student's sense of identity
predicts potential behavior. If students are successful in some meaningful
aspect of their lives, then their behavior will reflect a rational approach to
22
Both Dreikurs and Glasser argue that misbehavior is both irrational
and counterproductive
in the long term. It occurs because individuals feel
that their self identity is threatened and their experiences have taught them
that misbehavior is the only avenue left open. Misbehaving students are
reacting to perceived threats to their identity in the only way they feel will be
successful.
The Goal of Discipline
The second facet of this problem involves the expectations of the
proposed disciplinary action. Discipline is a tool that can bring about a
variety of outcomes, depending upon the form the discipline takes. Some
possible outcomes are:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
control the student
teach appropriate behavior
teach responsibility
provide relief for the teacher
make an example
teach respect
teach the joy of learning
teach self control
teach that life is hard
punish
In examining the list one can identify two types of outcomes:
concerns (a, d, e, f, g, i, & j) and student concerns (b, c, & h).
teacher
Teacher oriented outcomes are temporary, provide no skill development for the student and are essentially punishment oriented. Glasser (197 I)
defines punishment as an action, external to the student, which is illogical in
its relationship to the misbehavior.
In fact, a student suffering from a
negative identity will welcome punishment because it confirms. In this way
the misbehaving student becomes addicted to misbehavior
because it
provides the only, albeit negative, justi fication For his existence.
What Glasser (1969, 1971) and Dreikurs (1971) propose is that misbehaving students be met with strong yet logical consequences
of their
behavior. Expelling a student for skipping school is an illogical consequence
and therefore punishment
as it is commonly viewed. A more logical
approach might be to require some evidence from the student that the
behavior wouldn't be repeated before allowing him to participate as a full
member of the student body. In-school suspension is one method for
accomplishing this end.
Developing
Logical Discipline
Logical discipline teaches the students that they are responsible for
their behavior and that every behavior provides either a benefit or a penalty
to the student. The students learn that they are in control of their behavior.
23
Punishment, as it has come to be accepted, teaches the student that power is
all important.
As long as the students are less powerful they will submit.
Glasser proposes a ten step approach to more effective discipline, using
logical consequences
(Ryder, 1974). This approach
involves teachers,
administrators,
support. staff, and where possible, parents, in developing an
effective sysern.
The whole foundation for any effective discipline is a sense of involvement between the student and a responsible adult. Without this involvernent, effective interaction is hindered. Glasser (1969) recommends that
involvement be fostered in two ways. First, hold regularly scheduled class
meetings. A class meeting is an opportunity
for the teacher to become
involved with the whole class by talking with them about concepts which the
students feel are important. It is a time when students are free to critically
examine their own world without feeling threatened if they choose not to
examine it in the way the teacher feels is best.
Second, each student must come to believe that he or she is important
to the teacher. A fourth grade teacher in Maine spends two hours every
Saturday with a few of her students. She sets up a rotating schedule and
spends time with each student. Those kids believe their teacher cares!
Once this sense of involvement exists, teachers should focus on their
own behavior and assess honestly how much they contribute to the problem.
They should change their own attitude toward the student and reactions to
the misbehaviors. Teachers must be in control of their own behavior, rather
than permitting a student to dictate how they will react to him or her.
Teachers with as much student involvement as possible must establish
realistic and appropriate
rules. Each rule must have a logical consequence
attached to it. If a school rule is illogical in some way but it can't be
changed, then the students need to have this explained - they can accept a
certain number of rules of this type.
If students break rules, they are not summarily subjected to the
consequences.
Rather, the teacher helps them understand. It is through this
process that students learn responsibility and teacher/student
involvement
is strengthened.
This process includes four basic steps through which the teacher takes
the student by asking questions about the problem in a calm, unaccusing
manner. Step one, the student is asked to identify the rule that he or she broke
by the question "What happened?".
Step two, the student is asked to verify
that he or she knows what the consequences are by the question, "What will
happen now?". Step three, the student is asked whether he or she wants
these consequences to happen by the question "Is this what you want?".
Step four, the student is asked to make a plan which will help him or her
obey the rule in the future.
If the student is not successful with the plan, the process is repeated.
The
teacher
must
never
give up! Sometimes
24
a student
will refuse
to
cooperate or try, and this student should be isolated (in the school or at
home) until he or she is willing to cooperate in resolving the problem. This is
not punishment - it is a time for the student to think about his behavior.
Students disciplined in this way accept more responsibility and develop
positive attitudes toward themselves and their schools. Teachers who refuse
to accept excuses for failure, communicate to the students that they are
capable and worthwhile. A negative, destructive self image gives way to a
success identity, at least in some aspects of life.
BlBI.IOCRAPHY
Dobson, .I., Dare to Discipline, Wheaton, 111.:Tundale House, 1970.
Drcik urs. R .. Dr urnwald , B., Pepper, F., Maintaining Sanity ill the Classroom,
Harper & Row, 1971.
Glasser, W., Schools Without Failure, New York, Harper & Row; 1969.
Glasser, W., The ldentity Society, New York, Harper & Row, 1972.
Maurer, A., Corporal Punishment,
American Psychologist. August 1974,29,8,
Ryder, T., A New Look at Discipline, Learning, December 1974, 3,4, p6-11.
(COil
1981
November
New York,
pp614-627.
tinued [rom inside back cover)
1982
March 1-5 (Cere only)
May 3-7
August 2-6 (Cert. only)
August 9-13
November 8-12
9-13
HELD SEMINARS
Field weeks which are held in all parts of the U.S. and Canada enable
you to prepare for certification closer to where you live. They are subject to
the same payment rules and are fully accredited by the Institute for the
certification process. A list of scheduled field weeks is always available and
if you have a group of ten or more we will try to schedule a special week for
where and when you want it. THE MAIN DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
FIELD WEEKS AND LOS ANGELES WEEKS IS THAT DR. GLASSER
DOES NOT PARTICIPATE.
FIELD SEMINARS ARE SUBJECT TO
CANCELLA nON IF LESS THAN 10 PEOPLE REGISTER. U' CANCELLED,
HOWEVER,
YOU WILL RECEIVE
NOTICE 30 DAYS
PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE SEMINAR. THERE WILL BE NO
LAST MINUTE CANCELI,ATJONS.
TWO IMPORTANT
NEW BOOKS ARE NOW A VAILABLE!
What Are You Doing?, a book edited by Naomi Glasser in which 24
certified reality therapists each tell of an outstanding case that they have
worked with successfully. FOR THOSE WHO TEACH COUNSELING
AN INSTRUCTORS GUIDE TO BE USED WITH What Are You Doing?
is A V AII~ABLE. This guide tells how each case can be used to teach a
different reality therapy concept and provides many activities for students
to get involved. It is available from the Institute at its printing and mailing
cost.
Stations of The Mind, Dr. Glasser's latest book on how our brain
works as a control system moves the concepts of reality therapy a giant step
forward by showing how what we teach relates directly to the way our brain
may work. Both books are published by Harper and Row.
25
ETHICS IN REALITY THERAPY
Norman Matlin*
* The author is a decision analyst with Instituto Para EI Analisis De Decisiones, Hato
Rey, Puerto Rico.
The client's
Therapy. Glasser
(i.e., the clients)
criteria for such
evaluation of his own acts is of the essence of Reality
(1965) puts it succinctly: "We have found that unless they
judge their own behavior, they will not change." The
evaluation merits some consideration.
There are an infinite number of different kinds of evaluation possible.
Fortunately, most of them are not germane to counseling. I would like to
consider
three types that are relevant:
rational
evaluation,
ethical
evaluation,
and social evaluation.
Counselors, as well as clients, often
confuse the three, which does not make for clarity in the conversation.
A basis for distinguishing among them can be found in Glasser's (1965)
comments on persons who are not candidates for counseling. He says:
"Two
groups
of people who must be classed as
irresponsible by our definition are generally not our concern as
psychotherapists.
First are those who may fulfill their needs at
the price or preventing others from doing so. In a totalitarian
society like Nazi Germany, Hitler might have been considered
highly responsible by those who believed in his perverse ideas.
Through his behavior he gained love and respect from those who
felt as he did, but he made the rules. Those who value a free
society could not accept his rules and still give and receive love
or feel selfworth. In Nazi Germany, a responsible man, by our
definition, would have been placed in a concentration camp, and
many were. In a free society a Nazi is always irresponsible. His
behavior is not socially acceptable and would not fulfill his
needs. "
"The second group consists of those who only partially fulfill their needs but are not the concern of psychotherapists
because they do not harm others and do not ask for help
themselves. Among these people may be homosexuals who lead
meaningful, productive lives, recluses, and various eccentrics."
A rational evaluation is an evaluation of the efficiency of possible acts
as means to a stipulated end. The end may be the self-interest of the actor.
This is a legitimate end, insofar as there is no harm to other people. An
ethical evaluation is an evaluation of the efficiency of possible acts as means
to some end which includes advancing the interest of other people.
There seems to be no a priori reason to expect that the two kinds of
evaluation should invariably generate the same recommendation.
We have
seen that an act may be irrational without being unethical. We can equally
easily imagine an act which is rational, but unethical. Suppose I plan to
move to Europe and live there the rest of my life. It would be rational to
borrow as much money as I can, and take off, concealing my intention to
default. The act is unlikely to produce any serious personal consequences.
My reputation would be shot, but I would have no intention of returning. It
is unlikely that anyone will follow me to Europe to reclaim the money. If
someone does, I can pay the individual off and keep the rest. I would not
advise anyone to act on this rational evaluation. But it seems clear enough
that borrowing the money would be the rational act, if I wanted to arrive
somewhere with a lot of money.
Yet, it is not entirely surprising that people confuse the two types of
evaluation. Moral philosophers have been virtually unanimous in trying to
reduce ethics to a form of enlightened self-interest. The attempt, however,
is both misleading and misled. A little thought is sufficient to turn up
situations which are not so reducible. Inviting people to act purely on the
basis of their own interest, however enlightened, is inviting them to act
unethically whenever the two evaluations do not coincide. Even when they
do, the reductionist position seems to be undermining the sense of acting
ethically. One would not consider a person committed to act ethically who
stated, "I act ethically whenever it is in my own interest to do so." A
committed person is expected to act ethically even if there is cost.
When persons have committed themselves to act ethically, they may
take a further step of developing a dignity system or an entropathy system
which will mesh rational evaluation and ethical evaluation for themselves.
(Matlin, 1979). This is adapting self-interest to ethics, not reducing ethics to
self-interest. Furthermore,
the congruency will apply only to their own
calculations and to those of people who adopt similar systems. The person
within this system who is a counselor must not however make the
assumption that all people think this way.
A person who is unsatisfied with his life, does not harm others, and
does not want help, is not a client. A person who is unsatisfied, does not
harm others, but does want help, can be a client. What kind of evaluation
shall 1 ask this person to make? If he/she makes an ethical evaluation,
he/she will conclude that he/she is acting ethically, but this will not usually
help resolve dissatisfaction.
If he/she is dissatisfied, even though acting
ethically, he/she is acting irrationally or thinking irrationally. This is not
called 'irresponsibility,'
because it is convenient to reserve that concept for
ethical considerations. There is no obligation to act rationally. Persons have
the right to act as irrationally, or even as stupidly as they want, insofar as
they do not harm others. The key to counseling such persons, then, is a
rational evaluation.
The reductionist position of the moral philosophers usually rests either
on a posture of moral fatalism or on a confusion between ethical evaluation
and social evaluation. Moral fatalism is the doctrine that one is free to
choose among ethically relevant acts, but that the consequent benefit or loss
for each act is fixed. This makes sense for those who believe that God or the
gods will not permit people to get away with reaping benefits at the expense
of other people. It seems more dubious as an atheist theology. Any attempt
to derive the fatalist position from the observation of nature commits the
naturalistic fallacy (Hierro, 1970). For a moral fatalist, the structure of the
26
27
world is such that rational evaluation and ethical evaluation must yield the
same recommendations.
Even for a moral fatalist, however, it would be
naive to think that people who do not share these philosophical premises
will arrive at the same conclusions.
Rational evaluation and ethical evaluation are separate calculations.
For any particular
act, they may yield di fferent recommendations.
However, the relationship between the conclusions is not random. The
reactions of other people to one's acts should be considered in calculating
consequences in rational evaluation. Thus, if I expect to continue living
with the people affected by my actions, a general policy of behaving
unethically is irrational. Some of the people harmed are likely to catch on
and figure out how to get even. Few people would suggest that taking unfair
advantage
of everyone in sight is the key to pleasant interpersonal
relationships. For any particular act, rational and ethical evaluations may
yield different conclusions. But, when we evaluate a whole series of future
acts simultaneously,
the longer the series, the more likely that rational and
ethical evaluations will yield the same recommendation.
A social evaluation is an evaluation of the efficiency of possible acts as
means to the end of complying with community norms. Glasser's example
of Hitler's acts serves a classic example of acts which are social and
unethical. Of course, they came out social because Hitler made the rules.
However, irrespective of who originally invented the rules, these rules were
accepted as the community norms. So, any member of that community
found himself facing the same alternatives; the acts would be either both
social and unethical or both antisocial and ethical. Once a community has
adopted a norm which calls for acting unethically, there is no way to come
out positively on both evaluations.
It is a temptation to dispatch the entire question by congratulating ourselves that we do not live in Hitler's Germany. where such quandaries were
the stuff of daily living. In societies where most of the norms are ethical or,
at least, ethically neutral, we can hope that, with a bit of luck, we can avoid
running afoul of unethical norms. When we are stuck, we can try to resolve
the question by some ad hoc solution.
The difficulty seems to be that there is no basis for such ad hoc
solutions. Where a rational evaluation and an ethical evaluation lead to
different conclusions, there is no theoretical difficulty in doing the ethical
act. A rational evaluation makes no claim to impose an obligation. But
discrepancies
between social and ethical evaluations are not so easily
resolved. Both of them claim to impose an obligation. Let us examine the
basis for these claims.
Why should individuals act ethically? Because, if they do not, other
people will be hurt. Why should one care if other people are hurt? All one
can answer is 'just because.' In practice, we would invite clients who ask the
question to put themselves in the other person's shoes. Fortunately, most
people are entropathic enough to conclude that they do care if someone else
is hurt. But there is no answer for someone who says: "I would not want to
be hurt, but the act will hurt him. not me." There is no basis for an ethical
conversation
here. He has rejected the claim to ethical obligations.
28
Why should one act socially? Because one is a member of the
community. No man is an island; each is part of the mainland. The interests
of the community are his interests. Why? Because. There is no answer to
give to one who says: "I am fundamentally an individual, an island, if you
will. Someone else's interests are not necessarily mine. I see no reason to do
something for someone merely because we happen to be born into the same
tribe." There is no basis for social conversation. He has rejected the claim
to social obligation.
The ethical claim and the social claim are not only di ffcrent, they are
contradictory.
The ethical claim invites one to think of himself as an
individual responsible for taking into consideration the interests of other
individuals as well as his own. The social claim invites one to think of
himself as a member of the community. In the one case, differences of
interests are a fact; in the other, a mere misunderstanding
to be resolved by
better communication.
Nor are the beneficiaries of the two claims the same. The beneficiary of
the ethical claim is another person. The beneficiary of the social claim is the
community. Of course, communities are made of people, who can be
expected to indirectly benefit as members of the community. But people
who are not members of the community are not helped at all. The Stoics
argued that the community was all mankind, but our communities do not
seem to be organized along Stoic principles. Nor are the members of the
community benefited in terms of their own personal interests, except
insofar as their interests happen to coincide with those of the community.
Despite the obvious differences between the ethical claim and the social
claim, confusion of ideas and terminology is rife in the literature. Only the
exceptional moral philosopher calls attention to the differences (Aiken,
1966). Perhaps the most dramatic example of the dash of ideas was the
Nuremburg trial. The defendents sought exoneration on the basis of having
complied with their social obligations. The prosecution charged them with
disregarding ethical obligations.
I f one accepts the premise of the social claim that one's real interest is
the interest of the community
in which one resides, then a rational
evaluation and a socia! evaluation are indistinguishable,
merely different
names for the same proceeding. Advocates of the social obligation often
claim to be preaching Ethics or use hybrid terms like Social Ethics or Social
Morality. The premise of the social claim then leads to the reductionist
argument that acting ethically is a form of enlightened self-interest
If the social claim is rejected, in favor of ethical obligations, social
evaluations must still be made. It is merely the claim that there is an
obligation [0 act socially that is rejected. The social evaluation, like the
rational evaluation, would be a prudent calculation".
Although I have the
right to act as antisocially as I want, as long as I do not harm other people, I
may not find it convenient."
With this kind of an understanding
of social
evaluations,
the distinction
between social evaluation
and rational
29
evaluation no longer seems of great importance. A consideration
of the
desires of the community and its probable response would enter into the
calculation of rationality whenever it was relevant. There is no theoretical
difficulty in acting ethically, even if it calls for acting antisocially. The
difficulties are practical.
Conceptualizing
acting socially as non-obligatory is helpful in dealing
with clients who feel guilt or shame for antisocial or asocial acts. Of course,
if the acts involved are unethical, the guilt or shame is quite appropriate.
But, often, people are ashamed of antisocial acts which are ethically
neutral. An appropriate
conversation
will help the client eliminate the
shame. Then, if the client is still unsatisfied with the situation, he or she can
change the way of acting. To use Keeny and Raiffa's (1976) terminology,
the approach is prescriptive, not normative.
These theoretical distinctions have helped in structuring a sequence for
counseling and conversations
in Reality Therapy. Normally, a client begins
by complaining about the situation. After listening to the description to see
whether he or she uses words from an ethical vocabulary, such as dignity,
respect, or machismo, as well as rights, guilt, or shame, the counselor can
help the client do an ethical evaluation, using the same words that the client
does. The word 'ethics' may not be mentioned.
Sometimes the client does not, at any point, refer to ethical questions,
but seems to be acting unethically in the problem situation. After hearing
sufficient details, the client is asked to imagine being in the complementary
role of the situation, while the counselor plays the client's role. Usually
within ten minutes, the client starts questioning the ethics of how he/she has
been acting. In the rare case where he/she continues to act the goody-goody
in the other role, while the counselor escalates the abusive role, it is helpful
to stop and ask if the client knows how the other person thinks about the
question. By this time, if it is anparent that he/she doesn't, the counselor
can suspend the interview, discussing how to ask the other person involved
what he/she thinks, and when appropriately called, role-play the request.
Usually by the next session, the dynamics of the situation have completely
changed and are well on their way to a resolution.
evaluate the consequences of a series of future acts, so they tend to ignore
the difference between the risk for a single act and the cumulative risk over
the series. The latter keeps growing as one evaluates a longer series. The
chances of getting caught robbing a car are fairly small; the chances of
getting caught in a series of robbing one hundred cars are considerably
higher.
This, briefly, is the sequence used for the evaluation phase. Almost
every counseling session includes an evaluation phase, although it may be
brief, when working out the plans for a decision reached at the end of an
adequate evaluation. While there is more to counseling than evaluation,
effective handling of the evaluation conversation is the keystone.
Normally the terminology of this article is not used with clients, but the
concepts are discussed when it appears appropriate.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aiken, H.D. "Morality and Ideology" in DeGeorge, R.D. Ethics and Society. Garden City,
N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1966.
Arendt, H. Eichmann in Jerusalem. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1963.
Glasser, W. Reality Therapy. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.
Hierro, .1.S.-P. Problemas del Analisis del Lenguage Moral Madrid: Editorial Technos, 1970.
Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives.
New York: John Wiley,
1976.
Matlin, N. The Practice of Reality Therapy for Puerto Rico. (3rd version). San Juan: Instituto
para el Analisis de Decisioncs, 1979.
If the client is acting unethically in a situation where there is no contact
with the victims, (for example, stealing cars) and has no interest in
discussing ethics or in imagining being in the victim's place, the rational
evaluation is effective. Similarly, if the client is acting ethically, but still has
a problem, or if the situation is obviously unconnected with any ethical
question, a rational evaluation
is needed. It may take the form of a
prescriptive social evaluation, if the alternative actions involve the response
of the community.
A rational evaluation
is an attempt to weigh the pros and cons of
alternative acts. For the counselor to try to scare the client into acting better
would be unethical,
as well as ineffective.
Working
out probable
consequences
as realistically
as possible, enables clients to choose. In
general, clients are extremely skillful in assessing probable consequences of
single acts, usually much sharper than the experts. However, they rarely
30
NOTE:
In addition to the guidelines for contributors
on p. 32, the Journal
Therapy is also interested in printing a case study of RT in action in
Potential contributors
are asked to follow the format used in Whut Are
edited by Naomi Glasser. Send cases to the editor following manuscript
31
of Reality
each issue.
You Doing
guidelines.
Guidelines
a)
(Continued from
for Contributors
Manuscripts should he submitted in triplicate 10 the Editor Lawrence Litwack, Journal of
Reality Therapy, 311 Whit c I l all , Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242. III the case of a
manuscript wr iucn by rnorc than one author, the covering letter xhuuld indicate the name
and addre ,s of the author with whom Ihe editor should correspond
_... thai is, t hc
corresponding
author.
b) Manuscript;
must be rypewriucn double-spaced
on 8'/" x II while paper, and should be a
maximum of 10 pages with no more than 20 references. The name, highest earned degree
and professional
notation (c.g.: R.N.), t it lc or rank, organizar ion, and address of each
author should appear on the manuscript's
last page. In manuscripts written by more than
one author, the corresponding
author should indicate the order in which coauthors' names
should appear in The Journal if the manuscript is accepted. Rejected manuscripts will not
be returned unless a stamped, self-addressed
envelope is enclosed.
c)
In accordance
with the Copyr iglu Revision Act of 1976, we are required
following statement in writing before we may proceed wit h a review:
"Tn consicleration of
action in reviewing
undersigned hereby
copyright ownership
event such work is
to have the
The Journal of Reality Therapy laking
and editing my submission, the aurhorrs)
transfer, assign or otherwise convey all
to The Journal of Reality Therapy in the
published by The Journal."
d) Authors should strive for brevity, readability,
manuscript
should be succinct and lend itself
and grammatical
indexing.
accuracy.
lhe
t itlc
of a
e)
Manuscripts
should be prepared
in accordance
with the Publication
American Psychological
Association,
Second Editiou.
I)
CH.'\RTS,
CRAPHS,
TA[lLFS: Camera-ready
an must be Iurnishcd for charts, graphs,
and tables hy t he author OR The Journal's
printer can prepare the an and bill the author.
Aut hor s electing to furnish camera-ready
art must adhere 10 Journal format for tables and
figures and should either specif'y 8 point English Times typeface or use IBM typewriter ball
"Modern,
72" for the copy. Illustrations
that repeat information
given ill ihe text and
which do not enhance the manuscript should be omitted. Each table, chart, or graph should
be numbered and cited in the text where it is to appear.
Manual
of the
g) Manuscriprs
arc received with t hc understanding
they arc not under simultaneous
consideration
by any other publication.
The Journal will not be responsible in the event a
manuscript
is lost; and once published,
manuscripts
may not be published elsewhere
without writt cn permission from the corresponding
author of the article and [he editor of
The Journal.
It) When a manuscript is received by the editor, it is referred to members
Reviewers are asked to consider these questions:
I.
Has the subject been covered
manuscript would be redundant?
2.
Is the manuscript on a problem or topic of sufficient
Reality Therapy to warrant its publicauon?
3.
Is the content
4.
Docs the manuscript
of the manuscript
5.
Does the manuscript
understood?
6.
Will the manuscript
scientifically
accurate
any false or misleading
have readability,
require
in The Journal
SO
ofthe
that
importance
review board.
publishing
and philosophically
sound')
xtaterncnt s?
i.c., is it dearly
written,
succinct.
and easily
a great deal of revising to make it acceptable?
i)
All accepted
Following the appearance
or an article in The Journal, the author(s) will receive
complirncruar y copies or that issue. Forms for ordering reprints will be provided.
are subject
will be reviewed
his
t
in demonstrating
j)
k) Manuscripts
printing.
manuscripts
contain
adequately
to copy editing.
by two members
of the editorial
Certification at the present time is done only in Los Angeles under the
direct supervision of Dr. Glasser. Here too we work in small groups because
this is not only a week of testing but, because all the candidates are well
qualified, it is also a week of intensive learning. We run a school without
failure, no one should be afraid to try for certification because of fear of
failure.
HOW TO START TRAINING
To train in Los Angeles read the information that follows, To train in
the field near your home write to the Institute and we will try to direct you
to an intensive week that is close and convenient.
Many of our field
programs follow a different schedule than Los Angeles and meet over a
weekend so that you miss less work.
LOS ANGELES
[0
board
for approval
two
for
ONE WEEK SEMINARS
The following schedule is both for intensive training weeks and for the
certification weeks held in Los Angeles. We meet from 9:00 to 4:00 Monday
thru Thursday and from 9:00 to 12:00 Friday. The weeks all end with Friday
lunch, At present they are held in the Marina Del Rey Hotel, 13534 Bali
Way, Marina Del Rey, Ca. 90291, (phone 213-822-1010). This is a beautiful
hotel on the water surrounded
by boats. There are nearby beaches,
restaurants,
and many recreational facilities. The hotel guarantees us as
many rooms as we need provided your reservation is made at least three
weeks before arrival. Send in a deposit and get your confirmation
in
writing. BE SURE TO MENTION
THAT YOU ARE WITH THE
REALITY
THERAPY
GROUP TO GET A SLIGHTLY
REDUCED
RA TE. When we meet Monday morning we will make an announcement to
help those who wish to share rooms to get together to save money. There are
less expensive motels within a short ride but you will need a car, There is no
reliable public transportation.
Advance reservation is necessary. Enrollment is limited and will be on a
first application basis. Complete the attached form and mail it with a $50.00
deposit check. If you do not receive a prompt confirmation
call or write
immediately. THE FEE FOR THE WEEK IS $300.00 (U,S. currency). This
fee includes all instruction, material, refreshment breaks, LUNCH EACH
DA Y. and one social dinner on Tuesday night where we get together and
relax, The entire fee is due two weeks in advance unless other arrangements
for payment are approved. NOTE: if a billing is involved all paperwork
must be processed well ahead of time so that we receive full payment before
the end of the seminar. Even if your way is being paid we still must have
your $50,00 deposit. This is the only way we can confirm your enrollment.
If your agency does not reimburse you directly for your deposit we will do
so after full payment is received.
CANCELLATION
POLICY
Your $50.00 deposit is refunded if you cancel thirty (30) days prior to
the seminar. This $50.00 penalty fee is not transferable to another seminar.
The 1981-1982 schedule for Los Angeles is below:
(Continued
32
buck cover)
all
page 25)