Paul, I'd love to see what type of teaching materials you develop to get at/teach this point.
Well, I used the letters to the editor in class just now, and it went wonderfully. First I had them talk a bit about the notion of "evidence-based treatment". Some of them had heard the phrase, and so we were able to have that as a discussion. I had them think about why anyone would want treatments to be based in evidence (it didn't take them long to conclude that it has a lot to do with insurance companies, but also that consumers of mental health care should care as well), and why anyone would object to the notion that we should concern ourselves with which therapies are shown to be effective. In that latter area, I play the role of an advocate for the notion that it is the "therapeutic relationship" that matters, a notion that I think has serious potential (I don't pretend to really know, though).
Then we went through Scott's letter. I made sure to point out that it was NOT a critical dismissal of psychotherapy - that the second paragraph asserts that there IS good evidence for the effectiveness of a number of therapies. Then on to the arguments later in the letter. Then we moved on to the second letter, the one by a psychiatrist. The key argument is the very last line, which reads "We should respect the fact that people often have a way of measuring their internal psychological pain without the need for external empirical measurements". I asked the students to examine what he meant by that, and after just a few seconds' thought one student said "I think he contradicts himself". Woo-hoo!
We discussed the contradiction, and sure enough, she recognized that he was saying that you can't measure it...but that they measure it. We went on to the letter by the New York psychotherapist, who wrote:
"Adam Phillips is to be applauded for highlighting the idea that psychological growth and transformation often occur not in spite of but rather because of what occurs when two people meet in a psychotherapeutic encounter that defies scientific rigor"
and I pointed out that I could agree with her right up to the last four words. But she's conflating the notion that what matters is a therapeutic relationship (sure, perhaps...) with the notion that what matters is something that cannot be measured (which of course contradicts her claim to know that it matters). The students were right with me on this - it was one of those exciting times when you think you're really doing some good. They were getting into it, of course partly motivated by the feeling of being smarter than someone who not only has a fancy degree but also got published in the NYTimes. This was a really good discussion, and a great way to end just before spring break. Of course I'll have to assess this later in the semester, or maybe just declare that it's impossible to measure learning because what matters is the wonderful learning relationship between faculty and the students that produces the kind of learning I know I had there today.
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
