Overview
Prepare a 2,500-3,750-word APA formatted paper in which you address the following four major sections:
Section I – Personal Reflection & Values Analysis (500-750 words)
In this section, reflect on your personal values and understanding of change. What is your personal theory of change? How do you believe problems happen? Why do people get “stuck” in problems? How does change occur and how do you know that people are getting better? What is your role as a therapist in helping change occur?
Section II – Description of Theory (500-1,000 words)
In this section, present a brief description of the theory you have selected or the 2-3 theories you are planning to integrate. Include the theory of change for this model, founders of the model, strengths, and the aspects of this model(s) that appeal to you. In this section, you may cite your textbook, but you will also want to cite at minimum one or two original sources for your theory (e.g., if you’re choosing gestalt, you should probable have read/referenced some of Perls work).
Section III – Integrating Current Research (750-1,000 words)
This section will allow you to immerse yourself in the recent literature (i.e., peer-reviewed journal articles with 1990-2015 publication dates) regarding your chosen theory. You will select at minimum, 3 journal articles that utilize or assess your theory and you will provide an integrated summary and critique of these articles. You should also note how these studies have (or have not) influenced your perceptions of your chosen theory.
Section IV – Cultural Implications, Limitations, and Conclusion (750-1,000 words)
In this section, explore the cultural implications and potential limitations of your selected theory. For example, what challenges can you envision when utilizing this theory in cross-cultural work? How does this model fit with the American Counseling Association Social Justice Advocacy Competencies? How might this theory work if your client’s theory of change is not in line with the underlying assumptions of the model? How do you understand bridging the gap between describing the “facts” of a case to being able to conceptualize?
Use Murdock 2019 for reference, NO AI