You might want to try out the APA Style download by clicking here

Thank me later.
 

        The format you need to use has a style that is important and correct.  I would like you to master this style so that you might use it in all your classes. It will count!!  So will spelling, grammar, and punctuation.  This is, after all, a master's degree you are studying to obtain.  Note also, that the pages have a one inch margin all around, and are double spaced (the one below is NOT, however yours should be)

The Manuscript

        First of all, we start with a title page.  It should have a running head , be paginated through out, starting with the main text page, and have a title, and authorship, etc.  (See example below).
        The second page contains an abstract     An abstract is a short paragraph  that describes briefly what you are writing about that is from 75 to 100 words. For your purposes, you need not worry about going under the required amount.
        The next page(s) will have the bulk of your material on them. They, too, should have the running head on the top, and be paginated.  They also should have a level system of headings, depending on how many parts your paper has.  (see below)
Notice that the lines are double spaced.  Also note that there is a unique manner of providing citations within text.  If you are quoting someone you have talked with, called "personal communications," you cite it thus.    If you are citing written material, called "quotation of source," your citation should look like this if you are quoting copy and using quotation marks, and like this if you are merely restating in your own words someone else's thoughts. If you are quoting a chunk of material that has more that 40 words, then you need to place it in block quotes.  Note that there are proper ways of quoting multiple authorship and such.  Refer to the Manual for help with this.  Use the ampersand (&) in text, and not in the Reference section.
        Headings are tricky, and you probably  need to make an outline first to see how many you will need, in order to format them correctly.
        First of all, most of your work here will only have one or two levels of headings.  But I give you examples from the APA manual for all 5 levels here.  They are as follows:
 

Flush left, Underlined, Uppercase and Lowercase Side Heading  (Level 3)

         Indented, underlined, lowercase paragraph heading ending with a period.  (Level 4)
 
 

Go to those links within the text in the manuscript below that demonstrate the headings required.

        Finally, a reference section is included at the back. This should agree with all the citations through out the manuscript text, accuracy of all material is important.  Note that the references are place with author(s) name, last name first, then initials, followed by the date of publication, source, page numbers, etc.     If you have other questions, let me know.  Again, this is a very basic beginning of APA style. For more detailed information, you will need to consult the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th edition.  You may purchase this at the book store, or you may buy it on line at Amazon.com.    Or you can get it directoy from APA by clicking on here.
 

Let's begin!
 

_______________Manuscript_________________________________________________________________________________
 
 

^
 
 

 Running Head: STRENGTH-BASED WU-WEI SUPERVISION
 
 
 

Jeffrey K. Edwards is an Associate Professor, Department of Counselor Education, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL., and a Clinical Supervisor for The Family Institute at Northwestern University.

Mei-Whei Chen is an Associate Professor, Department of Counselor Education, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL.
 
 
 

Go to next page
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*
 
 
 

        Urged on by an article that described a "Zen-like" method of supervision where the student is "beaten" into understanding, the authors present a different method likening it to the wu-wei practice in Zen and Taoism. This model is strength-based, punctuating what the counselor does well rather than looking for problems. Wu-wei is different from some traditional models where supervisors tend to assume that their "view" of the client/counselor relationship is more informed and correct than the counselors they supervise. This article reviews counseling supervision, and suggests that a strength-based wu-wei model and an understanding of isomorphy in supervisory relationships are the preferred practice for the supervision of family counselors. Various contexts are presented in addition to family counseling training where the model may be used. It is posited that this model of supervision potentiates the person-of-the-counselor. Wu-wei supervision focuses on possibilities and personal agency rather than on problems, thus the person-of-the-counselor becomes the heart of supervision.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

To next page
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
**
                                                                                       STRENGTH-BASED WU-WEI SUPERVISION 3
 
 

        We read with much interest, sadness and disbelief Marina Oppenheimer's (1998) article, "Zen and the Art of Supervision." Here she describes her negative experience with family counseling supervision, and her resulting conclusions on how supervision might be better/different. She portrays much of classical family counseling supervision (and two editors have questions about all supervision, Riordan & Kern, 1998) as being akin to the Lin-Chi Zen tradition of beating students in order to guide them. We applaud her courage in adding her voice to the supervision literature.  Her outcry needs to be heard by those who continue to belittle those they supervise.
        Our practice of, and suggestions for supervision are much different, although we have experienced the "Lin-Chi" form in the past, and suspect it goes on all too frequently. As we have reflected on Oppenheimer's (1998) experiences and our own thoughts about supervision, we have come to believe that our present style might be characterized as being like another concept from Zen — that of wu-wei. We believe that much of contemporary supervision has been like what Oppenheimer experienced, albeit not quite so harsh, because much of counseling and supervision is patterned on a forceful, hierarchical practice.
        We are also aware that there are alternative methods of counseling, therapy and supervision practices, not only for family counseling, but for all counseling practices. But to have supervision practices characterized as Zen-like, and to punctuate only the Lin-Chi method, seemed out of balance. One of us (Edwards) remembered that years earlier, one of his supervisors had made the connection between systemic thought and the Zen/Taoist concept of wu-wei (personal communication Brent Atkinson, 1990). We thought that this would be a perfect opportunity to introduce our ideas — not really new ideas, but certainly a good deal gentler, and we believe, more contemporary.
        Briefly, wu-wei is described by Alan Watts (1989) as a being a metaphor for action/non-action. In describing the differences with respect to creation, he states that "The important difference between the Tao and the usual idea of God is whereas God produced that world by making (wei), the Tao produced it by 'not-making' (wu-wei) — which is approximately what we mean by 'growing'" (p. 160). The usefulness of wu-wei is that it relies on the naturalness of life, thus "arriving at decisions spontaneously, decisions which are effective to the degree that one knows how to let one's mind alone, trusting it to work by itself. This is wu-wei, since wu means 'not' or 'non-' and wei means 'action,' 'making,' 'doing,' 'striving,' 'straining,' or 'busyness'" (Watts, 1989, p 160). Coming back to Atkinson's (Atkinson & Heath, 1990) use
of this concept with regard to clinical work, they suggest that the issue is not in the "doing," or "action," or "intervening," but in how much the therapist (in this case a supervisor) holds on to their version of truth. Discussing second-order work, they suggest that:
 

Second-order family therapists will continually recognize and acknowledge that their
views are not objective or "true" in any determinable way, but, rather, that they are
constructed from the limited (but important) viewpoint of the therapist, and that clients
should feel free to disagree. However, second-order family therapists will recognize that
their ideas and suggestions may be helpful if heard, and they will not hesitate to share
them (Atkinson & Heath, 1990, p. 152).

Many of us are still living in the universe of Newtonian physics, and fondly imagine that real, hard scientists have no use for these misty ramblings, dealing as scientist do with the measurable and known. We think that at least the physical causes if physical events are perfectly knowable, and that, as the results of various experiments keep coming in, we gradually roll back the cloud of unknowing.… All we need to do is perfect our instruments and our methods, and we can collect enough data like birds on a sting to predict physical events from physical causes.
    But in 1927 Werner Heisenberg pulled out the rug, and our whole understanding
of the universe toppled and collapsed. For some reason it has not yet trickled down to the man on the street that some physicists nom are a bunch of wild-eyed, raving mystics. For they have perfected their instruments and methods just enough to whisk away the crucial veil, and what stands revealed is the Cheshire cat's grin. (Dillard, 1974, pp. 202).
 
 

                                                                    STRENGTH-BASED WU-WEI SUPERVISION  4
 
 

Quantum physics has had a major impact on world views. It surprises us that the fields of
counseling and supervision have been so late in coming to these new views in a grander scale.
And later Dillard (1974) goes on:

The Principle of Indeterminacy, which saw the light in the summer of 1927, says
in effect that you cannot know both a particle's velocity and position. You can guess
statistically what any batch of electrons might do, but you cannot predict the career of any
one particle. They seem to be as free as dragonflies. You can perfect your instruments
and your methods till the cows come home, and you will never ever be able to measure
this one basic thing. It cannot be done. The electron is a muskrat; it cannot be perfectly
stalked.
    It is not that we lack sufficient information to know both a particle's velocity and
its position; that would have been a perfectly ordinary situation well within the
understanding of classical physics. Rather, we know now for sure that there is no
knowing (Dillard, 1974, p 203).

______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

                                                                STRENGTH-BASED WU-WEI SUPERVISION   5
 
 

strength-based counseling models become more common practice, supervision practices
should follow suit. In contrast with the hierarchical position adopted by conventional models, strength-based models of supervision attempt to sidestep hierarchy in favor of co-constructing ideas with the supervisee. A non-hierarchical supervisory relationship is one where there exists a give and take, where the supervisor does not assume to have more "correct" or privileged knowledge of both the supervisee's and clients' goals, intentions or views, and where the supervisor works intentionally to create a strength-based supervision. We believe that it is within this non-hierarchical supervisory relationship that the most important and interesting work can occur. We see this as being a lot like wu-wei, where there may be action, but not an expectation of outcome from our direction.

        The strength-based wu-wei supervision we propose rests on two meta-frameworks of
supervision practices consistent with our current thinking. These two meta-frameworks are: (1) a
postmodern view of humans systems interaction, and (2) the isomorphic nature of the
supervisor/counselor/client relationships.

The Postmodern View of Human Systems Interaction
        The first meta-framework for our supervision model is the postmodern view of human systems.

 Postmodernism. Postmodernism represents a view of human systems that has begun to be appreciated and practiced in counseling (Bobele, Gardner, & Biever, 1995; Epston, White, & Murray, 1992; Guterman, 1994; Lax, 1992), and supervision (Anderson & Swim, 1995; Neal, 1996; Roth & Epston, 1996; Selekman & Todd, 1995; Storm, 1995;Thomas, 1994; Wetchler, 1990). The central organizing principles of postmodernism in human interactions revolves around language-generating and meaning-generating systems (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992), and moves away from the idea of a Grand Narrative of science, thus "truth" (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Individuals are seen as being responsive and responsible, recursively, to other individuals in a social context (Becvar & Becvar, 1996). Objectivity is viewed with great skepticism (Atkinson & Heath, 1987), and reality is seen as an evolving entity created through language, rather than discovered by those who "observe" (Gergen & Kaye, 1992). Problems, therefore, are imbedded in, and created by, a problem saturated language system rather than "caused" by some objective event or essence. As Bertrand Russell asserted some forty-five years ago:

The word "cause" is so inextricably bound up with misleading associations as to make its
complete extrusion from the philosophical vocabulary desirable...the reason physics has
ceased to look for causes is that, in fact, there are no such things. Law of causality...is a
relic of a bygone age, surviving, like the monarchy, only because it is erroneously
supposed to do no harm (Russell, 1953, p. 387).

        Postmodern ideas applied to supervision. We agree that there are useful ideas that come from any of the forms of counseling and psychotherapy, thus supervision. We believe that the ideas being articulated by the counseling movement that is called postmodern comes closest to how we currently think and practice, however we would assert that the spirit of wu-wei expresses these ideas more aptly, philosophically. Postmodernism, with it's denial of truth, presents a problem. For, as soon as one begins to say that certain ideas are "better," then one has begun to swallow one's own tail; especially if one calls him or herself postmodern. Thus wu-wei's ideas of action/non-action seems, to our way of thinking, a better description of what it is we are about. We see them fitting within strength-based supervision.
        With postmodernism, supervisors are not seen as having a privileged view that is more "true" than those whom they supervise. There is a focus on discourse that acknowledges the political/social context, and emphasizes the creation of meaning and construction of reality. Postmodern supervision works toward co-creating new realities through deconstruction (deShazer, 1991) of old narratives and replace them with new, more useful ones that do not pathologize people. Postmodern supervision focuses on strengths rather than deficits, potentials rather than constraints, future possibilities rather than past problems, and multiple perspectives instead of universal truths.
        Supervision from this view has begun to be articulated already, usually under the categories of solution focused or narrative. Several authors have discussed solution focused/oriented supervision

______________________________________________________________________________________

                                                                    STRENGTH-BASED WU-WEI SUPERVISION     6
 

practice (Marek, Sandifer, Beach, Coward, & Protinsky, 1994; Thomas, 1994; Wetchler, 1990). Selekman and Todd (1995) advocate supervision where the strengths and successes of supervisees are brought forth, rather than focusing on weaknesses and problems.
        Narrative supervisors espouse several ways of supervising. The most prevalent, to date, involve the use of reflecting teams (Biever & Gardner, 1995; James, MacCormack, Korol, & Lee, 1996; Lowe & Guy, 1996), emphasizing multiple voices of the team members thereby illuminating and transforming ideas, rather than criticizing or disqualifying. The reflecting team has been used to teach psychology interns systemic therapy (James, MacCormack, Korol, & Lee, 1996), and its value for training and supervision in systemic therapy is widespread (Diethelm, Fentress, London, & McCarthy, 1992; Wendorf, Wendorf, & Bond, 1985). The narrative ideas of Michael White and David Epston (1990) have also been applied to supervision (Freedman & Combs, 1996; Neal, 1996; Roth & Epston, 1996) with an emphasis on externalizing problems, finding unique outcomes, and deconstructing problem saturated systems.
        Finally, a languaging systems orientation (Anderson & Swim, 1995; Bobele, Gardner, & Biever, 1995; Storm, 1995) reflects the work of Anderson and Goolishian (1990). Supervision from this perspective focuses on opening up conversation and pays attention to how a conversationalist may "silence" or invite dialog and discourse. Lowe and Guy (1996) have discussed a combination of methods, such as solution focused and reflecting team. In addition, supervision, using a reflecting team, or with no team, may take place with the client(s) present (Madigan, 1993).
        It seems that in supervision, co-construction or co-creation of a new reality may be the most important aspect. As Edwards and Nejedlo (1988) note: "It happens where two people collaborate in a significant professional relationship in order to advance meaning and knowledge in a new way" (p. 4).

The Isomorphic Nature of the Supervisory Relationships
        The second meta-framework for our strength-based wu-wei supervision is the isomorphic nature of the supervisor/counselor/client relationship.

        Isomorphic process. "Isomorphism means identity or similarity of form," (Kerlinger, 1986, p. 395). The word comes from Iso - meaning same, and morph - meaning structure. Any two systems that are connected are said to have isomorphic properties when there is similarity between the two. The same principle or idea can be applied at more than one level of the system (Breunlin, 1997). In the supervision process, this means that what happens at one level — supervision — might be repeated at another — during counseling. According to Liddle (1988), isomorphic processes serve "as the overlay of overlays' — a framework under which all other elements of the training process can be subsumed" (p. 154-155). Isomorphy differs from parallel process in that the latter is a process-level description of interaction between the supervisor and supervisee, and does not bring into focus what Liddle calls the "action potential" (p. 155).
        Isomorphy refers to that part of two or more structures that have a correspondence. As there is an
interconnection between all systems that are interrelated, this correspondence has the potential of influence. Simon, Stierlin, and Wynne (1985) observed that "patterns of behavior and communication are isomorphic in, for example, a nuclear family, the parents' family of origin, the therapeutic system (family plus therapists), the treatment team subsystems, and the family of origin of the therapists" (p. 202), or in our case, supervisor, supervisee, and clients. A change in one part of the interconnected system will correspondingly change that part of the other system. Unlike the concept of parallel process, isomorphy implies a normalcy of pattern replication. It is expected that there will be similarity of process from one connected system to another. One may then use that principle to influence change. As a wu-wei supervisor, influence is a matter of whether the supervisee finds a fit with what is presented by the supervisor.

        Applying Isomorphic Process to Supervision. Isomorphic supervision reflects the notion that the process of supervision also allows for the altering and shaping of supervisees through intentionality. As Liddle (1988) states:

Using the isomorphic perspective, the supervisor can transform this replication into an intervention, redirecting a therapist's behavior and thereby influencing interactions at various levels of the system. Supervisors are not passive observers of pattern replication, but intervenors and intentional shapers of the misdirected sequences they perceive, participate in, and co-create (p. 155).

    Anderson, H. & Goolishian, H. (1992). The client is the expert: A not-knowing approach to therapy. In Sheila McNamee and Kenneth Gergen (Eds.). Therapy as social construction . (pp.25-39) London: Sage.
    Anderson, J. & Swim, S. (1995). Supervision as collaborative conversation: Connecting the voices of supervisors and supervisee. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 14, 1-13.
    Atkinson, B.J. (1997). Risks and safeguards in person-of-the-therapist supervision. The Supervision Bulletin, 9, 4-5.
    Atkinson B.J. & Heath, A.W. (1987). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Implication for family therapy research. Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies, 6, 8-17.
    Atkinson B.J. & Heath, A.W. (1990). Further thoughts on second-order family therapy: This time it's personal. Family Process, 29, 145-156.
    Bandura, A. (1982). Self efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
    Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175-1184.
    Bandura, A. (1990). Conclusion: Reflections on nonability determinants of competence. In R. Sternberg & J Kolligian (Eds.), Competency considered (pp. 315-362). New Haven: Yale University Press.
    Becvar, D.S., & Becvar, R.L., (1996). (Third Edition), Family therapy: A systemic integration. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Becvar, D.S., & Becvar, R.L., (1997). The client-therapist relationship: Comparison of second order family therapy and Rogerian therapy. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 16, 181-194.
    Biever, J.L., & Gardner, G.T., (1995). The use of reflecting teams in social constructionist training. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 14, 47-56.
    Blow, A., & Piercy, F.P. (1997). Teaching personal agency in family therapy training programs. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 16, 274-283.
    Bobele, M., Gardner, G., & Biever, J. (1995). Supervision as social construction. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 14, 14-25.
    Breunlin, D. (1997 April). The Family Institute at Northwestern University's Model of Family Systems Therapy. Illinois Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Annual Conference, Oak Brook, Illinois.
    Cantwell, P. & Holmes, S. (1994). Social construction: A paradigm shift for systemic therapy and training. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 15, 17-26.
    Carkhuff, R.R., & Berenson, B.G. (1967). Beyond counseling and psychotherapy. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    Chen, M., & Noosbond, J. P. (in press). "Un-Sticking" the stuck group system: Process illumination and the reflecting team. Journal of Systemic Therapies.
    deShazer. S. (1991). Putting difference to work. New York: W.W. Norton.
    Diethelm, K., Fentress, D.E., London, M.L., & McCarthy, J.J. (1992). Put from behind the mirror. Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies, 11, 46-52.
    Dillard, A. (1974). Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. New York: Harper and Row. Inc.
    Edwards, J. K., & Nejedlo, R. J. (1988). Excellence in supervision — Preparation for counseling excellence: About the issue. The Quarterly, 111, 2-4.
    Epston, D., White, M., & Murray, (1992). A Proposal for a Reauthoring Therapy: Rose's Revision of her Life and a Commentary. In S. McNamee and K. Gergen's (Eds.) Therapy as social construction. (pp. 96-115) London: Sage.
    Freedman, J., & Combs, G. (1996). Gender stories. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 15, 31- 46.
    Gergen, K., & Kaye, S. (1992). Beyond narrative in the negotiation of therapeutic meaning. In S. McNamee and K.Gergen (Eds.) Therapy as social construction. (pp. 166-185) London: Sage.
 

Comments regarding this article may be addressed to Dr. Jeffrey K. Edwards, Department of
Counselor Education, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL 60625.

                        http://www.neiu.edu/~jkedward/
 
 

        Your article reviews should be formatted and written much the same as the review of the book written below.  Take notice, however, that your reviews are not like book reports as you may have done in the past, but are critical, scholarly reviews, along with your own social commentary.  You have the right and it is expected that you will critic these pieces, rather than providing a report on what is written in the article.  The issue here is to help you develop style, and critical thinking. So, I am interested in your reactions, and how useful the articles were to you.
 

Family Psychopathology: The relational roots of dysfunctional behavior.  L'Abate, Luciano. 480 Pages
Publication Date: August 1998 ISBN: 1-57230-369-7 Cat. #0369 List Price: $55.00

        These are the days when some of the  family therapy leadership have sold out to drug companies, and many therapists have assimilated (or maybe regressed is a closer word) a less systemic practice in order to stay alive.  Then along comes one of the pioneers of the field, ready to throw down the gauntlet of positivism, and give it back in spades (no, in this case it's in hearts).  Luciano L'Abate and friends have given us a wonderful collection of straight shooting and hard to deny scientific explanations for what goes wrong with people, and demonstrates how they all are tied to systemic views.  These are no longer the theories or schools of most of our family systems /therapy models. This is hard, rigorously researched and empirically validated data demonstrating the link conclusively between family and dysfunction.   L'Abate begins his introduction with an accurate and inflaming chronicle about the state of most other texts on psychopathology thus:
 

Most textbooks  and handbooks of abnormal psychology or psychopathology do mention   (often in passing) the   family  as being one of the many causes or antecedents of    psychopathology. However, this mention is more like lipservice, because the orientation of  most traditional textbooks in this area remains individually monadic at best or intrapsychic   at worst...,"  (L'Abate, 1998, p. 2).

Jeffrey K. Edwards, Ed.D., LMFT is an associate professor of family counseling at Northeastern Illinois University, 5500 N. St. Louis Ave., Chicago., IL.,  http://www.neiu.edu/~jkedward/
 

I hope this has been helpful!  See you in class, and enjoy your writing.

Copyrighted, 2000, J.K. Edwards