MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx

MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric
Overview: For the capstone assessment, you will create a
business implementation plan and audiovisual presentation for
the product, service, or idea you have
been developing throughout your MBA coursework.
In Milestone Four, you will submit a financial analysis and
funding plan, which includes your analysis of the projected
costs, revenue streams, and net present
value for the concept from launch until two years after the
breakeven point. Be sure to include a budget, an assessment of
assets and liabilities, your anticipated
sources of funding, and the associated costs of attaining that
capital as part of your analysis. Support your analysis with
relevant primary and secondary data in
an appendix, specifying any relevant assumptions and
limitations. You should include, among other support, sales
forecasts, cash flow statements, income
projections, and any other relevant calculations or financial
reports.
Critical Elements:
value for the concept from launch until two years after the
breakeven point.
o Budget
o Assessment of assets and liabilities

o Anticipated sources of funding
o Associated costs of attaining that capital
o Sales forecasts
o Cash flow statements
o Income projections
o All other relevant reports specific to your concept or idea
Guidelines for Submission: Your draft must contain all of the
elements listed above. It should be 5 to 8 pages in length
(excluding the title page, references, and
appendices) using 12-point Times New Roman font, with one-
inch margins. You may include summary pictures, charts,
graphs, or other explanatory diagrams as
needed to successfully explain the concept and implementation,
but should use appendices for detailed supporting
documentation. Your paper should follow
APA guidelines. You must include at least 5 scholarly sources.
Cite your sources within the text of your paper and on the
reference page.
Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Not Proficient (0%) Value
Main Elements Includes most of the main elements Does not
include any of the main elements 20
Critical Thinking Provides logical conclusions and defends with
examples
Does not provide logical conclusions 20
Financial Analysis Provides an analysis of projected costs,
revenue streams, and net present value for

the concept from launch until two years after
the breakeven point
Does not provides an analysis of projected
costs, revenue streams, and net present value
for the concept from launch until two years
after the breakeven point
15
Analysis Parts Provides a budget, an assessment of assets
and liabilities, anticipated sources of funding,
and the associated costs of attaining that
capital as part of the analysis
Does not provide a budget, an assessment of
assets and liabilities, anticipated sources of
funding, and the associated costs of attaining
that capital as part of the analysis
15
Financial Reports Provides proforma financial reports including
sales forecasts, cash flow statements, income
projections, and other relevant reports
specific to concept or idea
Does not provide proforma financial reports 15
Articulation of Response
Submission does not have critical errors

related to citations, grammar, spelling,
syntax, or organization that prevent
understanding of ideas
Submission has critical errors related to
citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or
organization that prevent understanding of
ideas
15
Total 100%
Task Groups in the School Setting:
Promoting Children’s Social and
Emotional Learning
Patricia Van Velsor
San Francisco State University
Through social and emotional learning (SEL), individuals
develop skill in
negotiating relationships successfully and expressing emotions
appropriately.
The socially and emotionally intelligent child reaps benefits in
school and later
life. Counselors are best qualified to promote children’s SEL
and the task group
in the classroom provides an excellent opportunity for them to

do so. In the task
group, students can learn and practice crucial skills in vivo
while they work
together to complete a task. The counselor’s strategic attention
to promoting task
completion while facilitating SEL can serve to highlight the
benefits of group work
in the school learning environment.
Keywords: schools; social and emotional learning; task groups
Because humans are social beings, they spend a great deal of
time
interacting with others and much of that interaction takes place
in
groups. As Sonstegard and Bitter (1998) so aptly stated, ‘‘to be
human
is to ‘live’ in groups’’ (p. 251). The group (e.g., family, peer)
serves as
the ‘‘primary socializing influence’’ in children’s development
(Kulic,
Horne, & Dagley, 2004) and the nature of the social
environment in
those groups leads children down a path toward either prosocial
or
antisocial behavior and beliefs (Hawkins, Smith, & Catalano,
2004).
Children develop social skills and prosocial behaviors through
social and emotional learning (SEL). Although there are various
defi-
nitions of SEL, Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg and Walberg
(2007)
define it succinctly as ‘‘the process through which children
enhance
their ability to integrate thinking, feeling, and behaving to

achieve
important life tasks’’ (p. 6). Five competency areas—self-
awareness,
self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and
responsible
Patricia Van Velsor, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the
Department of Counseling at
San Francisco State University. Correspondence concerning this
article should be
addressed to Patricia Van Velsor, Department of Counseling,
San Francisco State
University, BH 524, 1600 Holloway Avenue, San Francisco, CA
94132. E-mail:
[email protected]
THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK, Vol.
34 No. 3, September 2009, 276–292
DOI: 10.1080/01933920903033495
# 2009 ASGW
276
decision-making—are basic to negotiating school, work, and
life
responsibilities effectively (Collaborative for Academic, Social,
and
Emotional Learning, 2000–2009).
Social and emotional intelligence, acquired through SEL, has
been
associated with various positive outcomes in school and life. A
socially

and emotionally intelligent child is less likely to develop
aggressive-
ness, depression, and=or violent behaviors (Poulou, 2005).
Children
who develop social and emotional intelligence are also more
resistant
to difficulties related to drugs, teen pregnancy, and gangs (Elias
et al.,
1997). Moreover, variations in children’s social and emotional
func-
tioning significantly predict current and later academic
achievement
(Greenberg, Kusché, & Riggs, 2004; Parker et al., 2004).
The small group in the school setting provides an excellent
opportu-
nity for counselors to enhance children’s positive mental health
through SEL. Children can better their social skills, unlearn
inappropriate social behaviors, and try out new skills in a safe
environment (Akos, Hamm, Mack, & Dunaway, 2007;
Thompson &
Henderson, 2006). Generally, the small group format used with
chil-
dren is psychoeducational (Corey & Corey, 2006) and a
common
approach to SEL in the schools is to pull targeted children out
of the
classroom to learn about appropriate skills and practice those
skills
in a small group. Another approach, however, is to make use of
the
task group, which focuses on the application of group process
princi-
ples to task completion (Corey & Corey, 2006). If used in the
classroom
setting, the task group can offer children the opportunity to

learn and
apply social and emotional skills and behaviors in a real life
situation
as they work together to accomplish an identified task.
Moreover,
when conducted in the classroom setting, all children can profit
from
the opportunity to enhance their social and emotional
intelligence. The
overall goal is to promote SEL for a broad range of children,
which in
turn can lead to other positive outcomes.
When considering the task group in the school setting, it makes
sense that students could benefit in three ways. First, the task
group
affords children the opportunity to learn about a topic as they
work
together on a project of educational importance. Second,
students have
the chance to acquire valuable social and emotional skills for
working
in groups related to cooperation, collaboration, and mutual
respect.
Third, students may well gain a sense of accomplishment when
the
task is completed, hopefully bolstering self-esteem.
The purpose of this article is to encourage counselors to
embrace the
task group model in the classroom setting to promote the SEL of
students in vivo and to help equip all students with the social
and
emotional tools necessary to work cooperatively and
collaboratively
in a group. In order to implement the task group, counselors

must
Van Velsor/TASK GROUPS IN THE SCHOOL SETTING 277
develop a clear understanding of this approach and its multiple
benefits in the classroom setting. With this knowledge,
counselors
can then determine ways to identify appropriate tasks for school
groups, and develop strategies to facilitate both task completion
and
group process for optimal SEL.
UNDERSTANDING THE TASK GROUP MODEL
AND ITS BENEFITS
Before initiating the task group in schools, it is important to
under-
stand the goals of a task group. The main goal of the group is
completing
a task (e.g., a work project, event planning) rather than
changing the
individual for therapeutic reasons or personal growth (Gladding,
2008).
However, successful functioning of the task group requires
attention
to the principles of group dynamics aimed at accomplishing the
task
and improving interpersonal interaction in the process (Corey &
Corey,
2006; Gladding, 2008). Although teachers may already assign
tasks to
small groups or make use of small group learning in the
classroom, they
may lack the necessary skills to facilitate SEL in the group

process
(Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 1997). Counselors,
however,
have training in group dynamics and process and can utilize that
knowl-
edge to promote SEL as children work together to complete a
task.
The task group in a school is different from the typical one in
an
organization where each member takes responsibility and is
accounta-
ble for his or her own contribution to the overall effort
(Katzenbach &
Smith, 2003). Instead children in the schools can benefit from
the task
group that operates like a team. Although teams, like other task
groups, focus on results and develop individual products, teams
are
more interdependent and more collaborative (Brown, 2009:
Gladding
2008; Stanley, 2006). In the team model, there are shared
leadership
responsibilities and accountability for the team product; that is,
the
team members do ‘‘real work together’’ (Johnson & Johnson,
2009,
p. 527). All students in the schools can benefit from working
together
and developing the abilities necessary to function as part of a
team.
Because all students can profit from refining their social and
emotional skills, the task group in the school does not
necessarily
target students with difficulties. Use of this approach is

predicated on
the idea that a primary goal of counseling is to help all children
‘‘learn
to deal with life’’ (T. Gutkin, personal communication,
December 2,
2008). Task groups are indeed a part of life; they are
omnipresent in
American culture and part of everyday experience (Conyne,
Crowell,
& Newmeyer, 2008) in schools, churches, work places, and
community
settings. The skills learned can help children fulfill their roles
278 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK /
September 2009
successfully in family, school, friend, and work groups
(Goleman,
1995). Promoting SEL for all students aligns with the Executive
Summary of the American School Counselor Association
(ASCA,
2005), which directs school counselors to ‘‘identify and deliver
the
knowledge and skills all students should acquire’’ (p. 1).
Additionally,
SEL aligns with the public school’s mission to ‘‘assist in the
socializa-
tion of the young,’’ identified in a U. S. Supreme Court case
(i.e.,
Wisconsin V. Yoder) (Adelman & Taylor, 2003, p. 85).
Another noteworthy benefit of the task group in the classroom
is
that it allows students to learn skills in vivo. Although teaching

social
and emotional skills is important; providing children the
opportunity
for ‘‘real-world application’’ of those skills is critical (Elias,
2004).
During transactions to complete a task, interpersonal exchanges
hap-
pen naturally in the classroom, that is, authentic interaction
occurs.
As differences in ideas and issues related to completing the task
surface and accompanying affect emerges, counselors can
facilitate
the interchanges quickly (Barratt & Kerman, 2001). The
counselor is
at hand to help children manage their emotions, effectively
navigate
their interactions, and successfully negotiate their differences
for opti-
mal SEL. For students with behavioral concerns, who may not
be able
to transfer skills from the counseling group to the classroom
(Clark &
Breman, 2009), this real world experience may be essential to
their
social and emotional development.
Students at risk for difficulties may benefit in other ways by
culti-
vating social and emotional abilities in the classroom. In a
counseling
group for social skill development, targeted students may have
similar
difficulties and inadvertently learn inappropriate behaviors from
each
other. In the classroom setting, however, students with less
developed

social and emotional skills interact with students at higher skill
levels
and can learn informally from the modeling of other students.
Lopes
and Salovey (2004) identified informal learning, where students
learn
behaviors through ‘‘experience, modeling, and observing’’ as a
valuable way to promote SEL (p. 78).
The task group as proposed here may also serve to highlight the
usefulness of group work in learning. Social factors often
influence
learning, because effective learning frequently involves the
ability to
communicate, interact, and collaborate with co-learners as well
as tea-
chers, peers, and families (McCombs, 2004; Zins et al., 2007).
The task
group offers a fertile environment for students to develop
positive
social relationships as they develop their academic skills. As
children
learn to collaborate and function interdependently in the task
group, a
better fit or ‘‘improved ecological concordance’’ between
students and
their school environment emerges, which in turn can improve
student
success both in and out of schools (Conyne & Mazza, 2007).
Successful
use of the task group by the counselor may then motivate

teachers
to adopt the small group as part of the learning environment for
children.
IDENTIFYING A FOCUS FOR THE TASK GROUP
Although a significant goal in utilizing the task group is to
promote
social and emotional learning, it is critical for the counselor to
identify
a project that clearly incorporates an aspect of the school
mission. For
example, a project might focus on an academic goal of a
particular
classroom or grade level (e.g., meeting a specific curriculum
objective),
or a school or community goal (e.g., conducting a service
learning
activity).
The list of projects that could be implemented to address SEL in
a
task group is endless and any activity that requires student
collabora-
tion in a small group could work. As an example, the literature
circle, a
language arts activity designed to engage students in reflection
and
critical thinking about reading (Daniels, 2001), could provide
an excel-
lent opportunity for incorporating SEL; because it can be
adapted for
all age levels, already uses a small group format, and has been
applied
in both mathematics (Kridler & Moyer-Packenham, 2008) and
science

(Straits, 2007). In a typical model, the teacher assigns roles
(e.g., facil-
itator, illustrator) and has students work on their tasks
independently
before coming together for discussion. In the task group model,
how-
ever, the teacher extends the process by assigning a project. The
task
can be as simple as making a poster to represent the feelings of
differ-
ent characters in a story or as involved as creating a video to
explore
character identity development related to the events in the
reading.
The students then decide on what roles are necessary and how
they
need to work together to complete the task. Although schools
most
likely will already have designated readings within their
curriculum,
the counselor may want to suggest books from the Bibliotherapy
Edu-
cation Project
(http://library.unlv.edu/faculty/research/bibliotherapy/),
which offers an excellent list of books that focus on both
counseling
and education topics.
Counselors who have not been teachers may balk at the idea of
focusing a group on an academic task; however, the counselor
need
not be an expert in an academic area. The teacher provides the
aca-
demic expertise while the counselor promotes the social and
emotional
development. The logistics will require close collaboration

between the
counselor and the teacher to create a suitable arrangement.
After the
task has been identified, the counselor may circulate among
various
task groups or work with one group at a time while the teacher
works
September 2009
with the remaining students. In the task group, the counselor
can
serve as a co-learner while he or she weaves SEL skill
development
into the process and facilitates group interactions aimed at
successful
task completion.
Working in the classroom may represent a paradigm shift for
counselors. However, it is consistent with a new ‘‘inclusion’’
model of
school counseling suggested by Clark and Breman (2009). This
model
requires that all students receive counseling support through
innova-
tive interventions in classroom settings and requires counselors
to col-
laborate and consult closely with teachers. The task group
model
proposed here complements the Clark and Breman model,
because it
necessitates collaboration with teachers and other school
personnel

to identify a suitable project and involves implementation of the
task
group in the classroom.
The best way to identify an appropriate task is through
familiarity
with the school context. The school counselor who has been in
the
school will already have intimate knowledge of school culture,
but will
still need to spend time observing school activities and
soliciting input
from others. The counselor new to the school, on the other
hand, must
become well acquainted with the school environment by getting
to
know, first students and school personnel (e.g., teachers,
administra-
tors, teachers), and then parents and community members. What
are the educational goals that the teachers share? What is
necessary
to promote the achievement of the student body? For example,
if there
are a large number of students living in poverty, what projects
would
support their unique needs—in the classroom, the school, and
the
community? Immersion in the culture—both school and
surrounding
community—allows the counselor not only to identify projects
that
support the school mission but also to design tasks that are
sensitive
to values of the population served. Service learning projects
that
require collaborative efforts offer excellent opportunities for

addres-
sing community needs and, at the same time, enhancing
students’
social and emotional abilities. For example, small groups of
younger
students may decide on a gift appropriate for a local senior
center,
design the necessary steps to make their gifts, and finally,
create
the gifts. Older students may research community needs and
then
work together in small groups to design and carry out
community pro-
jects. Although there are a variety of websites that describe
school
service learning projects, one particularly comprehensive list
for both
elementary and secondary levels comes from Mesa Service
Learning
(http://www2.mpsaz.org/msl/about/).
The most important school personnel with whom to collaborate
are
teachers, because counselors will need their support to carve out
time
and space for the task group. Common complaints of teachers
are that
SEL activities take time away from an already overloaded
academic
schedule (Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 2000;
Mildener &

Keane, 2006). Careful selection of task group focus, however,
helps
sidestep the criticism that time spent on social and emotional
skill
development usurps valuable academic time. Rather, teachers
view
the task as supporting their efforts rather than auxiliary to their
academic goals. At the same time, working closely with
teachers in
the classroom may stimulate more positive attitudes toward SEL
activities and small group learning.
With a task identified, a counselor must not only assist children
in
completing the task, but also help them to understand the
importance
of the group process in task completion. Effective SEL in the
task
group requires that children learn cooperation, social skills, and
prosocial values (Johnson & Johnson, 2004).
FACILITATING THE TASK GROUP FOR OPTIMAL SEL
A counselor facilitating a task group with children for optimal
SEL
must perform a variety of functions. Unfortunately, in a recent
survey
of 802 school counselors, many participants reported a lack of
group
training aimed at working with children and adolescents in the
schools (Steen, Bauman, & Smith, 2008). Although the
following infor-
mation is not meant to substitute for group training, it does
provide an
overview of functions that school counselors should feel
comfortable

performing in order to facilitate a task group successfully for
SEL.
The primary functions involve fostering positive
interdependence
through team building and promoting interpersonal process by
setting
appropriate structure and bolstering skill development. The
literature
on process in children’s groups is scant (Leichtentritt &
Shechtman,
1998; Shechtman & Yanov, 2001); however, along with the
literature
on task groups with adults, it provides some direction for the
counselor
carrying out these functions.
Building a Team
Simply assigning a task and asking children to work together
does not assure that they will become a team (Prichard, Bizo, &
Stratford, 2006). Therefore it is the responsibility of the
counselor to
incorporate ways to build group cohesiveness. In an
investigation of
children’s groups, child participants identified group
cohesiveness—
encouragement, support, and acceptance from others—as the
most
important factor in their group experience (Shechtman & Gluk,
2005). Thus, it is important to help children build new
relationships
September 2009

or strengthen existing relationships around working on the task.
So,
although task completion is primary, failure to attend to
relationships
of students could result in negative outcomes for task
completion and
learning.
Students in a school may already have formed relationships;
how-
ever, counselors will need to develop activities focused on
building
interdependent relationships and identifying appropriate norms
of
behavior. Effective task groups devote time to learning about
one
another, to culture building, and to nurturing collaboration and
coop-
eration (Hulse-Killacky, Killacky, & Donigian, 2001). Because
team
building involves learning prosocial behavior, norms should
include
discussion of respect for others and promotion of other
members’
efforts. Clear expectations for task completion and group
behavior will
enhance student learning related to completing the task and
acquiring
interpersonal skill in doing so.
Establishing Appropriate Structure
To promote SEL through the interpersonal process of the group,
counselors must establish appropriate structure. Counselors can
do

so by attending to the developmental level of the children in the
group
(Rosenthal, 2005); younger children need more structure. For
all chil-
dren, counselors need to provide more structure early in the
group’s
development. Group facilitators optimize children’s experiences
in
groups when they provide a safe environment for children to try
out
behaviors (Mayerson, 2000) and the appropriate level of
structure
helps provide that safe space.
An ideal structure for a task group involves balancing content
and
process (Hulse-Killacky, Kraus, & Schumacher, 1999). The
content
component of a group refers to the information shared; in a task
group,
the counselor should make sure that all children clearly
understand
the purpose of the group and the goals related to the task.
Addition-
ally, the counselor should pay attention to the content that
children
share to get a sense of each child’s strengths and how he or she
can
contribute to task completion. Too much attention to content in
a task
group, however, may actually interfere with progress toward
complet-
ing the task (Hulse-Killacky et al., 1999). The process
component of a
task group deserves equal attention. Yalom (2002) defines
process as,

‘‘the nature of the relationship between the people in the
interaction’’
(p. 109). As it applies to the task group, process refers to the
relation-
ships between and among children and how those relationships
promote or inhibit task completion. By attending to the process,
coun-
selors can make sure that all children share their ideas,
experiences,
and thoughts and contribute to accomplishing the task.
In a successful group, the counselor does not attend to the
process
alone; he or she makes sure that participants also attend to that
pro-
cess. From the onset of the group, the counselor structures a
reflective
environment in which children evaluate the interactions and
dynamics of the group (Barratt & Kerman, 2001). The counselor
fre-
quently encourages children to examine their relationships to
identify
how well they are working together and how they can better
their
effectiveness (Johnson & Johnson, 2009).
Although structure is essential to group work with children,
facili-
tators can best promote children’s SEL by knowing when to
allow free-
dom within the structure. An important value of group work—
that it

reflects real life most accurately (Akos, 2000)—is lost if a
group is too
structured. A challenge is finding the balance between
permissiveness
and appropriate structure and limits. In an exploratory study of
dynamics in children’s therapy groups, Mayerson (2000) found
that
facilitators’ willingness to join the play process, when
appropriate,
contributed to positive outcomes. Applying this to the task
group, a
counselor must be flexible and fluid in stepping forward to take
the
leadership role and stepping back to let the children lead.
Johnson
and Johnson (2009) maintain that facilitators must decide when
to
direct the children’s group, be ‘‘a sage on the stage,’’ or to be
their
assistant, ‘‘a guide on the side’’ (p. 497). Children can lead
their own
group when they have developed the ability to reflect on their
indivi-
dual and group behaviors and the skills necessary for working
with
others.
Bolstering Skill Development
Important for the task group is development of skill in giving
feed-
back, making decisions together, and solving problems and
resolving
conflict. The ability to give constructive feedback sets the stage
for
the other skills. In a task group, timely feedback fosters team

develop-
ment; because it increases member motivation and provides data
to
help members work together effectively (Birmingham &
McCord,
2004). In a study of interpretative responses—confrontation,
interpre-
tation, and feedback—of preadolescents in groups, Shechtman
and
Yanov (2001) found that high quality feedback (i.e., direct and
honest
personal reaction) precipitated productive responses (i.e.,
exploration,
insight, or change) while high quality interpretation (supportive
explanation of one’s behavior, feelings, or thoughts) or
confrontation
(highlighting incongruencies) precipitated unproductive
responses
(e.g., resistance, agreement). The authors concluded that
minimizing
confrontation and maximizing high-quality feedback was most
helpful
in group work with children.
September 2009
The challenge in the task group lies in helping children learn to
give
constructive feedback (i.e., direct and honest personal reaction)
that
supports task completion. This begins with counselor modeling;
simply
by listening, paraphrasing, asking open questions, that is, using

basic
counseling skills, counselors provide a positive example for
children
and promote SEL. In using these skills, it is important that
counselors
attend to the age of the children in the group to adapt those
skills
appropriately (see Van Velsor, 2004). If children learn these
skills,
they help to create a safe environment and set the stage for
giving con-
structive feedback to each other related to task completion.
Drawing
from several task group models, Hulse-Killacky et al. (1999)
suggest
that members create guidelines for giving and receiving
feedback,
reflect on behaviors and interactions that support or inhibit the
group
work, and give clear feedback (i.e., using ‘‘I’’ statements,
speaking
directly to others). Initially the counselor will model and direct
appro-
priate communications, but children should eventually learn to
provide their own feedback. According to Sonstegard and Bitter
(1998), accurate feedback from children may facilitate the
group pro-
cess better than feedback from counselors.
Along with communication skills, children need to develop the
abilities necessary for decision making in task groups. Because
good
decision making depends on effective processing of emotions
(Bechara,
Damasio, & Bar-On, 2007), an important step is helping
children

to develop skill in monitoring emotions that arise when
differences
occur. In the task group, counselors can guide children in
regulating
their emotional reactions and applying self-control in
interpersonal
communication. Regulating emotion and gaining control gives
chil-
dren access to the clear thinking needed for problem solving
(Elias,
2004). Johnson and Johnson (1995) identified a helpful process
for
problem-solving negotiation, in which children (a) describe
what they
want and feel along with the rationale for those, (b) listen and
commu-
nicate understanding of other children’s perspectives, (c)
formulate
three optional plans, and (d) select a plan from those options.
This
model provides the opportunity for children to practice
perspective-
taking, which is foundational to the development of empathy
(Shapiro,
1997).
When problem solving among children breaks down and conflict
arises, the counselor will need to serve as mediator allowing
time for
cooling off as necessary, ensuring commitment to mediation,
and guid-
ing children through the problem-solving process (Johnson &
Johnson,
1995). Formalizing the agreement (e.g., with a handshake) is
part of
both problem solving and conflict resolution procedures.

Once counselors have provided strategies for decision making,
problem-solving, and conflict resolution, they must decide when
to
let children direct the process and when they need to intercede.
Some
group facilitators may tend to intervene quickly in any disputes,
conflict, or disagreement among children (Rosenthal, 2005)
denying
them the experience of solving issues on their own, and in turn
inhibit-
ing their SEL from the process. On the other hand, an
environment
that encourages creative and collaborative decision making,
problem
solving, and conflict resolution by children promotes their
optimal
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Designing a task group for the classroom will require
considerable
collaborative planning to identify what works with which
students
based on academic learning objectives as well as student
developmen-
tal level and culture. The counselor, in collaboration with the
teacher,
must decide how much advance psychoeducation the students
will

need related to decision making, problem solving, and conflict.
It is
always best to discuss conflict resolution procedures before a
heated
emotional situation arises.
Implementation would typically begin with a teacher describing
an
academic assignment. Using the literature circle example, the
teacher
asks students to rank a list of stories or books based on their
interests.
The teacher divides students into small groups determined by
their
choices and, after students have read the literature, they discuss
their
reactions to and understandings of the reading. Next, the teacher
assigns a task for the group focused on student discussion. The
scope
of the task (e.g., a map of the events of the story, a presentation
on the
themes in the book) will depend on the age of the students and
the
teacher’s learning objectives. This assigned task could take
place
during one class period or over the course of several weeks.
As students begin work on the task in their small groups, the
coun-
selor’s expertise is tapped. If students are new to teamwork, the
coun-
selor conducts team building exercises and explains how
students
must attend to the process as they complete their task. Schmuck
and Schmuck (2001) provide some simple process observation
sheets

for younger students, which could be adapted in various ways
for
many ages. These questionnaires ask students to identify
specific
instances of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors evident in the
group
and promote student analysis of their own experiences and
actions
(SEL self-awareness competency) and those of others (SEL
social
awareness competency). The observation sheets serve as stimuli
for
discussion on group process as students work on their project,
and,
in turn, the discussion serves as a learning ground for students
as
September 2009
counselors help them give constructive feedback to each other
(SEL
relationship skill competency).
Eventually, disagreements will arise in some groups over
procedures, goals, and relationships (Schmuck & Schmuck,
2001),
and such controversies offer, perhaps, the most valuable
opportunities
for SEL. When students are involved in a passionate discussion
that
appears to have the potential for escalation, the counselor must
decide
when, and if, to step in and what intervention might facilitate

optimal
SEL. Early in a disagreement, the counselor may ask students to
listen to each other and then verbalize the opposing perspective,
promoting student empathy and sensitivity to others (SEL social
awareness competency). If emotions are already heightened, the
coun-
selor may direct the students to self-monitor and share their
feelings
related to the interaction before tackling a problem solving
procedure.
This helps students to accurately assess their feelings (SEL self-
awareness competency) and to regulate their emotions (SEL
self-
management competency). As students become more skilled in
decision making and problem solving, the counselor may need
only
to refer students to the steps of these processes.
There, of course, will be times when conflict arises and students
need a cooling off period. In facilitating student cool down, the
counse-
lor must use a course of action that works harmoniously with
the tea-
cher’s approach to de-escalation. When students have regained
their
self-control sufficiently, the counselor secures the commitment
of all
group members to the negotiation process, leads students
through pro-
blem solving steps, and helps students formalize their
agreement
(Johnson & Johnson, 1995). Students in the group can practice a
wealth of SEL competencies, and the counselor is on-hand to
facilitate
the learning process. At the same time, the counselor can serve
as a

model and consultant to the teacher, who may want to use small
groups for cooperative learning at times when the counselor is
not pre-
sent. The overall goal is to encourage teachers to reinforce
student use
of SEL skills and attitudes throughout the day as well as in and
out of
the classroom.
CONCLUSION
Counselors in the schools are already aware of the connection
between social and emotional learning and positive outcomes in
school
and life. Individuals need social and emotional skills for
achieving
academic and workplace success and becoming informed and
responsi-
ble community members (Elias, Arnold, & Hussey, 2003).
Counselors’
efforts to promote social and emotional learning (SEL) for all
students,
however, are often thwarted by the view of other school
personnel that
SEL intrudes on the academic mission of the school. The task
group
proposed unites educational aims with SEL objectives. It
transcends
the psychoeducational group approach, which tends to focus on
cogni-
tive behavioral strategies and problem solving, and the

counseling
group approach, which tends to focus on affect; the task group
offers
an integrative approach. The counselor facilitates completion of
an
educational task, and, at the same time, facilitates social and
emo-
tional skill development in the task completion process. This
task
group model has benefits for all students and allows students to
learn
social and emotional skills from each other and practice them in
vivo.
A challenging aspect of the task group model is the need for
counse-
lors to identify and design a task through collaboration with
stake-
holders. Teachers’ input in this process is crucial because of
their
knowledge and needed cooperation. However, as counselors
become
more practiced in the task group, input by other stakeholders
(e.g.,
parents, community members) provides an opportunity to
strengthen
school-community connections to enhance the social and
emotional
development of children beyond the school.
Once a counselor has identified a task, he or she can best
promote
task completion and enhance student SEL through team
building,
appropriate structure, and skill development. Students can learn
the

skills of giving feedback, offering empathy, making decisions,
and
solving problems along with managing emotions and negotiating
conflict—skills necessary throughout life for working together
coop-
eratively and collaboratively to complete a task.
Use of the task group by counselors in the schools, however,
requires somewhat of a paradigm shift. Counselors typically
focus on
a small percentage of students with difficulties or at risk for
difficul-
ties, and offer group counseling to these students on a pull out
basis
(i.e., taking students out of class) (Clark & Breman, 2009). The
task
group is not meant to preclude the counseling group; there will
always
be a need for groups focused on topics such as divorce and
grief.
However, the task group in the classroom has potential for use
with all students, rather than only a small percentage of them;
for
promoting the use of the small group in learning; and, perhaps,
for
repositioning the counselor in a role more central to the
school’s
educational mission.
Moving from working with a small percentage of students to
work-
ing with the broader student body will prove challenging.
However,
counselors can expand their sphere of influence in promoting
SEL
by training teachers in group process strategies for use in

classroom
groups. Some teachers are already schooled in cooperative
learning
and may need only minimal training in group process. Other
teachers
September 2009
may need more extensive training to first understand the value
of
group work in education and then to learn how to effectively
facilitate
children’s group process in the classroom. Counselors may
begin this
process by first working with teachers who are already using
groups
and cooperative learning. Then, by making their efforts known
throughout the school, they can engage other teachers who may
be
skeptical of the importance of group work and SEL in
education.
Counseling in schools is often relegated to the status of an
ancillary
service (ASCA, 2003) and SEL is sometimes viewed as
intruding on
the current responsibility of schools for student performance on
test-
ing and standards (Mildener & Keane, 2006). Small groups in
the
classroom, and task groups in particular, have great potential
for
enhancing the learning environment in schools. Counselors with

training in group process are in an excellent position to promote
task
group work specifically, and small group work in general, as an
inte-
gral part of the school educational mission. The goal for
counselors
is to enhance student social and emotional development by
weaving
SEL and small group work into the fabric of the school. The
ultimate
goal is to provide students with the social and emotional skills
neces-
sary for success during their school years and beyond.
REFERENCES
Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2003). Rethinking school
psychology: Commentary on
public health framework series. Journal of School Psychology,
41, 83–90.
Akos, P. (2000). Building empathic skills in elementary school
children through group
work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 25, 214–223.
Akos, P., Hamm, J. V., Mack, S. G., & Dunaway, M. (2007).
Utilizing the developmental
influence of peers in middle school groups. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work,
32(1), 51–60.
American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA
national model: A framework
for school counseling programs [electronic version].
Alexandria, VA: Author.

Barratt, G., & Kerman, M. (2001). Holding in mind: Theory and
practice of seeing
children in groups. Psychodynamic Counseling, 7, 315–328.
Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., & Bar-On, R. (2007). The
anatomy of emotional intelligence
and implications for educating people to be emotionally
intelligent. In R. Bar-On,
J. G. Maree, & M. J. Elias (Eds.), Educating people to be
emotionally intelligent
(pp. 273–290). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Birmingham, C., & McCord, M. (2004). Group process research:
Implications for using
learning groups. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L. D.
Fink (Eds.), Team-based
learning: A Transformative use of small groups in college
teaching (pp. 73–93).
Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Brown, N. W. (2009). Becoming a group leader. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson.
Clark, M. A., & Breman, J. C. (2009). School counselor
inclusion: A collaborative model
to provide academic and social-emotional support in the
classroom setting. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 87(1), 6–11.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
(2000–2009). What is SEL?
Skills and competencies. Retrieved April 24, 2009, from

http://www.casel.org/basics/
skills.php.
Conyne, R. K., Crowell, J. L., & Newmeyer, M. D. (2008).
Group techniques: How to use
them purposefully. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Conyne, R. K., & Mazza, J. (2007). Ecological group work
applied to schools. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work, 32(1), 19–29.
Corey, M. S., & Corey, G. (2006). Groups: Process and practice
(7th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Brooks=Cole.
Daniels, H. (2001). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book
clubs and reading groups
(2nd ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Elias, M. J. (2004). Strategies to infuse social and emotional
learning into academics. In
J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C., Wang, & H. J. Walberg
(Eds.), Building academic
success on social and emotional learning: What does the
research say? (pp. 113–134).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Elias, M. J., Arnold, H., & Hussey, C. S. (2003). EQ, IQ, and
effective learning and citi-
zenship. In M. J. Elias, H. Arnold, & C. S. Hussey (Eds.), EQ
þIQ ¼ Best leadership
practices for caring and successful schools (pp. 3–10).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Elias, M. J., Bruene-Butler, L., Blum, L., & Schuyler, T.

(1997). How to launch a social
and emotional learning program. Educational Leadership, 54(8),
15–19.
(2000). Voices from the field:
Identifying and overcoming roadblocks to carrying out
programs in social and emo-
tional learning=emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational
and Psychological
Consultation, 11, 253–272.
Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Frey, K. S.,
Greenberg, M. T., Haynes, N. M.,
et al. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning:
Guidelines for educators.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Gladding, S. (2008). Groups: A counseling specialty. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam
Books.
Greenberg, M. T., Kusché, C. A., & Riggs, N. (2004). The
PATHS curriculum: Theory
and research on neurocognitive development and school
success. In J. E. Zins,
R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Building
academic success
on social and emotional learning: What does the research say?
(pp. 170–188). New
York: Teachers College Press.
Hawkins, J. D., Smith, B. H., & Catalano, R. F. (2004). Social
development and social

and emotional learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.
Wang, & H. J. Walberg
(Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional
learning: What does the
research say? (pp. 135–150). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Hulse-Killacky, D., Killacky, J., & Donigian, J. (2001). Making
task groups work in your
world. Upper Saddler River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hulse-Killacky, D., Kraus, K. L., & Schumacher, R. A. (1999).
Visual conceptualizations
of meetings: A group work design. Journal for Specialists in
Group Work, 24(1),
113–124.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2009). Joining together:
Group theory and group skills
(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Teaching students to
be peacemakers (3rd ed.).
Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2004). The three Cs of
promoting social and emotional
learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J.
Walberg (Eds.), Building
academic success on social and emotional learning: What does
the research say?
(pp. 40–58). New York: Teachers College Press.
September 2009

Katzenback, J., & Smith, D. (2003). The wisdom of teams.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Kridler, P. G., & Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (2008). Mathematics
circles: A structured
approach to problem solving. Mathematics Teaching in the
Middle School, 14,
214–221.
Kulic, K. R., Horne, A. M., & Dagley, J. C. (2004). A
comprehensive review of prevention
groups for children and adolescents. Group Dynamics: Theory,
Research, & Practice,
8, 139–151.
Leichtentritt, J., & Shechtman, Z. (1998). Therapist, trainee and
child verbal response
modes in child group therapy. Group dynamics: Theory,
research and practice, 2(1),
36–47.
Lopes, P. N., & Salovey, P. (2004). Toward a broader
education: Social, emotional, and
practical skills. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, &
H. J. Walberg (Eds.),
Building academic success on social and emotional learning:
What does the research
say? (pp. 76–93). New York: Teachers College Press.
Mayerson, C. R. (2000). An exploratory study of Group-as-a
Whole dynamics in
children’s group therapy. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Group Therapy, 10,

131–150.
McCombs, B. L. (2004). The learner-centered psychological
principles: A framework
for balancing academic achievement and social-emotional
learning outcomes. In
J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg
Mildener, K., & Keane, C. R. (2006). Collaborating with
teachers on social emotional
learning. In Pellitteri, Stern, Shelton, & Muller-Ackerman
(Eds.), Emotionally intel-
ligent school counseling (pp. 141–149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Parker, J. D. A., Creque, R. E., Barnhart, D. L., Harris, J. I.,
Majeski, S. A., Wood, L.,
et al. (2004). Academic achievement in high school: Does
emotional intelligence
matter? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1321–1330.
Poulou, M. (2005). The prevention of emotional and
behavioural difficulties in schools:
Teachers’ suggestions. Educational Psychology in Practice,
21(1), 37–52.
Prichard, J. S., Bizo, L. A., & Stratford, R. J. (2006). The
educational impact of
team-skills training: Preparing students to work in groups.
British Journal of Edu-
cational Psychology, 76, 119–140.

Rosenthal, L. (2005). Qualifications and tasks of the therapist in
group therapy with
children. Modern Psychoanalysis, 30, 95–103.
Shapiro, L. (1997). How to raise a child with a high E. Q. New
York: Harper Collins.
Schmuck, R. A., & Schmuck, P. A. (2001). Group processes in
the classroom (8th ed.).
New York: McGraw Hill.
Shechtman, Z., & Gluk, O. (2005). An investigation of
therapeutic factors in children’s
groups. Group dynamics: Theory, research and practice, 9, 127–
134.
Shechtman, Z., & Yanov, H. (2001). Interpretatives
(confrontation, interpretation, and
feedback) in preadolescent counseling groups. Group dynamics:
Theory, research
and practice 5, 124–135.
Sonstegard, M. A., & Bitter, J. R. (1998). Counseling children
in groups. Journal of
Individual Psychology, 54, 251–267.
Stanley, P. H. (2006). Using the 5 P Relay in task groups.
Journal for Specialists in
Group Work, 31(1), 25–35.
Steen, S., Bauman, S., & Smith, J. (2008). The preparation of
professional school coun-
selors for group work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work,
33, 253–269.
Straits, W. (2007). A literature-circles approach to

understanding science as a human
endeavor. Science Scope, 31(2), 32–36.
Thompson, C. L., & Henderson, D. A. (2006). Counseling
children (7th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing.
Van Velsor, P. (2004). Revisiting basic counseling skills with
children. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 82, 313–318.
Yalom, I. D. (2002). The gift of therapy. New York:
HarperCollins.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H.
J. (2007). The scientific
base linking social and emotional learning to school success.
Journal of Educational
and Psychological Consultation, 17, 191–210.
September 2009
Task Groups in the School Setting:
Promoting Children’s Social and
Emotional Learning

Patricia Van Velsor
San Francisco State University
Through social and emotional learning (SEL), individuals
develop skill in
negotiating relationships successfully and expressing emotions
appropriately.
The socially and emotionally intelligent child reaps benefits in
school and later
life. Counselors are best qualified to promote children’s SEL
and the task group
in the classroom provides an excellent opportunity for them to
do so. In the task
group, students can learn and practice crucial skills in vivo
while they work
together to complete a task. The counselor’s strategic attention
to promoting task
completion while facilitating SEL can serve to highlight the
benefits of group work
in the school learning environment.
Keywords: schools; social and emotional learning; task groups
Because humans are social beings, they spend a great deal of
time
interacting with others and much of that interaction takes place
in
groups. As Sonstegard and Bitter (1998) so aptly stated, ‘‘to be
human
is to ‘live’ in groups’’ (p. 251). The group (e.g., family, peer)
serves as
the ‘‘primary socializing influence’’ in children’s development
(Kulic,
Horne, & Dagley, 2004) and the nature of the social
environment in

those groups leads children down a path toward either prosocial
or
antisocial behavior and beliefs (Hawkins, Smith, & Catalano,
2004).
Children develop social skills and prosocial behaviors through
social and emotional learning (SEL). Although there are various
defi-
nitions of SEL, Zins, Bloodworth, Weissberg and Walberg
(2007)
define it succinctly as ‘‘the process through which children
enhance
their ability to integrate thinking, feeling, and behaving to
achieve
important life tasks’’ (p. 6). Five competency areas—self-
awareness,
self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and
responsible
Patricia Van Velsor, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the
Department of Counseling at
San Francisco State University. Correspondence concerning this
article should be
addressed to Patricia Van Velsor, Department of Counseling,
San Francisco State
University, BH 524, 1600 Holloway Avenue, San Francisco, CA
94132. E-mail:
[email protected]
THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK, Vol.
34 No. 3, September 2009, 276–292
DOI: 10.1080/01933920903033495
# 2009 ASGW
276

decision-making—are basic to negotiating school, work, and
life
responsibilities effectively (Collaborative for Academic, Social,
and
Emotional Learning, 2000–2009).
Social and emotional intelligence, acquired through SEL, has
been
associated with various positive outcomes in school and life. A
socially
and emotionally intelligent child is less likely to develop
aggressive-
ness, depression, and=or violent behaviors (Poulou, 2005).
Children
who develop social and emotional intelligence are also more
resistant
to difficulties related to drugs, teen pregnancy, and gangs (Elias
et al.,
1997). Moreover, variations in children’s social and emotional
func-
tioning significantly predict current and later academic
achievement
(Greenberg, Kusché, & Riggs, 2004; Parker et al., 2004).
The small group in the school setting provides an excellent
opportu-
nity for counselors to enhance children’s positive mental health
through SEL. Children can better their social skills, unlearn
inappropriate social behaviors, and try out new skills in a safe
environment (Akos, Hamm, Mack, & Dunaway, 2007;
Thompson &
Henderson, 2006). Generally, the small group format used with
chil-

dren is psychoeducational (Corey & Corey, 2006) and a
common
approach to SEL in the schools is to pull targeted children out
of the
classroom to learn about appropriate skills and practice those
skills
in a small group. Another approach, however, is to make use of
the
task group, which focuses on the application of group process
princi-
ples to task completion (Corey & Corey, 2006). If used in the
classroom
setting, the task group can offer children the opportunity to
learn and
apply social and emotional skills and behaviors in a real life
situation
as they work together to accomplish an identified task.
Moreover,
when conducted in the classroom setting, all children can profit
from
the opportunity to enhance their social and emotional
intelligence. The
overall goal is to promote SEL for a broad range of children,
which in
turn can lead to other positive outcomes.
When considering the task group in the school setting, it makes
sense that students could benefit in three ways. First, the task
group
affords children the opportunity to learn about a topic as they
work
together on a project of educational importance. Second,
students have
the chance to acquire valuable social and emotional skills for
working
in groups related to cooperation, collaboration, and mutual

respect.
Third, students may well gain a sense of accomplishment when
the
task is completed, hopefully bolstering self-esteem.
The purpose of this article is to encourage counselors to
embrace the
task group model in the classroom setting to promote the SEL of
students in vivo and to help equip all students with the social
and
emotional tools necessary to work cooperatively and
collaboratively
in a group. In order to implement the task group, counselors
must
develop a clear understanding of this approach and its multiple
benefits in the classroom setting. With this knowledge,
counselors
can then determine ways to identify appropriate tasks for school
groups, and develop strategies to facilitate both task completion
and
group process for optimal SEL.
UNDERSTANDING THE TASK GROUP MODEL
AND ITS BENEFITS
Before initiating the task group in schools, it is important to
under-
stand the goals of a task group. The main goal of the group is
completing
a task (e.g., a work project, event planning) rather than
changing the

individual for therapeutic reasons or personal growth (Gladding,
2008).
However, successful functioning of the task group requires
attention
to the principles of group dynamics aimed at accomplishing the
task
and improving interpersonal interaction in the process (Corey &
Corey,
2006; Gladding, 2008). Although teachers may already assign
tasks to
small groups or make use of small group learning in the
classroom, they
may lack the necessary skills to facilitate SEL in the group
process
(Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 1997). Counselors,
however,
have training in group dynamics and process and can utilize that
knowl-
edge to promote SEL as children work together to complete a
task.
The task group in a school is different from the typical one in
an
organization where each member takes responsibility and is
accounta-
ble for his or her own contribution to the overall effort
(Katzenbach &
Smith, 2003). Instead children in the schools can benefit from
the task
group that operates like a team. Although teams, like other task
groups, focus on results and develop individual products, teams
are
more interdependent and more collaborative (Brown, 2009:
Gladding
2008; Stanley, 2006). In the team model, there are shared
leadership

responsibilities and accountability for the team product; that is,
the
team members do ‘‘real work together’’ (Johnson & Johnson,
2009,
p. 527). All students in the schools can benefit from working
together
and developing the abilities necessary to function as part of a
team.
Because all students can profit from refining their social and
emotional skills, the task group in the school does not
necessarily
target students with difficulties. Use of this approach is
predicated on
the idea that a primary goal of counseling is to help all children
‘‘learn
to deal with life’’ (T. Gutkin, personal communication,
December 2,
2008). Task groups are indeed a part of life; they are
omnipresent in
American culture and part of everyday experience (Conyne,
Crowell,
& Newmeyer, 2008) in schools, churches, work places, and
community
settings. The skills learned can help children fulfill their roles
September 2009
successfully in family, school, friend, and work groups
(Goleman,
1995). Promoting SEL for all students aligns with the Executive
Summary of the American School Counselor Association
(ASCA,

2005), which directs school counselors to ‘‘identify and deliver
the
knowledge and skills all students should acquire’’ (p. 1).
Additionally,
SEL aligns with the public school’s mission to ‘‘assist in the
socializa-
tion of the young,’’ identified in a U. S. Supreme Court case
(i.e.,
Wisconsin V. Yoder) (Adelman & Taylor, 2003, p. 85).
Another noteworthy benefit of the task group in the classroom
is
that it allows students to learn skills in vivo. Although teaching
social
and emotional skills is important; providing children the
opportunity
for ‘‘real-world application’’ of those skills is critical (Elias,
2004).
During transactions to complete a task, interpersonal exchanges
hap-
pen naturally in the classroom, that is, authentic interaction
occurs.
As differences in ideas and issues related to completing the task
surface and accompanying affect emerges, counselors can
facilitate
the interchanges quickly (Barratt & Kerman, 2001). The
counselor is
at hand to help children manage their emotions, effectively
navigate
their interactions, and successfully negotiate their differences
for opti-
mal SEL. For students with behavioral concerns, who may not
be able
to transfer skills from the counseling group to the classroom
(Clark &
Breman, 2009), this real world experience may be essential to

their
Students at risk for difficulties may benefit in other ways by
culti-
vating social and emotional abilities in the classroom. In a
counseling
group for social skill development, targeted students may have
similar
difficulties and inadvertently learn inappropriate behaviors from
each
other. In the classroom setting, however, students with less
developed
social and emotional skills interact with students at higher skill
levels
and can learn informally from the modeling of other students.
Lopes
and Salovey (2004) identified informal learning, where students
learn
behaviors through ‘‘experience, modeling, and observing’’ as a
valuable way to promote SEL (p. 78).
The task group as proposed here may also serve to highlight the
usefulness of group work in learning. Social factors often
influence
learning, because effective learning frequently involves the
ability to
communicate, interact, and collaborate with co-learners as well
as tea-
chers, peers, and families (McCombs, 2004; Zins et al., 2007).
The task
group offers a fertile environment for students to develop
positive
social relationships as they develop their academic skills. As
children
learn to collaborate and function interdependently in the task

group, a
better fit or ‘‘improved ecological concordance’’ between
students and
their school environment emerges, which in turn can improve
student
success both in and out of schools (Conyne & Mazza, 2007).
Successful
use of the task group by the counselor may then motivate
teachers
to adopt the small group as part of the learning environment for
children.
IDENTIFYING A FOCUS FOR THE TASK GROUP
Although a significant goal in utilizing the task group is to
promote
social and emotional learning, it is critical for the counselor to
identify
a project that clearly incorporates an aspect of the school
mission. For
example, a project might focus on an academic goal of a
particular
classroom or grade level (e.g., meeting a specific curriculum
objective),
or a school or community goal (e.g., conducting a service
learning
activity).
The list of projects that could be implemented to address SEL in
a
task group is endless and any activity that requires student

collabora-
tion in a small group could work. As an example, the literature
circle, a
language arts activity designed to engage students in reflection
and
critical thinking about reading (Daniels, 2001), could provide
an excel-
lent opportunity for incorporating SEL; because it can be
adapted for
all age levels, already uses a small group format, and has been
applied
in both mathematics (Kridler & Moyer-Packenham, 2008) and
science
(Straits, 2007). In a typical model, the teacher assigns roles
(e.g., facil-
itator, illustrator) and has students work on their tasks
independently
before coming together for discussion. In the task group model,
how-
ever, the teacher extends the process by assigning a project. The
task
can be as simple as making a poster to represent the feelings of
differ-
ent characters in a story or as involved as creating a video to
explore
character identity development related to the events in the
reading.
The students then decide on what roles are necessary and how
they
need to work together to complete the task. Although schools
most
likely will already have designated readings within their
curriculum,
the counselor may want to suggest books from the Bibliotherapy
Edu-
cation Project

(http://library.unlv.edu/faculty/research/bibliotherapy/),
which offers an excellent list of books that focus on both
counseling
and education topics.
Counselors who have not been teachers may balk at the idea of
focusing a group on an academic task; however, the counselor
need
not be an expert in an academic area. The teacher provides the
aca-
demic expertise while the counselor promotes the social and
emotional
development. The logistics will require close collaboration
between the
counselor and the teacher to create a suitable arrangement.
After the
task has been identified, the counselor may circulate among
various
task groups or work with one group at a time while the teacher
works
September 2009
with the remaining students. In the task group, the counselor
can
serve as a co-learner while he or she weaves SEL skill
development
into the process and facilitates group interactions aimed at
successful
task completion.
Working in the classroom may represent a paradigm shift for
counselors. However, it is consistent with a new ‘‘inclusion’’

model of
school counseling suggested by Clark and Breman (2009). This
model
requires that all students receive counseling support through
innova-
tive interventions in classroom settings and requires counselors
to col-
laborate and consult closely with teachers. The task group
model
proposed here complements the Clark and Breman model,
because it
necessitates collaboration with teachers and other school
personnel
to identify a suitable project and involves implementation of the
task
group in the classroom.
The best way to identify an appropriate task is through
familiarity
with the school context. The school counselor who has been in
the
school will already have intimate knowledge of school culture,
but will
still need to spend time observing school activities and
soliciting input
from others. The counselor new to the school, on the other
hand, must
become well acquainted with the school environment by getting
to
know, first students and school personnel (e.g., teachers,
administra-
tors, teachers), and then parents and community members. What
are the educational goals that the teachers share? What is
necessary
to promote the achievement of the student body? For example,
if there

are a large number of students living in poverty, what projects
would
support their unique needs—in the classroom, the school, and
the
community? Immersion in the culture—both school and
surrounding
community—allows the counselor not only to identify projects
that
support the school mission but also to design tasks that are
sensitive
to values of the population served. Service learning projects
that
require collaborative efforts offer excellent opportunities for
addres-
sing community needs and, at the same time, enhancing
students’
social and emotional abilities. For example, small groups of
younger
students may decide on a gift appropriate for a local senior
center,
design the necessary steps to make their gifts, and finally,
create
the gifts. Older students may research community needs and
then
work together in small groups to design and carry out
community pro-
jects. Although there are a variety of websites that describe
school
service learning projects, one particularly comprehensive list
for both
elementary and secondary levels comes from Mesa Service
Learning
(http://www2.mpsaz.org/msl/about/).
The most important school personnel with whom to collaborate
are

teachers, because counselors will need their support to carve out
time
and space for the task group. Common complaints of teachers
are that
SEL activities take time away from an already overloaded
academic
schedule (Elias, Bruene-Butler, Blum, & Schuyler, 2000;
Mildener &
Keane, 2006). Careful selection of task group focus, however,
helps
sidestep the criticism that time spent on social and emotional
skill
development usurps valuable academic time. Rather, teachers
view
the task as supporting their efforts rather than auxiliary to their
academic goals. At the same time, working closely with
teachers in
the classroom may stimulate more positive attitudes toward SEL
activities and small group learning.
With a task identified, a counselor must not only assist children
in
completing the task, but also help them to understand the
importance
of the group process in task completion. Effective SEL in the
task
group requires that children learn cooperation, social skills, and
prosocial values (Johnson & Johnson, 2004).
FACILITATING THE TASK GROUP FOR OPTIMAL SEL

A counselor facilitating a task group with children for optimal
SEL
must perform a variety of functions. Unfortunately, in a recent
survey
of 802 school counselors, many participants reported a lack of
group
training aimed at working with children and adolescents in the
schools (Steen, Bauman, & Smith, 2008). Although the
following infor-
mation is not meant to substitute for group training, it does
provide an
overview of functions that school counselors should feel
comfortable
performing in order to facilitate a task group successfully for
SEL.
The primary functions involve fostering positive
interdependence
through team building and promoting interpersonal process by
setting
appropriate structure and bolstering skill development. The
literature
on process in children’s groups is scant (Leichtentritt &
Shechtman,
1998; Shechtman & Yanov, 2001); however, along with the
literature
on task groups with adults, it provides some direction for the
counselor
carrying out these functions.
Building a Team
Simply assigning a task and asking children to work together
does not assure that they will become a team (Prichard, Bizo, &
Stratford, 2006). Therefore it is the responsibility of the
counselor to
incorporate ways to build group cohesiveness. In an

investigation of
children’s groups, child participants identified group
cohesiveness—
encouragement, support, and acceptance from others—as the
most
important factor in their group experience (Shechtman & Gluk,
2005). Thus, it is important to help children build new
relationships
September 2009
or strengthen existing relationships around working on the task.
So,
although task completion is primary, failure to attend to
relationships
of students could result in negative outcomes for task
completion and
learning.
Students in a school may already have formed relationships;
how-
ever, counselors will need to develop activities focused on
building
interdependent relationships and identifying appropriate norms
of
behavior. Effective task groups devote time to learning about
one
another, to culture building, and to nurturing collaboration and
coop-
eration (Hulse-Killacky, Killacky, & Donigian, 2001). Because
team
building involves learning prosocial behavior, norms should
include

discussion of respect for others and promotion of other
members’
efforts. Clear expectations for task completion and group
behavior will
enhance student learning related to completing the task and
acquiring
interpersonal skill in doing so.
Establishing Appropriate Structure
To promote SEL through the interpersonal process of the group,
counselors must establish appropriate structure. Counselors can
do
so by attending to the developmental level of the children in the
group
(Rosenthal, 2005); younger children need more structure. For
all chil-
dren, counselors need to provide more structure early in the
group’s
development. Group facilitators optimize children’s experiences
in
groups when they provide a safe environment for children to try
out
behaviors (Mayerson, 2000) and the appropriate level of
structure
helps provide that safe space.
An ideal structure for a task group involves balancing content
and
process (Hulse-Killacky, Kraus, & Schumacher, 1999). The
content
component of a group refers to the information shared; in a task
group,
the counselor should make sure that all children clearly
understand
the purpose of the group and the goals related to the task.

Addition-
ally, the counselor should pay attention to the content that
children
share to get a sense of each child’s strengths and how he or she
can
contribute to task completion. Too much attention to content in
a task
group, however, may actually interfere with progress toward
complet-
ing the task (Hulse-Killacky et al., 1999). The process
component of a
task group deserves equal attention. Yalom (2002) defines
process as,
‘‘the nature of the relationship between the people in the
interaction’’
(p. 109). As it applies to the task group, process refers to the
relation-
ships between and among children and how those relationships
promote or inhibit task completion. By attending to the process,
coun-
selors can make sure that all children share their ideas,
experiences,
and thoughts and contribute to accomplishing the task.
In a successful group, the counselor does not attend to the
process
alone; he or she makes sure that participants also attend to that
pro-
cess. From the onset of the group, the counselor structures a
reflective
environment in which children evaluate the interactions and
dynamics of the group (Barratt & Kerman, 2001). The counselor

fre-
quently encourages children to examine their relationships to
identify
how well they are working together and how they can better
their
effectiveness (Johnson & Johnson, 2009).
Although structure is essential to group work with children,
facili-
tators can best promote children’s SEL by knowing when to
allow free-
dom within the structure. An important value of group work—
that it
reflects real life most accurately (Akos, 2000)—is lost if a
group is too
structured. A challenge is finding the balance between
permissiveness
and appropriate structure and limits. In an exploratory study of
dynamics in children’s therapy groups, Mayerson (2000) found
that
facilitators’ willingness to join the play process, when
appropriate,
contributed to positive outcomes. Applying this to the task
group, a
counselor must be flexible and fluid in stepping forward to take
the
leadership role and stepping back to let the children lead.
Johnson
and Johnson (2009) maintain that facilitators must decide when
to
direct the children’s group, be ‘‘a sage on the stage,’’ or to be
their
assistant, ‘‘a guide on the side’’ (p. 497). Children can lead
their own
group when they have developed the ability to reflect on their
indivi-

dual and group behaviors and the skills necessary for working
with
others.
Bolstering Skill Development
Important for the task group is development of skill in giving
feed-
back, making decisions together, and solving problems and
resolving
conflict. The ability to give constructive feedback sets the stage
for
the other skills. In a task group, timely feedback fosters team
develop-
ment; because it increases member motivation and provides data
to
help members work together effectively (Birmingham &
McCord,
2004). In a study of interpretative responses—confrontation,
interpre-
tation, and feedback—of preadolescents in groups, Shechtman
and
Yanov (2001) found that high quality feedback (i.e., direct and
honest
personal reaction) precipitated productive responses (i.e.,
exploration,
insight, or change) while high quality interpretation (supportive
explanation of one’s behavior, feelings, or thoughts) or
confrontation
(highlighting incongruencies) precipitated unproductive
responses
(e.g., resistance, agreement). The authors concluded that
minimizing
confrontation and maximizing high-quality feedback was most
helpful
in group work with children.

September 2009
The challenge in the task group lies in helping children learn to
give
constructive feedback (i.e., direct and honest personal reaction)
that
supports task completion. This begins with counselor modeling;
simply
by listening, paraphrasing, asking open questions, that is, using
basic
counseling skills, counselors provide a positive example for
children
and promote SEL. In using these skills, it is important that
counselors
attend to the age of the children in the group to adapt those
skills
appropriately (see Van Velsor, 2004). If children learn these
skills,
they help to create a safe environment and set the stage for
giving con-
structive feedback to each other related to task completion.
Drawing
from several task group models, Hulse-Killacky et al. (1999)
suggest
that members create guidelines for giving and receiving
feedback,
reflect on behaviors and interactions that support or inhibit the
group
work, and give clear feedback (i.e., using ‘‘I’’ statements,
speaking
directly to others). Initially the counselor will model and direct
appro-

priate communications, but children should eventually learn to
provide their own feedback. According to Sonstegard and Bitter
(1998), accurate feedback from children may facilitate the
group pro-
cess better than feedback from counselors.
Along with communication skills, children need to develop the
abilities necessary for decision making in task groups. Because
good
decision making depends on effective processing of emotions
(Bechara,
Damasio, & Bar-On, 2007), an important step is helping
children
to develop skill in monitoring emotions that arise when
differences
occur. In the task group, counselors can guide children in
regulating
their emotional reactions and applying self-control in
interpersonal
communication. Regulating emotion and gaining control gives
chil-
dren access to the clear thinking needed for problem solving
(Elias,
2004). Johnson and Johnson (1995) identified a helpful process
for
problem-solving negotiation, in which children (a) describe
what they
want and feel along with the rationale for those, (b) listen and
commu-
nicate understanding of other children’s perspectives, (c)
formulate
three optional plans, and (d) select a plan from those options.
This
model provides the opportunity for children to practice
perspective-
taking, which is foundational to the development of empathy

(Shapiro,
1997).
When problem solving among children breaks down and conflict
arises, the counselor will need to serve as mediator allowing
time for
cooling off as necessary, ensuring commitment to mediation,
and guid-
ing children through the problem-solving process (Johnson &
Johnson,
1995). Formalizing the agreement (e.g., with a handshake) is
part of
both problem solving and conflict resolution procedures.
Once counselors have provided strategies for decision making,
problem-solving, and conflict resolution, they must decide when
to
let children direct the process and when they need to intercede.
Some
group facilitators may tend to intervene quickly in any disputes,
conflict, or disagreement among children (Rosenthal, 2005)
denying
them the experience of solving issues on their own, and in turn
inhibit-
ing their SEL from the process. On the other hand, an
environment
that encourages creative and collaborative decision making,
problem
solving, and conflict resolution by children promotes their
optimal

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Designing a task group for the classroom will require
considerable
collaborative planning to identify what works with which
students
based on academic learning objectives as well as student
developmen-
tal level and culture. The counselor, in collaboration with the
teacher,
must decide how much advance psychoeducation the students
will
need related to decision making, problem solving, and conflict.
It is
always best to discuss conflict resolution procedures before a
heated
emotional situation arises.
Implementation would typically begin with a teacher describing
an
academic assignment. Using the literature circle example, the
teacher
asks students to rank a list of stories or books based on their
interests.
The teacher divides students into small groups determined by
their
choices and, after students have read the literature, they discuss
their
reactions to and understandings of the reading. Next, the teacher
assigns a task for the group focused on student discussion. The
scope
of the task (e.g., a map of the events of the story, a presentation
on the
themes in the book) will depend on the age of the students and
the

teacher’s learning objectives. This assigned task could take
place
during one class period or over the course of several weeks.
As students begin work on the task in their small groups, the
coun-
selor’s expertise is tapped. If students are new to teamwork, the
coun-
selor conducts team building exercises and explains how
students
must attend to the process as they complete their task. Schmuck
and Schmuck (2001) provide some simple process observation
sheets
for younger students, which could be adapted in various ways
for
many ages. These questionnaires ask students to identify
specific
instances of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors evident in the
group
and promote student analysis of their own experiences and
actions
(SEL self-awareness competency) and those of others (SEL
social
awareness competency). The observation sheets serve as stimuli
for
discussion on group process as students work on their project,
and,
in turn, the discussion serves as a learning ground for students
as
September 2009
counselors help them give constructive feedback to each other

(SEL
relationship skill competency).
Eventually, disagreements will arise in some groups over
procedures, goals, and relationships (Schmuck & Schmuck,
2001),
and such controversies offer, perhaps, the most valuable
opportunities
for SEL. When students are involved in a passionate discussion
that
appears to have the potential for escalation, the counselor must
decide
when, and if, to step in and what intervention might facilitate
optimal
SEL. Early in a disagreement, the counselor may ask students to
listen to each other and then verbalize the opposing perspective,
promoting student empathy and sensitivity to others (SEL social
awareness competency). If emotions are already heightened, the
coun-
selor may direct the students to self-monitor and share their
feelings
related to the interaction before tackling a problem solving
procedure.
This helps students to accurately assess their feelings (SEL self-
awareness competency) and to regulate their emotions (SEL
self-
management competency). As students become more skilled in
decision making and problem solving, the counselor may need
only
to refer students to the steps of these processes.
There, of course, will be times when conflict arises and students
need a cooling off period. In facilitating student cool down, the
counse-
lor must use a course of action that works harmoniously with
the tea-

cher’s approach to de-escalation. When students have regained
their
self-control sufficiently, the counselor secures the commitment
of all
group members to the negotiation process, leads students
through pro-
blem solving steps, and helps students formalize their
agreement
(Johnson & Johnson, 1995). Students in the group can practice a
wealth of SEL competencies, and the counselor is on-hand to
facilitate
the learning process. At the same time, the counselor can serve
as a
model and consultant to the teacher, who may want to use small
groups for cooperative learning at times when the counselor is
not pre-
sent. The overall goal is to encourage teachers to reinforce
student use
of SEL skills and attitudes throughout the day as well as in and
out of
the classroom.
CONCLUSION
Counselors in the schools are already aware of the connection
between social and emotional learning and positive outcomes in
school
and life. Individuals need social and emotional skills for
achieving
academic and workplace success and becoming informed and
responsi-
ble community members (Elias, Arnold, & Hussey, 2003).
Counselors’
efforts to promote social and emotional learning (SEL) for all
students,

however, are often thwarted by the view of other school
personnel that
SEL intrudes on the academic mission of the school. The task
group
proposed unites educational aims with SEL objectives. It
transcends
the psychoeducational group approach, which tends to focus on
cogni-
tive behavioral strategies and problem solving, and the
counseling
group approach, which tends to focus on affect; the task group
offers
an integrative approach. The counselor facilitates completion of
an
educational task, and, at the same time, facilitates social and
emo-
tional skill development in the task completion process. This
task
group model has benefits for all students and allows students to
learn
social and emotional skills from each other and practice them in
vivo.
A challenging aspect of the task group model is the need for
counse-
lors to identify and design a task through collaboration with
stake-
holders. Teachers’ input in this process is crucial because of
their
knowledge and needed cooperation. However, as counselors
become
more practiced in the task group, input by other stakeholders

(e.g.,
parents, community members) provides an opportunity to
strengthen
school-community connections to enhance the social and
emotional
development of children beyond the school.
Once a counselor has identified a task, he or she can best
promote
task completion and enhance student SEL through team
building,
appropriate structure, and skill development. Students can learn
the
skills of giving feedback, offering empathy, making decisions,
and
solving problems along with managing emotions and negotiating
conflict—skills necessary throughout life for working together
coop-
eratively and collaboratively to complete a task.
Use of the task group by counselors in the schools, however,
requires somewhat of a paradigm shift. Counselors typically
focus on
a small percentage of students with difficulties or at risk for
difficul-
ties, and offer group counseling to these students on a pull out
basis
(i.e., taking students out of class) (Clark & Breman, 2009). The
task
group is not meant to preclude the counseling group; there will
always
be a need for groups focused on topics such as divorce and
grief.
However, the task group in the classroom has potential for use
with all students, rather than only a small percentage of them;
for

promoting the use of the small group in learning; and, perhaps,
for
repositioning the counselor in a role more central to the
school’s
educational mission.
Moving from working with a small percentage of students to
work-
ing with the broader student body will prove challenging.
However,
counselors can expand their sphere of influence in promoting
SEL
by training teachers in group process strategies for use in
classroom
groups. Some teachers are already schooled in cooperative
learning
and may need only minimal training in group process. Other
teachers
September 2009
may need more extensive training to first understand the value
of
group work in education and then to learn how to effectively
facilitate
children’s group process in the classroom. Counselors may
begin this
process by first working with teachers who are already using
groups
and cooperative learning. Then, by making their efforts known
throughout the school, they can engage other teachers who may
be
skeptical of the importance of group work and SEL in

education.
Counseling in schools is often relegated to the status of an
ancillary
service (ASCA, 2003) and SEL is sometimes viewed as
intruding on
the current responsibility of schools for student performance on
test-
ing and standards (Mildener & Keane, 2006). Small groups in
the
classroom, and task groups in particular, have great potential
for
enhancing the learning environment in schools. Counselors with
training in group process are in an excellent position to promote
task
group work specifically, and small group work in general, as an
inte-
gral part of the school educational mission. The goal for
counselors
is to enhance student social and emotional development by
weaving
SEL and small group work into the fabric of the school. The
ultimate
goal is to provide students with the social and emotional skills
neces-
sary for success during their school years and beyond.
REFERENCES
Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2003). Rethinking school
psychology: Commentary on
public health framework series. Journal of School Psychology,
41, 83–90.
Akos, P. (2000). Building empathic skills in elementary school
children through group

work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 25, 214–223.
Akos, P., Hamm, J. V., Mack, S. G., & Dunaway, M. (2007).
Utilizing the developmental
influence of peers in middle school groups. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work,
32(1), 51–60.
American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA
national model: A framework
for school counseling programs [electronic version].
Alexandria, VA: Author.
Barratt, G., & Kerman, M. (2001). Holding in mind: Theory and
practice of seeing
children in groups. Psychodynamic Counseling, 7, 315–328.
Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., & Bar-On, R. (2007). The
anatomy of emotional intelligence
and implications for educating people to be emotionally
intelligent. In R. Bar-On,
J. G. Maree, & M. J. Elias (Eds.), Educating people to be
emotionally intelligent
(pp. 273–290). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Birmingham, C., & McCord, M. (2004). Group process research:
Implications for using
learning groups. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L. D.
Fink (Eds.), Team-based
learning: A Transformative use of small groups in college
teaching (pp. 73–93).
Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Brown, N. W. (2009). Becoming a group leader. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson.
Clark, M. A., & Breman, J. C. (2009). School counselor

inclusion: A collaborative model
to provide academic and social-emotional support in the
classroom setting. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 87(1), 6–11.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning.
(2000–2009). What is SEL?
Skills and competencies. Retrieved April 24, 2009, from
http://www.casel.org/basics/
skills.php.
Conyne, R. K., Crowell, J. L., & Newmeyer, M. D. (2008).
Group techniques: How to use
them purposefully. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Conyne, R. K., & Mazza, J. (2007). Ecological group work
applied to schools. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work, 32(1), 19–29.
Corey, M. S., & Corey, G. (2006). Groups: Process and practice
(7th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Thomson Brooks=Cole.
Daniels, H. (2001). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book
clubs and reading groups
(2nd ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Elias, M. J. (2004). Strategies to infuse social and emotional
learning into academics. In
J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C., Wang, & H. J. Walberg

Elias, M. J., Arnold, H., & Hussey, C. S. (2003). EQ, IQ, and
effective learning and citi-
zenship. In M. J. Elias, H. Arnold, & C. S. Hussey (Eds.), EQ
þIQ ¼ Best leadership
practices for caring and successful schools (pp. 3–10).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
(1997). How to launch a social
and emotional learning program. Educational Leadership, 54(8),
15–19.
(2000). Voices from the field:
Identifying and overcoming roadblocks to carrying out
programs in social and emo-
tional learning=emotional intelligence. Journal of Educational
and Psychological
Consultation, 11, 253–272.
Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Frey, K. S.,
Greenberg, M. T., Haynes, N. M.,
et al. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning:
Guidelines for educators.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Gladding, S. (2008). Groups: A counseling specialty. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam
Books.

Greenberg, M. T., Kusché, C. A., & Riggs, N. (2004). The
PATHS curriculum: Theory
and research on neurocognitive development and school
success. In J. E. Zins,
R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Building
academic success
on social and emotional learning: What does the research say?
(pp. 170–188). New
York: Teachers College Press.
Hawkins, J. D., Smith, B. H., & Catalano, R. F. (2004). Social
development and social
and emotional learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C.
Wang, & H. J. Walberg
(Eds.), Building academic success on social and emotional
learning: What does the
research say? (pp. 135–150). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Hulse-Killacky, D., Killacky, J., & Donigian, J. (2001). Making
task groups work in your
world. Upper Saddler River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hulse-Killacky, D., Kraus, K. L., & Schumacher, R. A. (1999).
Visual conceptualizations
of meetings: A group work design. Journal for Specialists in
Group Work, 24(1),
113–124.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2009). Joining together:
Group theory and group skills
(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Teaching students to
be peacemakers (3rd ed.).

Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2004). The three Cs of
promoting social and emotional
learning. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J.
Walberg (Eds.), Building
academic success on social and emotional learning: What does
the research say?
(pp. 40–58). New York: Teachers College Press.
September 2009
Katzenback, J., & Smith, D. (2003). The wisdom of teams.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Kridler, P. G., & Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (2008). Mathematics
circles: A structured
approach to problem solving. Mathematics Teaching in the
Middle School, 14,
214–221.
Kulic, K. R., Horne, A. M., & Dagley, J. C. (2004). A
comprehensive review of prevention
groups for children and adolescents. Group Dynamics: Theory,
Research, & Practice,
8, 139–151.
Leichtentritt, J., & Shechtman, Z. (1998). Therapist, trainee and
child verbal response
modes in child group therapy. Group dynamics: Theory,
research and practice, 2(1),
36–47.

Lopes, P. N., & Salovey, P. (2004). Toward a broader
education: Social, emotional, and
practical skills. In J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, &
H. J. Walberg (Eds.),
Building academic success on social and emotional learning:
What does the research
say? (pp. 76–93). New York: Teachers College Press.
Mayerson, C. R. (2000). An exploratory study of Group-as-a
Whole dynamics in
children’s group therapy. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Group Therapy, 10,
131–150.
McCombs, B. L. (2004). The learner-centered psychological
principles: A framework
for balancing academic achievement and social-emotional
learning outcomes. In
J. E. Zins, R. P. Weissberg, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg
Mildener, K., & Keane, C. R. (2006). Collaborating with
teachers on social emotional
learning. In Pellitteri, Stern, Shelton, & Muller-Ackerman
(Eds.), Emotionally intel-
ligent school counseling (pp. 141–149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Parker, J. D. A., Creque, R. E., Barnhart, D. L., Harris, J. I.,
Majeski, S. A., Wood, L.,
et al. (2004). Academic achievement in high school: Does
emotional intelligence

matter? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1321–1330.
Poulou, M. (2005). The prevention of emotional and
behavioural difficulties in schools:
Teachers’ suggestions. Educational Psychology in Practice,
21(1), 37–52.
Prichard, J. S., Bizo, L. A., & Stratford, R. J. (2006). The
educational impact of
team-skills training: Preparing students to work in groups.
British Journal of Edu-
cational Psychology, 76, 119–140.
Rosenthal, L. (2005). Qualifications and tasks of the therapist in
group therapy with
children. Modern Psychoanalysis, 30, 95–103.
Shapiro, L. (1997). How to raise a child with a high E. Q. New
York: Harper Collins.
Schmuck, R. A., & Schmuck, P. A. (2001). Group processes in
the classroom (8th ed.).
New York: McGraw Hill.
Shechtman, Z., & Gluk, O. (2005). An investigation of
therapeutic factors in children’s
groups. Group dynamics: Theory, research and practice, 9, 127–
134.
Shechtman, Z., & Yanov, H. (2001). Interpretatives
(confrontation, interpretation, and
feedback) in preadolescent counseling groups. Group dynamics:
Theory, research
and practice 5, 124–135.
Sonstegard, M. A., & Bitter, J. R. (1998). Counseling children

in groups. Journal of
Individual Psychology, 54, 251–267.
Stanley, P. H. (2006). Using the 5 P Relay in task groups.
Journal for Specialists in
Group Work, 31(1), 25–35.
Steen, S., Bauman, S., & Smith, J. (2008). The preparation of
professional school coun-
selors for group work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work,
33, 253–269.
Straits, W. (2007). A literature-circles approach to
understanding science as a human
endeavor. Science Scope, 31(2), 32–36.
Thompson, C. L., & Henderson, D. A. (2006). Counseling
children (7th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing.
Van Velsor, P. (2004). Revisiting basic counseling skills with
children. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 82, 313–318.
Yalom, I. D. (2002). The gift of therapy. New York:
HarperCollins.
Zins, J. E., Bloodworth, M. R., Weissberg, R. P., & Walberg, H.
J. (2007). The scientific
base linking social and emotional learning to school success.
Journal of Educational
and Psychological Consultation, 17, 191–210.

MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx

MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx

Similar to MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx (20)

More from alfredacavx97

More from alfredacavx97 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

MBA 705 Milestone Four Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx