Through the Looking Glass

What kind of guidance would I like to be involved with in an ideal world?

I would like to work with people and help support them over time. I would like to be the person clients get sent to rather than the person that signposts them if they need extra support. I've grown to love opening up all those famous 'cans of worms'. I want to keep learning and developing (or 'unfolding' as Grant would say!). I'm not averse to the idea of moving into full-on counselling eventually.

I would like to have be able develop my own style of guidance, and to use approaches to suit individual clients needs. I'm a creative person and a 'good egg'. I would love to have a job where you can get stuck in with very basic support and to have the freedom to be able to use my creativity in my work - when it's appropriate of course, I wouldn't subject just everyone to my great 'play-doh' guidance ideas!

I would like to be confident, trusted, well liked, and well respected.

I once took a client along to their careers scotland appointment, and when we came out I said 'that's the course I'm going off to do soon, careers guidance. Can you imagine me working somewhere like that?'. She said (actually I think you would call it 'wailed') 'Nooooooooooooooooooooo! you can't work there! That's for boring auld folk, and you're not like that! You know how to have a laugh. I need you to be there for me, I want you to be there to help me forever'

Come to think of it, that's probably the best careers advice I've ever had. I just hope I can make it happen some day.

And now to end this blog I feel it is most appropriate to quote an acrostic poem I was once given by a client!

Giving
Everyone
Money
Meals
And

Everybody
Loves her
Dated, vintage, jumble sale CRAP
Especially cause she makes it look great with her sexy
Red hair!!!!!!!!!

A Thoroughly Postmodern Millie

I give my gold-star seal of approval to my last placement with enable scotland (and not just because I got to go out in the sun with a bit of card and some sticky-backed plastic to make this nature study!). I thought it was a really great place, doing really good work and with a really nice atmosphere about it.

In contrast to my other placements I wasn't stuck in offices or schools, I wasn't stuck within the bounds of a big institution, and I got the chance to build relationships with some of the clients over time. Definitely the sort of thing I would like to do in the future (somewhere I could get stuck in with things rather than signposting).

One of the most difficult things for the EDWs is obtaining work placements - which is why in our 'dream guidance scenarios' I said they should be compulsory, like jury duty! (although that obviously wouldn't be that great an idea as you wouldn't want to send anyone out into a hostile place). I would have expected to a lot of closed doors when trying to get placements, but what surprised me was the number of people who are very openly and blatantly discriminatory.

I also got to go out one day with an EDW who was supporting a client into their new cleaning job. They teach clients how to do the job, stay with them until they learn it and are comfortable, and then gradually remove themselves. Enable has the funding for clients to get back in touch in the future if they are having any problems, which is sooooo important (I'm a bit horrified by all the stories of places which don't have that)

We were talking in class today about the problem of which theorectical stance to take with differnet clients. Although they are often viewed negatively, I think sometimes directive matching approaches are sometimes appropriate. Everyone (not specifically this client group) has limits to their capability, everyone works within limited opportunity horizons to a greater or lesser extent, and some people struggle with 'decision making' and knowing what they want, especially if they are used to having little or no say in their lives.

At enable, one of the EDWs (who did this course last year) was talking to me about how, in reality, she often uses matching techniques, as this is what is most appropraiate. However, there is no one set approach, and support is individualised. While I was there I also went to one evening of a 6 week event,'The Big Plan', an evening event at the hibs ground where they can bring friends and family, and where they are given supported space to assert their identities, dream, and make plans for the future, which they do by drawing their ideas on posters and talking about them to the group. I really love that sort of stuff, and the idea of 'pick n mix'. When it comes to guidance I'm a thoroughly postmodern millie!


I hate all the stuff Pete says about 'having a different theory for different groups'. I know that there can be broad similarities between 'groups' of clients (school leavers vs women returners etc) but I would never want to (intentionally) prejudge anyone, or assume groups are homogenous. I don't see what is so difficult about taking individual people as they come and thinking on your feet!




[and while I was at enable I even got to jet-set about edinburgh with my very own volunteer-liasing 'James Bond'! (which I guess must make me a bond girl???). He was absolutely amazing at his job, so suave and professional and talented (yes thats right he is reading this!). Despite his fears I don't have a bad word to blog about him - even if he does drink his body weight in coffee every day and have a thing for buttons shaped like unicorns and pixies. I honestly like those things about him :D]

Is there a doctor in the house?

Thinking about how I originally made my journey to career guidance, lets see what my diagnosis is...

1) learning how to make career decisions

- being willing to career plan

I decided to do this course and the related work I did before it as an end in themselves. If I liked them I would stick with them and if I didn’t I would take the transferable skills and move on. I was hopeful and optimistic, but I know there are no certainties in life.

If I ever stop liking it or come across something fabulous I will drop it. I can plan for the next stage or two in advance but not for my working life. Not necessarily because I don’t want to, but because how can you?

half a point?

Having a method

Having a method. Hmmm. I originally came up with 'career guidance' by thinking about headhunting/recruitment, going for an internship and later a few interviews. I pulled out of the next stages because it didn't seem quite 'right', I would have had to 'fake it', I like people, I don't care about money/sales enough.
I came up withthe headhunting/recruitment idea because a) I thought it would be a 'sensible' idea to have an internship and the headhunting one was the only one I saw that I liked the looks of and b) because I am a nosey cow and like riffling through peoples cvs.

I then came up with career guidance. It seemed like a good idea. I thought in any case it would be a good idea to beef up my 'people skills' as I was really good at all the academic stuff and that tends to read as 'bookish and unsociable' when you are job hunting.

Was that methodical? Should it have been?


2) Making a career decision
Using a method: finding out about myself and the world of work

I already knew about myself. I have met me many times. I did not use a method. If anything I based my career decision on what I wanted to be like more than what I was like. I thought it would make things more exciting and give me room to grow (and it did!).

Half a point???

Find out about the world of work? What, all of it? Everything? Or does this mean ‘find out that you can’t chew gum at work?’.

3) Finding out about my chosen job or course

Knowing where to find information on jobs and courses

Google?

I also spoke to a career advisor before I applied for the course, full marks for me, go me!

4) Knowing how to apply

Covering letters, application forms and CV’s.

I can do all that.

5) Understanding interviews and assessments

Dealing with selection and outcomes

I always think that interviews are as much/more about me ‘interviewing’ them than them interviewing me. If it is the right job then it is easy and enjoyable but if I have my doubts or don’t like the atmosphere when I meet them then I know I don’t really want it.

Then I am either accepted or rejected a) because I was great but someone was better or b) because I was not so great because I didn’t really want it

Is it ‘technically’ a good idea to be so choosy? If I were unemployed for a long time/needing the cash then I would probably find more things desirable and so do ‘well’ more frequently.

Is that too subjective an answer??? It makes sense to me anyhow.

6) Developing my career

What to do when things change, promotion, keeping up to skills

Roll with the punches? Go with the flow? Don't stop moving to that funky funky beat?




So whats the diagnosis? Am I ill?

areers-cay cotland-say and the areer-cay lanning-pay ourney-jay

Thought I had better put that in pig Latin, as there are (most probably) spies everywhere….

What are my thoughts on areers-cay cotland-say and the areer-cay lanning-pay ourney-jay?

Overall, I’m not against the idea of a national, standardised guidance service to provide the ‘bread and butter’ of careers guidance. But I definitely think that this has to be supplemented by local and specialist services.

I could forgive areers-cay cotland-say for a lot of it’s flaws – I don’t know what I would suggest if I were setting the agendas. What nnoys-aay e-may is the kind of overarching rrogance-aay, that it is the ‘best’ the ‘only’, the ‘first and last word’ in career guidance. No-one likes to be told they ‘have’ to do something.

And the areer-cay lanning-pay ourney-jay? I don’t really get it. It seems too ne-oay imensional-day and bvious-oay to be a true ‘tool’? I never saw it being used in any useful way while on placement. There was a big poster of it on the wall and it was vaguely pointed at a few times (making me ince-way a little).

I feel like I must be missing something???

cupboard guidance

What role does place and space take in career guidance? I studied social geography, and so I find it easy and obvious to think of things spatially. Different spaces undoubtedly impact on how we read and use the world.

So, should guidance be in an office? on the high street? in the school? in the school ‘broom cupboard’/guidance office? in the local community? in the home? online? In a field?

The same guidance technique conducted in the school ‘broom cupboard’* would be a very different thing if it were conducted in a field! What spaces empower and what spaces intimidate?

If you find yourself working in a 'formal' environment should you act a little more 'informally' to balance it out (and vice versa)?

And everyone has a different sense of spatial distance. Some people can't leave their own homes. Lots of people can't get a bus. Lot's of people wouldn't travel somewhere minutes away. I used to work in Musselburgh - to me that is 'in' Edinburgh (25 mins up the road from my flat on a bus). But for a lot of people who live there Edinburgh city centre is on the other side of their world.

So I don't think there is any one 'right' place for guidance. Some clients will find it more convenient to come to you when it suits them. Some clients will be sent to you. And some clients will need you to come to them.

On top of this there is the issue of community, which is quite different to the issue of place and the issue of space. It's not only clients who may problematically lack the right social capital for work, guidance workers in some communities will also need the right social capital if they are to be accepted and respected. Although this can be difficult it isn’t really something you can shy away from.

*[n.b speaking from experience, it is not a good idea to get into the habit of affectionately calling your tiny office “the cupboard”. This can lead to confusion and mild horror when colleagues ask you where you have just put an upset client!]

hmmmm...is it wrong that I identify with this careers advisor????

http://www.e4.com/video/wP3KHvRDthcENgjXe4bCeX/play.e4

Humanism or Good Eggs?

"Are you a humanist?"

I hate it when this question is asked. Someone asked me this on placement, and people have been asked it in class a few times.

I don't want to say 'yes' but I feel like I can't say 'no', in case the person asking recoils in horror and assumes I am therefore a judgmental selfish person-hating dictator. Which I am not. I just can't get particularly excited about humanism or Rogers.

When you read Rogers it all sounds very nice. But then you start thinking about real life, and if it is even possible to have an unconditional positive regard.

And I always wonder how you can really be congruent - I think i did this better before I started the course, when I was a volunteer and no-one expected me to be 'professional'. So I was just me. But when doing the practicals on this course, I am definitely 'acting the part' a little.

And we don't even get to wear our own clothes! We get told to come looking 'smart'. I am never normally a 'smart' kind of person. How can we be congruent when we are dressed up to portray just how 'professional' we are? How can we say we are without facade when our assessors purposefully carry briefcases?

Apart from these concerns, I always get a bit 'stuck' with Rogers in terms of why it is specifically a counselling technique.

Should we not, if we want to be 'good eggs', try to be like this all the time, and not just when we are at work? Can you be/try to be a good egg when at work, if you aren't/don't try to be a good egg out of work?

I think I am a humanist-type person in general. But I wouldn't say I am A humanist. I'm just a good egg.

Doodle Guidance

I liked this weeks 'doodle guidance' (aka life space maps). Very much the sort of thing I like (but then again I am a little odd).I have done something a wee bit similar with a group in the past. We made posters using magazine images/words, to represent 'you'. You could make it represent you in the past, present, future, or a mix of the three, whatever you liked. The only rule was you had to include the positive things you think about yourself. This was actually quite a difficult exercise for some of the group, as they generally had low self esteem. It was sad because every single one of them had cut out the word 'help' and stuck it on their poster somewhere. No-one was willing to talk to the group about their poster either, which was a shame because that was supposed to be the 'empowering' bit (but then it was a difficult group with a lot of group tensions).I'm not sure if I entirely agree with Grant about it being tool very unlikely to cause harm - like I said with the repertory grids, if you don't have trust/rapport with the client, this sort of thing can be very exposing. Even through it's in 'code' and you don't have to say anything you don't want to, it would still be scary to do if you didn't trust the counsellor.

Repertory Grids

Overall, I’m a big fan of the self-characterisation we have been doing. However, I don't think it's the right tool for a lot of situations. I can imagine self-characterisation going wrong. It can be very exposing, and so (well-placed) trust is important.

Overall, I can't say I'm keen on repertory grids. I find the numerical rankings overly simplistic.

Use of a wider scale would allow you to represent unequal distance between elements, and it should be possible to score more than one element equally for each construct. It should also be possible to weight the constructs differently for significance.

I also think the linear representation of ‘construct’ and ‘contrast’ is bizarre. It assumes that the implicit and explicit are inherently distinguishable and opposing, and that the ‘preferred’ end of the continuum is recognisable, singular and static.

So, even if the ‘accuracy’ of the scoring were improved, I’m not sure what exactly is ‘measured’.

Can internal constructs ever be adequately plotted onto charts and graphs? Our evaluation of clients’ internal constructs is inevitably filtered through our own internal constructs. How can the bias of the counsellor be addressed? Does it need to be?

I can imagine situations where it might be interesting, even insightful, but it can never be ‘enough’.

I spy with my little eye...

I came across this case study in the march linknet newsletter - our very own Pete's take on mentoring!

Peter (Mentor)

I work as a lecturer at Napier University, and I am involved in teaching trainee career advisers on a post-graduate course. I got involved in Linknet because our students were given the opportunity to become mentors - it would be great experience for their CVs and very relevant to learning about guidance. Having heard what was involved I decided I would give it a try myself . I don't see why students should have all the fun.

For me mentoring gives me an opportunity to work one to one with interesting people. I am a bit rusty, but it enables me to practice the skills of individual guidance that we train our students in. Also as a Londoner, I sometimes miss the incredible ethnic diversity and constant surprise of my home town. Mentoring provides a chance to meet with and have an in depth conversation with someone I would never normally meet. And of course if I am able to be of help then that's a bonus ! Ideally its working towards a situation where the mentee no longer needs you, but the mentor benefits from the process too.

crisis in confidence?

I have only read one chapter, 'The Crisis of Confidence in Professional Knowledge' out of Schons 'The Reflective Practitioner', so hopefully he will have redeemed himself a bit in other chapters, and maybe my criticisms are unjust. But I really hated the style of his writing in this chapter. There were too many sweeping generalisations, un-evidenced statements (which then read as 'factual'), and a lack of examination of his own professional knowledge.

I hated all the statements like "We look to professionals for the definition and solution of our problems, and it is through them that we strive for social progress." Do 'we'?? Did people ever really put all their faith in the professions? Is the 'crisis' really anything new? is it just a discursive shift? For instance, there is a perception that patients are now less trusting of their doctors, with patients self-diagnose themselves and conducting research via the Internet before they even meet with a health professional. But is this really a sudden shift, a sudden crisis in confidence that hasn't always existed? My granny never trusted doctors, and avoided them at all costs. And hasn't there always been (e.g. class related) differences in uptake of/trust in professional services?

It is also unclear throughout what Schon is basing this all on. Is it based on research? What research? Or is it just his reflections? There is no mention of any supportive material or counter-arguments.

And what about the article itself - it is a form of academic 'professional knowledge', but Schon doesn't problematise this or address the inherent instability of all academic writing and claims to 'knowledge'. I would have liked to have seen some acknowledgement of his own positionality, and examination of his motives for writing this.

Schon doesn't seem to have any crisis of confidence in his own professional academic knowledge, and how this knowledge is portrayed to the audience. I think he needs to question this, as his style comes across as depersonalised, authoritative, and hence unquestionably 'true'.

All in all, the way the chapter is written makes it come over as careerist and hypocritical. I find this disappointing, as I really liked the concluding point that professionals need to accept/embrace (instead of fearing) artful and unstable demonstrations of professionalism.

shiney new blog

welcome to my thrilling reflective practice blog!