HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT & INFLUENTIAL THEORIES IN SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE WITH

GROUPS

There is great value in reading, studying, and analyzing history for what it can help you understand about
the past and inform you about the present. This module is a story of social group work over time and its
relationship to the burgeoning social work profession. Particular focus is on three periods of time: (1) the
formation of a group work association, 1930s; (2) the merger into the National Association of Social
Workers, 1950s; and (3) the rebirth of group work, 1970s.

This module aims students to develop a broad perspective concerning the potential uses of groups in
practice settings and have affirmed foundation on which to build a knowledge base for effective group
work practice. It also aims to enhance their understanding of groups through two general types of
inquiries and to improve methods for working groups through understanding both inquiries.

Essential Questions:

What are the historical development of task groups and treatment groups in social work
profession?
What are the most influential theories in groupwork practice?

Intended learning outcomes:

Affirm foundation on which to build a knowledge base for effective group work practice.
Improve methods for working groups through understanding both inquiries.
Distinguish the different inquiries of task group and treatment groups.

A. Historical development of group work

Social group work and group psychotherapy has

primarily developed along parallel paths. Where the
roots of contemporary group psychotherapy are often
traced to the group education classes of tuberculosis
patients conducted by Joseph Pratt in 1906, the exact
birth of social group work can‟t be easily identified
(Kaiser, 1958 Schleidlinger, 2000 Wilson, 1976).

1 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
Social group work approaches are rooted in the
group activities of various social agencies that
arose in the latter part of the 19th century and
the early years of the 20th century. Social
upheaval and new found demands as a result of
post-Civil War industrialization, migration and
immigration created many individual and
societal needs (Brown, 1991, Kaiser, 1958,
Middleman, 1968, Reid, 1991, Schwartz, 1977,
Wilson, 1976).

Some of these needs were met through group work

endeavors found in settlement houses as well as
religious and charity organizations (Middleman, 1968,
Wilson, 1976). Additionally group work could be
found in the progressive education movement
(Dewey, 1910), the play and recreation movement
(Boyd, 1935), informal education, camping and youth
service organizations invested in character building
(Alissi, 1980, Schwartz, 1977, Williamson, 1929,
Wilson, 1976).

As Clara Kaiser (1958) has indicated there have been numerous philosophical and theoretical influences
on the development of social group work. Chief amongst these influences are the ethics of Judeo
Christian religions the settlement house movement‟s charitable and humanitarian efforts, theories
eminent in progressive education, especially those of John Dewey (1910).

Sociological theories about the nature of the relationship between man and society, i.e. Mead (1914), the
democratic ethic articulated by early social philosophers, the psychoanalytic theories of Rank and Freud,
the practice wisdom, theory building, educational and research efforts of early social group workers (Alissi
1980, Kaiser 1958, Wilson 1976). Early theoretical, research and practice efforts of Grace Coyle (1930,
1935, 1937, 1947, 1948), Wilber Newsletter (1935), and Neva Boyd (1935) paved the way for the
advancement and development of social group work.

Grace Coyle presented an early theoretical framework for social group work articulating the need for a
democratic value base (Coyle 1935), identifying the role of the worker as a group builder (Coyle 1937)
and noting the benefits of “esprit de corps” or group morale (Coyle 1930). As the editor of several small
group research compendiums Hare (1976) would later point out, Many of her insights about group
process were ahead of her time.

Social group work was introduced to the social work profession when it made its debut at the National
Conference for Social Work in 1935. At this conference, Newsletter (1935) Introduced the concept of
social group work to the social work profession and identified group work as a field, process and set of

2 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
techniques. He described group work as an “educational process” concerned with “the development and
social adjustment of an individual through voluntary group association” and “the use of this association as
a means of furthering other socially desirable ends”.

The period of time between the 1930s and the 1950s was one of growth and expansion for social group
work (Alissi 1980, Wilson 1976). The economic despair of and varied psychosocial needs resultant of the
Great Depression paved the way for greater affiliation between the social work profession and the field of
group work (Alissi 1980, Konopka 1983, Wilson 1976).

The psychological needs of returning war veterans who

served in World War-II resulted in the more frequent
application of social group work in psychiatric
treatment (Konopka, 1983). During this period of time
not only would the field of social group work debut at
the National Conference for Social Work but additional
advances would be made.

Academic courses and research institutions were established, a professional organization was formed,
The American Association of Social Work with Groups (AAGW) and a journal, The Group, was establishe.
The 1950s would usher in even greater affiliation of group work with the profession of social work (Alissi
1980, Andrews, 2001). The merger of the AAGW with six other organizations to form the National
Association of Social Work (NASW) in 1955 solidified the identification and integration of social group
work with the social work profession (Alissi 1980, Andrews, 2001). The impact of the merger was
reflected in efforts at definitional shifts regarding group work.

In 1956 the NASW formed a group work section which issued a new definition that contrasted in focus
with that proposed by the AAGW. The new definition dismissed the idea of group work with normal growth
and development and instead saw group work as a Service to a group where the primary purpose is to
help members improve social adjustment, and the secondary purpose is to help the group achieve
objectives approved by society, the definition assumes that the members have adjustment problems”
(Alissi, 1980).

The 1960s and the 1970s saw the expansion of the social welfare state the Vietnam War the emergence
of the war on poverty, the Woman‟s Rights Movemen, the Black Power Movement, and the Lesbian and
Gay Rights Movement (Balgopal and Vassil 1983, Somers 1976).

The above social, intellectual and cultural factors influenced the social work profession including social
group work (Balgopal and Vassil 1983, Somers, 1976). With such a wide range of social and therapeutic
needs there seemed to be an even greater appreciation of group work (Balgopal & Vassil 1983, Hartford
S1964, Somers, 1976).

Having expanded into differing practice settings, the purposes and goals of group work had been more
broadly described at this juncture than in previous decades.

3 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
Group work scholars made great strides in developing practice theories. The work of Vinter and Schwartz
and their respective associates would dominate the group work scene for much of this decade and the
next (Galinsky and Schopler, 1974). In Vinter‟s approach (1967) the treatment group is thought of as a
small social system “whose influences can be plan fully guided to modify client behaviour”.

In this approach the worker takes a central position in providing treatment, interventions are planned,
group process is highly structured, and great emphasis is given to outcome evaluation and research
(Vinter 1967, Garvin 1987, Galinsky and Schopler 1974). Schwartz (1961) proposed his vision of the
small group as an enterprise in mutual aid.

In 1965, Bernstein and colleagues introduced another social group work practice theory (Bernstein 1978,
Lowy, 1978, Garland Kolodney and Jones 1978). The centrepiece of the edited collection was a
developmental stage model, known as the Boston Model, which presented a framework for understanding
how groups navigate degrees of emotional closeness over time (Bernstein 1978, Garland, Kolodney and
Jones 1978).

In 1966 Papell and Rothman (1966) presented a typology of social group work that included the social
goals model (in the tradition of Coyle), the remedial model (as developed by Vinter) and the reciprocal
model (as articulated by Schwartz). in 1968 Middleman (1968) made a seminal contribution in articulating
an approach to group work practice that utilized non-verbal activities.

In 1976 Roberts and Northern presented a collection of ten group work practice theories (Roberts and
Northern 1976) further illustrating the diversity of approaches to group practice.

B. Influential Theories in Social Groupwork

In order to examine the nature of the current theories and practices of a part of the profession of social
work, it is necessary for us to view this part against the profession as a whole and the social-culture
setting which affects it and which it affects.

Social group work, as one of the methods of the social work profession, was introduced during the first
quarter of this century. It emerged at a time when there was a renewed dichotomy within the profession
between social workers who primarily regarded the causes of social problems as those within people and
others who located these causes primarily within the social situations in which people with problems were
living.

This difference in point of view has found expression in the organization of various types of agencies, all
of which may be classified as social welfare organizations although their methods of providing services
differ. Some of these methods are used in the social work profession of today. The stimulus for the
organization of services, and the development of methods to provide them, arises out of the lag between
basic human needs and the ability of social institutions, particularly the family, religion, government, and
economic systems, to meet them. In consideration of the changes of the last hundred years, it is
observed that “industrialism” has had an increasing impact upon the total social culture of our time. We
recognize the severe struggle experienced by individuals and groups to adjust to the sharp changes in
the nature of their environment. The effect of industrialism is universal, it demands changes in the
functions to be performed by all social institutions. The rate of change demanded has proportionately
increased with the rapidity with which technological advances have been applied to the production of
material goods and to communication and transportation.

4 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
The impact of industrialism, and of the new insights into human behavior gained in the pre-atomic age,
upon social welfare organizations and the profession of social work may be documented from history.
While the time span is of insufficient length to identify significant trends in the effects upon the profession
of the recent momentous discoveries relative to matter and man, it does indicate a direction for
speculation.

Social forces affecting a large collection of people are, in the last analysis, recognized by their effect upon
some people, as seen by other people, one at a time. People in trouble need help. Some observers will
be stimulated to help themselves and/or other people meet their immediate problems. Others will try to
eliminate the causes of the problems by a variety of methods. Some will be moved to work in both
directions simultaneously. During the first twenty years of this century, while the agencies developing
social casework services continued to devote the larger proportion of their time to working with people on
an individual-by-individual basis, there was an increasing participation of other social workers in working
“for and with the masses.” The personnel of the social welfare organizations, both volunteer and staff,
continued to reflect sharp differences of opinion between the people who identified with agencies devoted
to changing the “social order” and those who identified with agencies which were developing “the art of
bringing about better social adjustments in the social relationships of individual men, women or children.”
By 1915 the division was sharp, and the two approaches within the profession were evident in the
literature of the first twenty-five years of this century.

Theories in Social Group Work „Theory‟ is a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body
of facts offered to explain phenomena. For example, Social Learning Theory describes how human
behaviour is a product of environmental, social and personal factors. In the context of group work,
theories are on the whole scientifically accepted facts or statements for understanding individuals and
their relationships with others. Therefore, group work is based on eclectic theory of individuals and
groups. There are no independent theories as such in social group work method, but in the core of social
group work practice, we use theories of individual dynamics and theories of group dynamics borrowed
from various disciplines for understanding group behaviour. Now we shall discuss those theories.

Theory of Individual Dynamics An individual is understood, in social group work, on the basis of
psychoanalytic theory and cultural components as well as knowledge of social psychology and sociology.
Importance of early childhood experiences: A child initially engages in one-to-one relationship i.e.
interacts only with the mother. Later on, he/she begins to interact with others outside the mother. The
earliest experience of interaction within the family or outside provides the child a valuable mental and
emotional learning experience which he/she begins to apply as he/she grows and begins to reach out
beyond the intimate family group to peers (Konopka, 1963). Thus, these experiences have a great impact
on personality development. Man ‟s actions are influenced by unconscious motivation as well as by his
capacity to act consciously and rationally: This concept is directly related to group work practice.
The group worker guides the individual members in a group to participate in the programme activities and
to relate to other members in the group in order to fulfill certain personal and social needs. In other words,
the capacity to control difficult inner forces can be achieved and the insight of the individual can be
strengthened through constant interaction with others through group work. The concept of ambivalence:
The human being can experience two opposing emotions at the same time towards the same person or
situation. In case of change, they wish to be involved in the change process, but at the same time they
resist change and desire to keep their identity as it is. Development theory of human being: Human
beings pass through various stages in their life. In the first year, when child is under the loving adult, a
sense of trust is established. In the next stage a sense of autonomy, is felt when the child can understand
the boundaries of his/her self-determination. The third, fourth and fifth stages are sense of initiative,
sense of industry and a sense of identity respectively. Sense of intimacy, which comes next, is the
beginning of interest in the other sex and in marriage. Adulthood is the period of parental sense. The last
stage is the sense of integrity when a well-integrated adult can accept himself as different from others and
yet able to have and accept others (Friedlander, 1976).

Having accepted this developmental theory, a group worker tries to know whether the group member with
whom he deals with constantly has had adequate development through their different stages of

5 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
developments. He needs to lessen some of their negative experiences. The worker also facilitates
positive group experiences to compensate for the developmental lags. Group association changes as per
the need and focus in the group, depends on group goals: Every person in his/her lifespan belongs to
three types of groups i.e. primary group (the family) where he is born, friendship groups, and the vital-
interest groups. The primary group or family plays a fundamental role during childhood, the friendship
group is most important in adolescence, and adulthood seeks vital interest groups. A person in his
adulthood forms a new family, becomes a parent and feels the reversal of roles.

A social group worker may apply the same logic for fulfilling group member‟s needs. His focus or
emphasis is intricately related to group goals. In „growthoriented‟ groups (eg. therapeutic groups), the
worker is aware of every individual‟s specific needs, whereas in „taskoriented‟ groups (eg. adult
community groups), although focus is on every individual‟s needs, more emphasis is on the
accomplishment of group goals (Friedlander, 1976).

Theory of Group Dynamics When an individual belongs to a group, his behaviour is determined not only
by his inner forces but also by the people around him. Hence, apart from the individual dynamics, a social
group worker must know the group dynamics or various concepts of the group process. These concepts
include: acceptance or rejection, isolation (neglected and rejected) sub groups, group bond, group
hostility and group contagion, group support, and group conflict.

Acceptance or rejection: A group worker must know

every individual group member‟s relationship with other
group members or how much power each one has over
the other i.e. whether he is accepted by others or
isolated. If a member is isolated, the group worker must
know the meaning and causes of isolation. It may be
because the individual‟s behaviour has offended the
other members due to variations in Socio-cultural
background or personality differences. Sometimes the
situation is worse than the isolation i.e. the individual is
rejected by the group and exposed to open hostility.
Thus the questions of isolation or rejection need to be addressed by the group worker by handling
interpersonal and intrapersonal issues in the group.

Sub groups: There is no group where all members come together

to perform every task Formation of sub groups are very natural and
they emerge spontaneously. The group worker has to observe
whether these sub groups threaten the unity of the group or are
friendly formations. He has to act accordingly. It should be known
that emotional acceptance of the inevitability and legitimacy of sub
groups is a pre requisite for good and skillful group work. A worker
who works against the sub groups, loses the whole group
(Konopka, 1963).

Group bond: It refers to „group cohesiveness‟ or

„sense of belonging‟. It is the force bringing group
members closer. Group bond may be emotional
or task-related. „Emotional bond‟ derives from the
connection that members feel to other group
members and „task-related bond‟ refers to the
degree to which group members share group
goals and work together to meet these goals. The
effectiveness of a group can be understood
through group bond. The main factors that

6 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
influence group bond are: members‟ similarity, group size, entry difficulty, group success, and external
competition and threats. Thus, group bond is a powerful aspect of group dynamics.

Group hostility and group contagion: Group hostility,

in most of the cases, is found among the exploited or
depressed or minority groups. Hostility means
aggression or resentment or unfriendliness. A very
fine man or gentle person can express hostile
attitude because of the fact that he is part of a
hostile group atmosphere. Group contagion is the
tendency to catch and feel emotions that are similar
to and influenced by others in the group. In this
regard, Barsade (2002) comments: „It is a process in
which a person or group influences the emotions or
behaviour of another person or group through the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states
and behavioural attitudes‟. Group contagion may occur during examination or when two children are
upset in a camp or when some external threats come.

Group support: Any work becomes easy in

a group when support and courage come
from other members. A child having good
behaviour does not have any motive
towards stealing but he/she may do it while
interacting in a group. We find in group
therapy that each individual shares
experiences with others „who are in the
same boat‟ and accumulate moral support,
information as well as advice on the
problems and experience growth
opportunities. The group support thus is an
instrument for solving individual problem in
the group.

Group conflict: There exists no group

without any conflict. Maturity of a group
can be understood by observing how a
group resolves conflict. Normally conflict
can be solved or mitigated through
withdrawal of one part of the group (giving
up or running away or starting another
group), subjugation (powerful part forces
others to follow their wish), majority rule
(major people decide action), minority
consent (minority agrees with any option),
compromise (each party agrees to the limit
set by them), and integration (conflicting
opinions are discussed and reworked for
solution) [Konopka, 1963]. Integration is the most mature way of conflict resolution (Friedlander, 1976).
The worker, while performing the helping role in a group, should have knowledge on „group conflict‟ for
better handling of the clash or arguments and decision-making.

C. Exploring the theory and practice of group work

The emergence of the group as a focus for intervention and work within social work and informal
education in Britain and north America was a slow process and initially largely wrapped up with the
response of Christians, particularly evangelical Christians, to the social conditions they encountered in the

7 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
late eighteenth and throughout the nineteenth century. Examples from Britain include Hannah
More and Robert Raikes and Sunday schooling; John Pound and Quentin Hogg and ragged
schooling; George Williams and the YMCA; Arthur Sweatman and Maude Stanley in boys‟ and girls‟ club
work. Their motives were often a complex mix of concern for others, the desire to bring people to Bible
truths and values, and worries about the threat to order that the masses posed.

Alongside this a considerable amount of mutual aid activity developed during the nineteenth century
especially around chapels, meeting houses, working men‟s clubs and in the field of adult education (see,
for example, Smith 1988 on the making of popular youth work; Horton Smith 2000; Rose 2002). There
was also a growing appreciation of group process and sophistication in approach within adult education.
However, it was with developments in psychology and sociology (with the emergence of „small group
theory‟ and studies of group dynamics, for example) that the scene for a more thorough building of theory
about working with groups – particularly in north America. Alongside this, the influence of progressive
education as a philosophy – particularly through the work of John Dewey and William Kilpatrick – began
to be felt by many practitioners (see Reid 1981a).

In the USA, courses on group work started to appear in the early 1920s – and the first sustained
treatments of group work began to appear. In particular, the work of Grace Coyle (1930; 1937) drawing
upon her experience of settlement work, the YWCA and adult education was influential – but many others
around the field such as Eduard Lindeman (1924), Margaretta Williamson (1929) and Mary Parker
Follett (1918; 1924) were exploring different aspects of working with groups. There began to be a
discourse around the work that transcended professional and sector boundaries.

First, it was discovered that workers in a variety of agencies had a great deal in common and that the
major component of that common experience lay in their experience with groups. Out of this recognition
came the widespread use of the term social group work and the development of interest groups focusing
on work with groups in a number of cities. The second discovery was that what was common to all the
groups was that, in addition to the activities in which the group engaged, groups involved a network of
relationships between the members and the worker, between the group as a whole and the agency and
neighborhood in which the members lived. This combination of relationships was called the group
process. This second realization produced a search for deeper insights into these relationships, an
attempt to describe them and to understand their dynamics. (Reid 1981a:123)
Group work began to be seen as a dimension of social work in north America (perhaps best symbolized
by it being accepted as a section at the 1935 National Conference of Social Work). It‟s potential as a
therapeutic process was also starting to be recognized (Boyd 1935). As might be expected there was
considerable debate around what group work was – and where it belonged (see, for example, Lieberman
1938). Although group work methodology was developed within recreation and informal education
agencies it was increasingly being used in social work-oriented agencies within other institutions such as
children‟s institutions, hospitals, and churches (Reid 1981b: 145-6).

Influential commentators such as Gertrude Wilson (1941) argued that group work was a core method of
social work and not a field, movement, or agency. At the same time theorizing about group work was
benefiting from significant advances in the understanding of group dynamics (most especially through the
work of Kurt Lewin) and small work groups (Elton Mayo‟s research at the Hawthorne Plant of the Western
Electric Company being the best known).

By the start of World War II, group work in north America „was beginning to change its emphasis from
social action and preparation of group members for social responsibility to problems of individual
adjustment‟ (Reid 1981b: 154). This gathered pace during the 1940s and was reflected in the publication
of key practice texts – notably Grace L. Coyle‟s (1948) Group Work with American Youth: A Guide to the
Practice of Leadership, and Gertrude Wilson and Gladys Ryland‟s (1949) Social group work practice; the
creative use of the social process.

There were those, such as Alan Klein (1953) who continued to explore the connection between group
work and democracy – but much of the running was now being made by those working within social work
and therapy. Gisela Konopka‟s explorations of therapeutic group work with children (1949), group work in

8 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
institutions (1954) and of social group work as a helping process (1963) were amongst the most important
here. Some more generic texts around social group work such Phillips (1957) also appeared.

In Britain, there was some awareness of these developments – but there was very little explicit
exploration of group work theory and practice until the early 1950s. A number of the key figures involved
in stimulating debate and exploration came from youth work – notably Peter Kuenstler at the University of
Bristol. Kuenstler encouraged Grace Coyle to come to Britain to spend time with workers – and edited the
first major text on social group work in Britain (Kuenstler 1955). Josephine Klein was another pivotal
researcher and writer. Her books The Study of Groups (1956) and Working with Groups (1961) were
major additions to the literature – and brought groups and group work firmly into the discourse of social
work. This was helped by the attention given by the Younghusband Report (Ministry of Health 1959) to
social group work.

Group work as form of social work is directed towards giving people a constructive experience of
membership in a group, so that they may develop further as individuals and be better able to contribute to
the life of the community.

There was also important work happening within community development – with studies of community
groups (Spencer 1964) and small social groups (Phillips 1965). George Goetschius‟ (1969) long term
exploration of work with community and estate groups was also important. Further significant work
followed – notably Joan Matthews (1966) explorations of working with youth groups, Leslie Button‟s
(1974) examination of developmental group work, and Bernard Davies‟ (1975) path-breaking
interactionalist perspective with regard to the use of groups in social work practice.

At the same time there had been an explosion in exploration and publishing in the United States. Aside
from the obvious problem of scale, there are issues around categorizing material, quality (many texts are
are repeats of a basic how-to-do-it formula), and purpose. To make life easier I have adapted a
framework used by Kenneth E. Reid in his helpful study of the use of groups in social work (1981) and
added in a more therapeutically strand. I am not very comfortable with the categories – but they do
provide a way of mapping material:

Case-focused group work. This approach can be

described as „preventative and rehabilitative‟,
„remedial‟ or „organizational‟ – and is focused on the
individual. The group provides a means by which an
individual‟s problems can be assessed and
addressed. It is most clearly connected with social
work and casework and case management. The
emphasis is upon „ameliorating or preventing the
adverse conditions that negatively influence
individuals and result in deviant behaviour‟ (Reid
1981: 191). Classic examples of this literature come
from Gisela Konopka (1949, 1954, 1963) and Paul
Glasser et al. (1974).

Interaction-focused group work. Here the group

is understood as „a system of mutual aid wherein
the worker and the members are engaged on the
common enterprise of carrying out the group‟s
goals‟ (Reid 1981: 191). Within this category fall
humanistic approaches such as those of Glassman
and Kates (1990), the social group work of Grace
Coyle and the work of William Schwartz as his
associates such as Lawrence Shulman (1979,
1999).

9 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
Group therapy, T-groups and encounter
groups. There was a continuing growth in
discussions that looked to the group as a key
element in the therapeutic process – and that
drew heavily upon central traditions of practice
within psychotherapy e.g. psychoanalytic,
Gestalt, cognitive-behavioural etc. Allied to this
was material around family therapy (through
which I have hardly bared to tread). „Classic‟ work
appeared from Wilfred Bion (1961) and some
standard works from writers such as Irvin D.
Yalom (1970). Another tradition of practice that
could be said to fall in this strand is that of
Training groups (T-groups). Here following on
from Lewin‟s interest in using small groups as
training laboratories for teaching people
interpersonal skills, Bradford‟s work at the National Training Laboratory at Bethel, Maine; and the later
development of sensitivity-training or encounter groups (e.g. Lieberman 1973, Rogers 1970) are
examples of the use of groups for interpersonal learning.

Social goals group work. Here the focus is on dealing

with „those problems that are related to the social order
and the social value orientation in small groups‟ (Reid
1981: 202). This long established set of traditions of
practice is closely linked to community
organization/community work. See, for example
Mullender and Ward (1991) and Twelvetrees (1982,
1991, 2001, 2008).

In recent years there has been a significant development in the discussion of therapeutic traditions of
group work, and some limited attention to group work within mainstream schooling. Unfortunately, much
of the work within the social work arena has resulted in rather pedestrian „how-to-do-it‟ texts – but there
have been some good introductory texts examples over the last decade or so (e.g. Benson 2000; Brown
1993; Doel 1999). Similarly, the quality of texts offered teachers and educators has been variable but
one of the better examples is Jaques and Salmon (2006). Sadly, working with emergent groups, and with
community groups has not had the attention it merits.

10 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
Campling, Jo (2007), Effective groupwork, second edition, the british association of social workers,
England.

Garvin, Gutierrez, and Galinsky (2004), Handbook of social work with groups., the gulford press new york
London

Lindsay, Orton (2008), Groupwork practice in social work, learning matters Ltd.

Mendoza, Thelma L., (2003) Social work with groups, Megabooks company, Quezon City Philippines.

Toseland, Ronald W., & Rivas, Robert F., (2001) An introduction to groupwork practice, fourth edition., A
pearson education company, United States of America

11 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
 UNDERSTANDING GROUP DYNAMICS

People may underestimate the importance of society and group memberships on their lives. Whilst
people sometimes undertake solo journeys yet by and large much of our experiences of life involves
being engaged with others and groups.

Within an organization we do find number of groups. Individuals joining group (s) is a reality – may be
formal or informal groups. People work in groups quite frequently and in many different areas of their life
e.g. at work, school/college, sport, hobbies. The social workers need to understand Group Dynamics that
can enable them to adopt the right approach of interventions.

At the end of this module, the students are expected to understand all types of task and treatment groups
and the importance of group dynamics. This module also aims students Can work effectively with all types
of groups and familiarized with the four dimensions of group dynamics,

Essential Questions:

What are the different group dynamics in groupwork process?

How can you illustrate and describe the different stages of group development?

Intended learning outcomes:

Identify the importance of different concepts of group dynamics in groupwork practice.

Familiarize the different stages of group development.

Before we proceed to the lesson input and illustration, let us have a short activity to prepare you for this
lesson.

Poetry Making:

 Make a poem that shows the significance of group dynamics in

social work profession.
 Can be English or tagalaog as long you can freely express your idea
 Minimum of 50 words / Maximum of 100 words

12 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S
A. Meaning and Definitions of Group Dynamics

The term „group dynamics‟ means the study

of forces within a group. Since human beings have an
innate desire for belonging to a group, group dynamism
is bound to occur. In an organization or in a society, we
can see groups, small or large, working for the well-
being. The social process by which people interact with
one another in small groups can be called group
dynamism. A group has certain common objectives &
goals. Because of which members are bound together

13 |M O D U L E 2 : S O C I A L W O R K P R A C T I C E W I T H G R O U P S