Corrections Community

I work in a corrections based inpatient substance abuse treatment facility that uses TFC.  Currently several of my fellow instructors are struggling with the six steps of problem solving.  Specifically they believe that the steps are too many and too confusing.  They are proposing changing the problem solving steps and adding several other social skills.  My questions are these:  Has anyone else changed their problem solving steps, and if so, how was this new problem solving strategy impacted by the earlier classes, and what problem solving strategy/steps did you change to?  I am concerned that anytime instructors want to change the structure of a manualized training that the impact of that change on the actual training is not fully realized until after the fact.  Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Raymond Cruthis, BA, LCDC, CCJP Central Texas Treatment Center.   

I am a TFC facilitator and trainer and I think that if you change the problem solving steps that you will lose the integrety of TFC and you may end up teaching something that could possibly increase recidivism rates if they are not evidence-based strategies.  I have found all of the steps of Problem Solving to be useful, however, some clients tend to like one step more than another.  If there are particular steps that are confusing for some of the facilitators I would be happy to try to clarify some of it for you which may help in facilitating the Problem Solving lessons.

Jennifer Persons, Cognitive Skills Specialist

I believe that the question raised about problem solving does hit at the essence of program integrity. Dr. Juliana Taymans the author of the problem solving section of Thinking for a Change program has spent years working with problem solving and has determined that there is significant importance to the order and placement of each of the steps in problem solving. I believe that a careful review of the steps of problem solving reveals that their is clear connection between cognitive self-change and social skills that have been woven carefully around the problem solving model. Each of the steps is critical. Research of the Thinking for a Change program, not surprising, shows that the better the offender becomes as a problem solver the less likely he/she is to recidivate. The stronger the facilitator is at helping the offenders draw and see the connections between their thoughts and beliefs and how these thoughts and beliefs effect our behavior in context of the problem solving steps is the clue that truly makes this program work. NIC would request that if agencies choose to amend or alter any facet of the Thinking for a Change program that they please refrain from continuing to name the program Thinking for a Change for program integrity reasons.

 Steven Swisher, M.Ed., M.S., National Institute of of Corrections, Longmont, CO

Thanks for the response to my questions about problem solving steps.  I experience frustration when anyone wants to begin tampering with an evidence based manualized programs.  I shared the emails I received and a great discussion began with fellow staff members on how to better tie in the first two thirds of TFC with problem solving.  Again, thanks so much for having this service to test ideas and receive feedback from others.

Raymond Cruthis BA, LCDC, CCJP, Central Texas Treatment Center, Granger Texas. 

 Looking for clarification on how to fill out the Chart on page 20-4  activity 4.  Relating Shewan's problem with the four questions just above the chart.  I see under choices, there is Action,  Risk Thinking and then New Thinking.  Back on question three just above the chart on the core content side...it asked for "What might these thoughts lead her to do?".  First, do we write the response to this question on the chart?  And if so were at?  Next,  In activity 5 "Practicing Considering Consequences"   I says to consider both consequences for self and others.  Notes on the side say "Just do consequences for actions."  Where do we write these down at?  On the chart in Activity 4 under where it says Consequences?  But there Isn't any columns under it Consequences saying "self" -----"others".  What is confusing us as trainers is that under the chart in Activity 4 it says...(See instructor resource in supplements for an example.)   Now that chart makes sense for what they are asking.   Why can't we just make a blank instructor resource supplement and use that for Activities 4,5, and 6.  I hope this doesn't sound to confusing.  Thanks for anyone who might be able to help.

Could someone please explain how to correctly fill out the chart on page 20-4 Activity 4, in relation to the four questions just above the chart  just above it.  And how does the instructor resource in the supplements help in this.