Training Evaluation: Co-Facilitation in Group Therapy: Foundations for Effective Sexual Offense Treatment

(OT256-A) Evaluation – Co-Facilitation in Group Therapy: Foundations for Effective Sexual Offense Treatment

Training Name: Co-Facilitation in Group Therapy: Foundations for Effective Sexual Offense Treatment

Learning Objectives

As a result of this training, participants will be able to:
1) Explain the importance of co-facilitation in enhancing the effectiveness of group therapy.
2) Analyze the intersection of diversity and the cofacilitator alliance and its implications for therapeutic practice.
3) Identify and prevent common mistakes in co-facilitation.
4) Explain the steps necessary for building a productive and collaborative relationship between cofacilitators.

I certify that I am the above-named person completing this form and that the information I submit here is accurate.
1. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? 5 = Very much, 1 = Very little
2. Rate the quality of the program content 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
3. Rate how current/relevant the program content is 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
4. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development? 5 = Extremely Useful, 1 = Not Useful at all
5.1. Rate the first instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Brenda Blanchard Crowder, LPC, CSOTP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
5.2. Rate the second instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject (Steven Sawyer, MSSW, LICSW, ATSA-F) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
6.1. Rate the first instructor’s teaching ability (Brenda Blanchard Crowder, LPC, CSOTP) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
6.2. Rate the second instructor’s teaching ability (Steven Sawyer, MSSW, LICSW, ATSA-F) 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
7.1. Would you agree that learning objective #1 was met?
Learning Objective #1: “Explain the importance of co-facilitation in enhancing the effectiveness of group therapy.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.2. Would you agree that learning objective #2 was met?
Learning Objective #2: “Analyze the intersection of diversity and the cofacilitator alliance and its implications for therapeutic practice.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.3. Would you agree that learning objective #3 was met?
Learning Objective #3: “Identify and prevent common mistakes in co-facilitation.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.4. Would you agree that learning objective #4 was met?
Learning Objective #4: “Explain the steps necessary for building a productive and collaborative relationship between cofacilitators.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
8. Rate how well the program met your expectations (according to the promotional materials) 5 = Very well, 1 = Not well at all
9. Rate the quality of the provided course materials 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
10. Rate the quality of the facilities (in-person) or technology (online). 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
11. Rate how well disability accommodations were met, if requested. 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
12. Rate the ease of the registration process 5 = Very Easy, 1 = Very Difficult
13.1. Rate the first instructor’s (Brenda Blanchard Crowder, LPC, CSOTP) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive*
13.2. Rate the second instructor’s (Steven Sawyer, MSSW, LICSW, ATSA-F) responsiveness to questions 5 = Very Responsive, 1 = Not responsive*
14. Rate the program staff’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all