Final evaluations are this week. Mine is due tomorrow. Here are the areas of reflection. Oy.
The curriculum for CPE Level II addresses the development and integration of pastoral formation, pastoral competence and pastoral reflection to a level of competence that permits students to attain professional certification and/or admission to Supervisory CPE. The Level II curriculum involves at least two or more program units of CPE. Supervisors must document satisfactory completion of CPE Level II curriculum outcomes in the supervisor’s final evaluation(s). At the conclusion of CPE Level II students are able to:
Pastoral Formation
312.1 articulate an understanding of the pastoral role that is congruent with their personal values, basic assumptions and personhood.
Pastoral Competence
312.2 provide pastoral ministry to diverse people, taking into
consideration multiple elements of cultural and ethnic differences,
social conditions, systems, and justice issues without imposing their
own perspectives.
312.3 demonstrate a range of pastoral skills, including listening/attending, empathic reflection, conflict resolution/confrontation, crisis management, and appropriate use of religious/spiritual resources.
312.4 assess the strengths and needs of those served, grounded in theology and using an understanding of the behavioral sciences.
312.5 manage ministry and administrative function in terms of
accountability, productivity, self-direction, and clear, accurate
professional communication.
ACPE Standards Revised January 2005 Objectives/Outcomes Supervisory CPE 13
312.6 demonstrate competent use of self in ministry and administrative
function which includes: emotional availability, cultural humility,
appropriate self-disclosure, positive use of power and authority, a
non-anxious and non-judgmental presence, and clear and responsible boundaries.
Pastoral Reflection
312.7 establish collaboration and dialogue with peers, authorities and
other professionals.
312. 8 demonstrate self-supervision through realistic self-evaluation of pastoral functioning.
Posted by tripp at March 15, 2005 04:08 PMAll of those look like delicious challenges.
Are there any areas in that breakdown where you can identify definite progress that you've made? Any that are particularly challenging to you?
Posted by: Megan at March 15, 2005 04:12 PMHmmm...Well, in general I suck with the behavioral sciences piece. I can articulate theologically. I can identify patient, peer, staff and even personal strengths. Crisis management is what I have been doing of late and I like it. I seem to have a knack for settling people.
But I suck with the behavioral sciences. In spite of years of therapy, I still don't think in terms of psychotherapy models and the like. Not that it is a huge hindrance or anything to "passing" the program, but it is a useful tool. Somehow the way I engage a crisis or a new relationship with the patient does not give much room or time for that kind of thinking. Also, we have people who are PhD's in psychology and psychiatry here. I am not them nor do I wish to be. So, I tend to avoid overlapping. I will say that the patient is sad and allow the psych eval folk to diagnose depression. I will say "estranged from parents" and allow them to say "authority issues" or "emotional distancing." This is how I engage the behavioral sciences. I am consistantly challenged by my supervisors.
Posted by: Tripp at March 15, 2005 04:24 PM