以下四編文章，錄自《摘星足印》：

1. 驀然回首

2. 兩個浪漫的故事

3. 南海十三郎

4. 小組工作 - 所學何事 ( And English Translation)

 

對該書有興趣者，可以電郵與作者聯絡：

kwong_liu@hotmail.com

​

驀然回首

寫於1992 年

​

自從造天地以來，神之永能和神性是明明可知的，雖是眼不能見，但藉著所造之物，就可以曉得，叫人無可推諉。

羅馬書 1：20

​

去年仲夏一個正午，我如常的駕車到多倫多大學仕嘉堡校園。這是我每天午膳的地方。離開辦公室時同事告訴我教育局曾經來電，叫我回覆。想是為了昨天見工的事，看來機會不大，還是午膳回來再算。來了加拿大後雖然在四個月內已經找到福利局的工作，但仍然因為未能真正入行社會工作而梗梗於懷。於是三個月前又再展開新一輪的求職攻勢。漁翁撒網式地寄出求職信，約見行內人仕，一星期兩晚夜校，一晚做義工，忙個不了。最難受的，是每次見工回來的挫敗感。每次見工前盡力準備，見工後的患得患失，知道結果後覺得自尊心再度被人蹂躪。每次見工後作檢討，看甚麼地方出錯，需要改進。這背後的信念，是命運由我自己掌管。這是我大半生的信念。來加拿大前其實已經有心理準備要從頭幹起，但仍然是無法接受學非所用的事實。大半年的苦幹，到現在已經筋疲力盡，自信心亦開始動摇。用第二語言去做心理輔導，其實談何容易。

​

走到球場中央，正是烈日當空，四野無人。回想到昨日見工，自覺自己表現不錯，但總覺得無信心。頓然間，覺得茫然若失，百般滋味湧上心頭，心情良久未能平靜下來。依稀記得曾經說過這番話：「神啊！我已經盡了我最大的努力。但我已經無法承受這樣的心理壓力，我要暫時停下來了。我已經知道命運並不是我可以掌握。求祢引領我走以後的路。」這是我一生人第一次對神的謙卑。之後，心情頓然平靜下來。

回到辦公室後給教育局回電，得到如以往一樣禮貌的回覆，但自己的心境卻平靜得多。

​

兩個星期後，一連串巧合的事情發生。兩個機構突然來電，說收到我朋友轉寄去的履歷表，他們剛好有空缺，約我見面。而其中一份，竟是我八個月前見過的，是小組心理輔導，正是我的專長。但八個月前不被取錄，八個月後有何分別呢？算了吧！下午四時半下班的時候，突然想起，不妨回電一試。對方正是八個月前見我的那一位，說對我還有印象，他們的招聘工作已到尾聲，希望明天能見了我才作決定。對方似乎頗有誠意，問她我可否明天下班後來。她一口答應，說下班後等我。

​

見工回家已是晚上八時，已經很疲累。太太問我結果如何。記得我曾這樣說過：「這次得失與否，都是 an act of God 。我很餓，吃飯吧！」晚飯未完，電話鈴聲突然響起，對方說：「廖先生，我正在考慮錄用你，你可否給我三個咨詢人的電話。」  我簡直喜出望外。兩個星期後，我轉了工。

​

喜悅之後，隨之而來的是思想上的震撼。詩篇第一百二十七篇不斷在我腦海中：「若不是耶和華建造房屋，建造的人就枉然勞力；若不是耶和華看守城池，看守的人就枉然儆醒。」   回首一切，人算甚麼？我算甚麼？我往聖經裡尋。1992年七月，我和內子第二次在教堂內作重大的決定，第一次是結婚，今次是受浸禮重生。

​

一生何求。其實半生所求，盡在兩個女兒的名字上 － 慧欣，慧萱。慧，是佛家的慧根；萱是萱草，又名忘憂草。智慧與忘憂，半生所求，竟然盡在咫尺。「眾裡尋他千百度，驀然回首，那人卻在，燈火闌珊處。」  願主繼續帶我走以後的路。

​

兩個浪漫的故事

 

1998年，機構週年聯歡會，同事要開部門主管的玩笑，要部門主管唱粤曲《帝女花》。當我開腔的時候，同事們都驚訝我竟然懂得唱粵曲，卻不知道《帝女花》是我最心愛的劇目。對我來說，《帝女花》比莎土比亞的《羅蜜歐與茱麗葉》更浪漫。記得有一次看雛鳳鳴演出，到了《香夭》一幕，長平公主鳳冠霞帔，與周世顯合巹交杯，飲毒酒殉情。舞台上灑下漫天花絮。「落花滿天蔽月光」。我被那浪漫悽怨的氣氛深深吸引。

​

浪漫，是因為有一份矢志不移的愛。周世顯只見了長平公主一面，便深深的愛上了她。跟著是兵荒馬亂。周世顯四處尋找愛人，最後為了成全愛人的心願而甘心情願的與愛人於合巹交杯之日殉情。浪漫，是因為愛來得毫無條件，來得如此的痴。

​

來了加拿大，聽到另外一個更浪漫的故事。在天地初開之時，神以自己的形象造人，把他安置在樂園中，將天地一切交由他掌管，把一切的愛都放在他身上。創世記第二章講述神把一切走獸帶到人的面前，要他為走獸一一起名。場面充滿爱與温馨。但這份温馨卻是非常短暫。人很快便背棄了這份愛，走上一條絕路。整本聖經在創世記第三章以後，都是講神苦口婆心的去勸人回轉，去修補這份愛。但人始終頑劣，神在盛怒之下曾經要親手摧毀一切，但最終還是留下挪亞餘種，以彩虹為約。以後幾千年是神不斷的苦口婆心，人面對這份愛的反反覆覆。直至二千年前，神決定道成肉身來到這個世上，死在十字架，以自己的血洗淨世人的罪。同樣一個浪漫的故事，因為愛來得如此的毫無條件，如此的痴。

​

所不同的，是周世顯尚能與長平公主相擁而去，耶穌卻孤單的走上十字架。祂的心愛門徒三次不認主，其他的門徒四散。

​

但是，《帝女花》只是詩人墨客穿鑿附會的愛情故事。耶穌的故事，卻是千真萬確的活在歷史當中，鐵證如山。天若有情天亦老。神的故事，始於天地初開。在二千年前神道成肉身，故事推向高潮。幾千年來，這份爱盪氣迴腸於歷史當中。

​

《帝女花》的故事，只能帶來短暫的浪漫情懷。二千年前各各他山上十字架所展示的愛，郤把第一世紀變成一個大時代，使曾經三次不認主的門徒剛強壯膽；使曾經見證過這浪漫故事的人不惜灑熱血，擲頭顱，前仆後繼。

​

有人問我浸禮的意義。我個人認為，浸禮是公開回應這份浪漫的愛。沒有這份浪漫的愛，永生將會毫無意義。

​

南海十三郎

 

1998 年的一天，部門會議完畢，不知如何會談到電影 《南海十三郎》。我剛好昨天看過，我說我欣賞這電影幽默風趣，却惹來部門娘子軍群起攻之。「這樣悲怨浪漫的故事，我看後哭了一場，你却當笑片看？你怎麽啦！」「怎麽，男子漢扮酷啦？」「感情反應有問題，是精神病啊！」娘子軍們七嘴八舌，毫不留情，完全不把這個上司放在眼內。眼看敵不過這群娘子軍，還是一走了之。聘請了這群娘子軍，倒是活該！

​

《南海十三郎》講述一個天才橫溢的粵劇名作家。南海十三郎生於清末官宦世家，父親是太史公。他聰敏過人，曾就讀於香港大學醫學院，却因追求一個女孩子而流浪上海，失意而返。他對粵劇有很高的天份，曾收粵劇名作家唐滌生為徒；能同一時間創作三個劇本。他思路極怏，三個替他抄寫劇本的人無法跟上，被他毫不留情的侮辱一番。

​

南海十三郎才高八斗，却是恃才傲物，近乎氣焰迫人，因此與行內人都合不來，最後瘋癲了，潦倒街頭，被世人忘掉了。

​

影片最後一幕有人問說故事的人是否很愛看粵劇，他却答道，唐滌生早死，南海十三郎早癲，只留下幾個劇目可看。我倒有同感。

​

我曾經想過，倘若南海十三郎不是生於富貴之家，他是否還會如此的恃才傲物？是否會踏實一點？是否會留下多一點作品，粵劇不至於像今天的息微？

​

聖經告訴我們傲慢把人和神隔離了，因而罪入了世界。這是神學的課題。在現實生活中，恃才傲物的人看是浪漫，但舆他交往，却是另外一回事。我倒同情那三個被他斥罵一番的抄寫人。窮等人家讀名校，我亦見過聰明絕頂的富家子弟的氣焰。

​

難怪神道成肉身之時，天使首先通知的是牧羊人；耶穌基督招集的門徒，都是販夫走卒。因為聰明人太自恃，反而會誤了大事。

​

我欣賞李白的詩，欣賞他天馬行空，不拘一格。但我還是愛杜甫，愛他那沉實，悲天憫人。

​

影片最後講述南海十三郎潦倒街頭，却再遇到當年苦戀而不得的舊情人，相逢陌路。

​

「怕應羞見，劉郎才氣。可惜流年，憂愁風雨，樹猶如此；倩何人喚取紅巾翠袖，搵英雄淚。」場面淒涼落寞，却是孰令至之！

​

小組工作－所學何事

​

1972 年夏天，我被調職到香港政府社會福利署青年工作組。經過1966，67 年兩次暴動之後，香港政府汲取教訓，積極發展青年工作。當年這群青年人，正是戰後嬰兒潮的一代。

 

1970年代初，香港人口結構，以十來二十歲的人口最大。是將來的社會棟樑。香港政府經過66，67年兩次暴動之後，痛定思痛，決意發展青少年服務，一方面疏導青少年的精力，另一方面要培養人材。社會福利署青年工作組的工作有三方面：第一是舉辦青少年活動，尤其是青少年暑期活動，以疏導青少年精力；第二是組織青少年自務會社，把青少年人組織起來，培養青少年人的歸屬感，並訓練其領導才能；第三是舉辦義工訓練，青年領袖訓練課程。以培育青少年。當我被調派到青年工作組，我其中重點的工作，是舉辦這些訓練課程。

 

接手這份工作的時候，我發覺前人辦課程的方法，就是把兩年的社會工作課程濃縮成四堂兩小時的課程，講的都是社會工作理論，全部都是單向講座。有的加入實習，就是派到一些康樂活動中心做義工，但實習與理論之間沒有多大的關連。我問自己，這樣的課程是否有效？我的三年大學課程如何能幫助我有效的訓練這些青少年？我學的小組工作如何能應用於這件工作上？我搜索枯腸，解答不了這些問題，更令我驚訝的，是我所讀的小組工作，都是理論，沒有實踐。

 

到了我要舉辦領袖訓練課程時，我還是茫無頭緒，只有跟前人一樣，去邀請講員。我找到一位學長，請他幫忙講一課領袖須知。誰不知，他劈頭一句：「這樣空口講領袖訓練有何用？浪費他們的時間，也浪費我的時間。」我心想：「說得好！這正合我的想法。」但回頭過來，不這樣做，又可以怎樣做？學長告訴我，訓練專業中最新的方法，是LABORATORY APPROACH ﹝實驗室方法﹚。他介紹我一本經典的書：THE LABORATORY METHOD OF CHANGING AND LEARNING – THEORY AND APPLICATION。我趕緊到圖書館，找到了這本書，讀過兩頁後愛不釋手，因為它解答了我很多的問題。

 

實驗室方法，簡單來說，就是從實踐中學習。傳統的教學方法，是先講理論，然後做實習。而理論與實習之間的相連是一大問號。實驗室方法是先實踐，在實踐中小心觀察，總結經驗。看似簡單，實行起來，就像老鼠拉龜，不知從何入手！

 

首先我要解決兩個難題，第一是人手。用傳統的講書形式，可以請一位講員便可應付三四十人。但要三四十人一同實踐，我一個人實在應付不來。於是在我的青年組員中找義工。最後，找到了兩名英皇書院的師弟，一位是曾家達，另一位是羅致光。兩人最後都進了香港大學，都選讀社會工作，最後都拿了博士學位，在大學任教，他們以後在學術上成就比我高很多。

 

我第二個難題是課程內容。傳統做法很簡單，把大學社會工作課程斬為四件就成了。現在，要決定學員要學甚麼，然後決定用什麽實踐的遊戲，如何總結實踐的經驗。對我這個初出茅廬的社工畢業生，帶着兩個中學生小師弟，全無實戰經驗，實在是很大的挑戰。我一口氣把那兩寸厚的LABORATORY METHOD OF CHANGING AND LEARNING讀完，開始掌握到背後的理論基礎。舆師弟們商量，覺得非常有趣，值得一試。於是，三師兄弟就決定上馬，去辩第一個課程。

 

課程第一堂，我衣著整齊的走入課堂，正襟危坐面對三四十個參加者，一言不發。頭十分鐘課堂一片靜寂，間中有同學交換眼神，有人靜靜的問隔鄰自己有否入錯課室。十五分鐘後，同學開始不耐煩，有人開始挑戰我。「你是這一課的老師嗎？你為什麼一言不發？」我心平氣和的反問：「你為什麼這樣問我？你期望我做什麽？」跟着再有幾位同學加入戰圈，向我挑戰。「我付費來學習，你在浪費我的時間！」我開始向全組發問：「大家觀察到什麽？這裏發生了什麼事？」慢慢的開始有人感興趣，嘗試描述所見發生的事。跟著我帶大家去討論對見到發生的事如何理解，理解以後有何感受。這個步驟我日後發展成我小組工作的工具：我所見，我的理解，我的感受（What I see, what I think, and what I feel）。討論開始熱烈，一個半小時很快的過去。最後，我們把大家帶回理論層面，介紹小組中每個人扮演不同的角色，每個角色帶來的期望，以及當期望與現實有距離時產生的心理狀況。所有的學員對這樣的學習方法都很雀躍。

 

第一堂給我這個初出茅廬的社工心理壓力很大，課堂完畢後我簡直是精力耗盡。但這一堂的成功給我們很大的鼓舞，加強了我們的信心。以後的三堂，我們用同一的模式帶出其他領袖課程的概念。

 

LABORATORY METHOD 建築於幾個基礎上：

1. HERE AND NOW - 把焦點放在現在。LABORATORY 小組的討論，集中於現在小組發生的事。觀察到什麼？從觀察中總結了什麼？我們感覺如何？小組討論並不是不談過去，但是過去只是現在發生事物的背景，用來了解現在。而將來則是現在學習總結的將來應用。

2. LEARN HOW TO LEARN – LABORATORY GROUP 的目的並了止於學習技巧，而是學習一個方法在以後日常生活中繼續學習。在小組中大家學習聆聽，觀察，分析，總結，實際應用。LABORATORY METHOD 是鼓勵學員在日後生活中繼續用這樣的方法學習，繼績自我改良。LABORATORY METHOD 的信念是所有人都有自我改進的潛質。

3. PROCESS (過程) VS. CONTENT (內容) - 傳統的教學方法，小組工作著重內容，這一堂的目的是什麼？學員要學些什麼？教學的進程怎樣？但LABORATORY METHOD 則著重於過程。內容是從過程中產生。有義意的學習是要把過程中產生的內容觀察，整理，分析，總結。開始的時候，我們對這個模式的掌握不夠，及對自己的信心不大，因此把每堂的內容及時間分配都寫得很詳細，但慢慢就知道，因為每個組的成員不同，環境不同，因此過程都不同。故此得到的內容都不同。接著我們學會了們要跟隨小組過程的流程 (FOLLOW THE FLOW) ，便放棄了詳盡的課程綱領。這對小組主持人 (FACILITATOR) 是重大的挑戰。但經過主持幾個小組之後，我們都掌握到主持小組 (GROUP FACILITATION) 的技巧。這是小組工作最困難，最難學的地方。個人輔導，你面對一兩個人，你可以掌控的事多很多。當你面對一群人，要從他們的互動產生學習內容，然後帶領組員分析整理，那就要看你功夫如何。所以找常常說，小組工作的最高境界是手中無劍，心中有劍。

4. 真 (AUTHENTICITY) - 因為小組學習的是各個組員的參與互動，各人的觀察，分析，感受，所以，參與者的「真 (AUTHENTICITY) 」很重要。組員的參與互動，是透過回饋 (FEEDBACK) 與自我披露 (SELF DISCLOSURE) 。倘若回饋和自我披露都不是真的，則一切的分析整理及學習都沒有價值。但要做到真，則小組組員間要有一定的信任，然後大家立约。所以，安排互動活動的次序很重要，要讓組員由比較膚淺的自我披露，到深入的自我披露。

 

在以後的五六年間，我們幾個人 - 我和我的同事張耀輝，與及兩位義工曾家達，羅致光舉辦了無數的課程/小組，我們不斷的自我學習，參考過不少T-GROUP, ENCOUNTER GROUP, SENSITIVITY TRAINING的文獻，學習新的技巧及改良課程。我們從開始的義工及領袖訓練，著重於知識傳授；轉到人際關係訓練，著重於技巧訓練；到自我認識，個人成長。我們從成人教育的範疇，慢慢轉到 GESTALT THERAPY 的領域。

 

回頭望，青年工作組的幾年是我在社工工作上的扎根。幾年間我們學習，工作，改良。從中，我學到了幾點：

1. 我雖然讀社會工作，但尋找知識，學習技巧卻不能局限於傳統的社工知識範疇，臨床心理學的理論。在這個範疇以外，其實是海闊天空。小組工作的知識與技巧，我在教育，人力資源管理，商業管理訓練等領域找到了不少的寶藏。

2. 在青年工作組的幾年，是我在小組工作的木人巷。幾年間，我訓練自己觀察，帶組時懂得問問題；懂得表達empathy；懂得分析；懂得總結。基本上，我已經可以手中無劍，心中有劍。

3. 我們三師兄弟幾年間的誤打誤撞，日後亦帶來頗深遠的影響。我們開始時訓練青少年人際關係技巧。之後曾家達引進英國社會心理學家MICHAEL ARGYLE 的社會技巧訓練( SOCIAL SKILLS TRAINING) 的理論。MICHAEL ARGYLE 認為，人的問題在於缺乏社會技巧 (SOCIAL SKILLS) 去解決問題。因此，要訓練受助者的SOCIAL SKILLS。MICHAEL ARGYLE 沒有把這理論發揚光大，曾家達後來把這理論發展他的「知行易徑」(STRATEGIES & SKILLS LEARNING & DEVELOPMENT 簡稱 SSLD) 理論。「知行易徑」(SSLD) 的理論，簡單來說，是相信人的問題是用不有效的方法、技巧去滿足自己的需要，所以解決問題的方法，是去幫助受助者去尋找有效的策略(STRATEGIES) 及技巧(SKILLS) 以滿足自己的需要。對我來說，幾年間的訓練亦加強我在小組工作的實務，與及在行政工作，員工訓練的工作。

4. 開始的時候，我邀請了兩位很有濳質的小師弟做義工，他們日後在學術及專業上的成就都比我高。這幾年間，有不少學歷比我高的人參與過。還記得有一位會講廣東話的美國神父，帶着社工碩士學位，要來看我們在做什麽。我就告訢他：「做義工吧！」他就留下兩三年，也給我們不少思想上的沖擊。這個過程擴闊我的胸襟，使我日後能用比我高的人。我常對人說：「一流人用一流人，二流人用三流人。」

 

小組工作，我們從無到有，從茫無頭緒，到找到海闊天空，浩瀚的知識。四十五年的社工生涯中，這段學習的過程，幫我以後扎根成長，願以此與其他社工同工分享，共勉！

 

Social Group Work - My journey

 

In Summer, 1972, I was transferred to the Youth Work Unit of the Social Welfare Department of the Hong Kong Government.  After the two social unrests in 1966 and 67, the Hong Kong Government learnt a lesson and started to develop youth work in order to expend the energy of the young people; and, on the one hand, develop their leadership.  The Youth Work Unit of the Social Welfare Department had three areas of work. (1) To run youth programs and activities, especially Youth Summer Programs in order to expend young people's energy  (2) To organize youth self-programming groups to organize young people, and (3) To run volunteer and leadership training to develop young people.  One of my assignments at the Youth Work Unit was to run these training programs.

 

 When I took over the assignment, I found that what my predecessors did was just to replicate the Social Work curriculum and condensed it into four 2-hour sessions.  It was all one-way teaching.  Some added in practicum, but the practicum was only attachment to a community program and there was no connection between theory and practice.  I started to ask myself, were these training programs effective?  How did my three years university education help me run effective training for these young people?  How could I apply the group work theories I learnt to these training work?  I tried to search for an answer, but much to my disappointment, I found that all I learnt from the university were theories that cannot be applied.

 

I was still at a loss when my first training course was drawing near, so I had to do what my predecessor did - to invite speaker.  I went to one of my good friends and my senior.  Much to my surprise, he challenged me: "Is this one-way teaching of theories really effective?  It would be wasting their time and also wasting mine!"  "Wow!" I said to myself. "Good for you! That's exactly what I think!" But, then, What could I do?

 

My friend told me that the most current training method is Laboratory Training.  He introduced me to a classic: THE LABORATORY METHOD OF CHANGING AND LEARNING - THEORY AND APPLICATION.  I rushed to the library and got hold of the book.  I was so amazed after reading the first chapter.  It answered most of my questions.

 

Simply put, Laboratory approach is learning from practice.  The traditional approach to teaching is to talk about theory first, and then do practicum.  A lot of times, the link between theory and practice is not strong.  Laboratory approach is to let students practice first, they have to observe carefully, analyze, and then summarize their experience.  It looks easy, but when it comes to practice, there are a lot of challenges.

 

I faced two big challenges.  The first one was manpower.  Using the traditional didactic approach, I can invite a speaker to lecture a class of 30 to 40, but to have 30 to 40 students practice together, interact and discuss, I couldn't handle it single-handedly.  So I searched for volunteers among my youth group members.  I found two of my juniors at King's College, one was Ka Tat Tsang, the other one was Law Chi Kwong.  Both of them entered Hong Kong University later and studied Social Work.  Both of them got Ph.D., taught at the University.  Academically, they have higher achievement than I.

 

My second challenge was course content.  The traditional approach was simple, I could just adopt the Social Work Curriculum and condense it into 4 sessions.  With this new approach, I had to decide what the participants were going to learn, what structured experiences to help bring out the learning and how to help them analyse and summarize the learning.  To me, a new graduate so green, taking along two high school juniors without any practice experience, this was a big challenge.  So I read the 2 inch thick LABORATORY METHOD OF CHANGING AND LEARNING in one go. I started to grasp its theoretical underpinning.  I discussed with my two juniors and we decided that it would be interesting and worth a try.

 

At the first session, I dressed up, sitting facing my 30-40 participants, quiet without saying a word.  10 minutes passed and the classroom was in dead silence.  Some of them exchanged facial expressions, some quietly asked their neighbours if they were in the right class.  15 minutes passed.  Some students could not hold it and started challenging me:  "Are you the teacher of this class? why don't you say anything?:" I calmly replied:  Why were you asking this question?  What were you expecting of me?  Then, more students joined the rebellion and challenged me:  "I paid for this class.  You are wasting my time!"  I then directed my question to the whole class:  "Can anyone describe to me what you have observed?  What has happened here?"  Slowly, some students were interested and tried to described what they had observed.  Then, I led a discussion on how people observed, how they made sense of the observation and how they felt afterwards.  This process has formed one of my important tools in my toolbox: What I see, what I think and how I feel.  That was a very exciting discussion and one and a half hours easily passed.  I then brought the group back to the theory level and gave a short presentation on the role people play in a group, what expectation people have on these roles and what happens when there is a difference between what people expect and what really happens.  The students were very excited about the learning method.

 

The first session was a tremendous psychological pressure on me, a fresh graduate.  I was totally exhausted after the session, but we were so encouraged by the success.  We became more confident now.  For the following three sessions, we used the same model to bring up other concepts in leadership.

 

The Laboratory Method was built on the following foundations:

 

1. HERE AND NOW - Put the focus on the present.  The discussion will focus on what is currently happening in the group:  What did we observe?  what can we learnt from the observations?  How do we feel after the experience?  We don't exclude the past, but the past is only the background of the present.  We use it to understand the present.  The future is our application of what we have learnt in the present.

 

2.  LEARN HOW TO LEARN - The Laboratory group is not only for learning skills.  It is a model of learning in our daily life after the course.  We learn how to listen, how to observe, how to analyse, how to summarize and how to apply the learning in daily life.  The Laboratory Method encourages us to continue learning in our daily life to continue improving ourselves.  The belief is everyone has the potential to grow.

 

3.  PROCESS vs. CONTENT - Traditional teaching and social group work method emphasizes the content.  What is the goal of this session? What do we want the participants to learn?  What is the program schedule?  However, Laboratory method emphasizes the process.  To achieve effective learning we have to make the content obtained through the process meaningful through observation, active processing, analyzing and formalize the learning.  In the beginning, we were still not confident in this approach, so we wrote down in details the goal of the session, the schedule and timing for each component and tried to follow this planning dutifully.  But slowly, we learnt that because membership for each group is different, situations are different, therefore the process for different groups would be very different, and the contents derived from each group would be very different.  Gradually, we learnt how to follow the flow of the group and gave up the detailed learning & teaching schedule.  To the facilitator, this would be a big challenge, but after conducting a few groups, we started to grasp the group facilitation skills.  This is the most difficult learning part for social group work students.  For individual counselling, you only have to face one or two clients.  That's much more easy to control.  When you have to face a group of clients and you have to pick up the contents coming up from their interactions and to lead the group to analyze and learn, that's a test of your skill.  That's why I always tell people that the highest level of social group work is when the sword is not in your hand, but the sword is in your mind.

 

4.  AUTHENTICITY - Authenticity is very important because what we are learning are the interactions of participants, their observations, analysis and feelings.  Group members interact through their disclosure and feedback.  If the disclosure and feedback are not authentic, then the analysis and learning are meaningless. To achieve authenticity, the group has to agree on a contract of trusting each other.  Therefore, staging the interaction is very important.  Discussion has to start from less threatening to more in-depth.

 

In the following 5 to 6 years, the Team has conducted a number of these groups.  We self-learn, read books about T-group, encounter group and sensitity training.  We learnt a lot of new skills.  We started with teaching knowledge in volunteer and leadership training and moved to human relations training that emphasizes on skill training, then moved to self-understanding and personal growth.  We moved from adult education under a behavioral  model to Gestalt Therapy.

 

Looking back, I laid my social group work foundation in the Youth Work Unit.  During those years, we learned, we worked, and we improved.  Through these experiences, we learnt the following:

 

1.  Although I studied Social Work, but in searching for knowledge and skills, I shouldn't limit myself to Social Work.  Outside Social Work, there is an ocean of related knowledge.  I found a lot of treasures in Education, Human Relations and Business Management.

 

2.  The years in Youth Work Unit was my bootcamp training.  During these years, I trained myself in observation, learn to ask questions, express empathy, analyse and summarize.  Basically, I reached the stage of no sword in my hand, but sword in my mind.

 

3.  What my two juniors and me did has a lot of long-term implications.  We started with training young people in human relations skills.  Later, Ka Tat Tsang brought in Michael Argyle's Social Skills Training theory.  Michael Argyle's theory is that human problems lies in the lack of social skills in resolving their problems.  Therefore the solution is to train our clients in social skills.  Michael Argyle didn't develop his theory further.  Ka Tat Tsang developed his theory into his Strategies & Skills Learning & Development (SSLD) theory.  To put it simply, SSLD theorized that the root of human problem is the use of ineffective skills to satisfy their needs.  So to solve the problem, we need to help our clients to find effective strategies and train them in effective social skills.  To me, these years of experience have strengthen my social group work practice and improved my skills in service management and staff development.

 

4.  In the beginning I recruited two juniors who were bright with much potential as my volunteers.  They turned out having higher academic and professional achievement than I.  Through these years, a number of people having higher academic qualifications than me came to participate in our project.  I still remember a Catholic priest with a masters degree and lots of experience came and wanted to see what we were doing.  I told him to join us as volunteers.  He did joined us and brought us a lot of new stimulations.  These few years of experience opened my eyes and broaden my view and enabled me to hire people who have higher qualifications than me. 

 

My Social Group Work journey started with nothing but uncertainty. I then found an ocean of knowledge and sky as our limit.  These years of experience helped me laid my foundation for the following 45 years of Social Work journey.  I would like to share this with my social work colleagues.

 

Translated from Chapter 3 of my book - My Footprints (摘星足印)

​