New here? Get 15% off your first order.See how it works

Nursing questions
Discussion postCounseling theories

DQ 2 :Some might argue that a therapist’s theoretical orientation is irrelevant in the counseling process, and that only client outcomes matter.

Two positions are set out and you are asked to adjudicate. The trap is treating them as opposites: the common factors argument is not the claim that theory is irrelevant, and saying so is most of the answer.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 22, 2026

01

The two positions in the prompt are not the same claim

Read the two positions carefully, because they are routinely collapsed and the collapse is the mistake the prompt is set up to catch. The first says orientation is irrelevant and only outcomes matter. The second says common factors, rather than any specific theory, produce the outcome. Those are different claims. The second is a positive account of what causes change, and it does not follow from it that a therapist should hold no theory. Common factors include the alliance, empathy, goal consensus, expectancy and therapist allegiance, and several of those are only available to a therapist who has a coherent rationale to offer the client. A model gives the client an explanation, gives the therapist a plan, and structures the work; those are the conditions under which expectancy and goal consensus exist at all. Making that observation is most of the work, because the rest of the post follows from it.

Then take a position, because the prompt asks what you think and a survey of the debate is not an answer. Two defensible ones are available. You can argue that common factors carry most of the outcome variance while a specific model remains the vehicle through which they are delivered, which is close to what the evidence supports and lets you cite it. Or you can argue that orientation matters more for particular presentations, pointing to conditions where a specific protocol outperforms generic supportive therapy, and treat common factors as the floor rather than the whole. Either way, notice that this is the first week of a theories course. If you conclude that theory does not matter you have argued that the next seven weeks are pointless, so say what you nonetheless expect to gain from studying the models. A defensible version of that is that models are how a trainee acquires the structure an experienced therapist improvises.

Likely learning objectives

  • Distinguish the outcomes-only claim from the common-factors claim.
  • Explain how a specific model supplies conditions that common factors require.
  • Take and defend a position rather than surveying the debate.
  • Cite evidence about relative contributions rather than asserting them.

Assignment instructions

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 2 DQ 2 :Some might argue that a therapist’s theoretical orientation is irrelevant in the counseling process, and that only client outcomes matter. Some might argue that a therapist’s theoretical orientation is irrelevant in the counseling process, and that only client outcomes matter. Others might argue that specific factors common across models of therapy-not specific theory or an approach endorsed by a counselor create a positive outcome. What do you think? Why?

Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course! Grading Rubric Guidelines PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 2 Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0 Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. (5 points possible per graded thread) Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition 2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. 4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused. 6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. 8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor 0 points lost -5 points lost Total Participation Requirements per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days Early Participation Requirement per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01A statement of the two positions in their own terms.
  2. 02An explanation of why they are not equivalent.
  3. 03A position of your own, stated plainly.
  4. 04Evidence supporting the position you take.
  5. 05A reason for studying theories that survives your conclusion.
03

Separate the positions, then take one and defend it

01

Position one, stated fairly

Give the outcomes-only claim in its strongest form.

What the assessor is likely looking for

The claim rendered without a straw man.

02

Position two, stated fairly

Give the common factors claim and name several of the factors.

What the assessor is likely looking for

Named factors such as alliance, expectancy and goal consensus.

03

Why they are not the same

Show that common factors do not entail that orientation is irrelevant.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A factor that depends on the therapist having a model.

04

Your position

Commit to one account and defend it with evidence.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A commitment with a citation attached rather than a preference.

05

What studying theories is for

Say what a theories course gives you given your conclusion.

What the assessor is likely looking for

A use for models that is consistent with the position taken.

04

Where the common factors evidence actually sits

Recommended databases

  • PubMed Central
  • APA PsycNet
  • NCBI Bookshelf
  • GCU Library

Search sequence

  1. 1.Read a common-factors review and note what proportion of variance it attributes.
  2. 2.Find a study where a specific protocol outperformed a generic comparison.
  3. 3.Look up the dodo bird verdict so you can state it accurately.
  4. 4.Check what the alliance literature says about its relationship to technique.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

06

Before you post to the Week 1 forum

Common mistakes

  • Treating the common factors argument as proof that orientation is irrelevant.
  • Surveying both positions and never committing to one.
  • Citing the dodo bird verdict without saying what it actually claims.
  • Ignoring that alliance and expectancy require a rationale to be offered.
  • Concluding theory is pointless in the first week of a theories course without addressing that.

Submission checklist

  • Have you separated the two positions before responding?
  • Is your own position stated in one sentence?
  • Have you supported it with something citable?
  • Did you address why a model still matters if common factors dominate?
  • Have you avoided treating outcome and process as the same argument?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read Brinevia's academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Maren Caldwell

MSN, RN, CNE

Medical-surgical nursing, pharmacology and NCLEX preparation

Maren is a registered nurse with over 15 years of clinical and educational experience in medical-surgical nursing. She writes on NCLEX preparation, patient care fundamentals, pharmacology and evidence-based practice.

Reviewed by

Dr. Tessa Redmond

DNP, RN, CNE

Evidence-based practice and clinical education

Tessa is a doctorally-prepared nurse educator. She reviews Brinevia content for clinical accuracy and alignment with current evidence-based guidelines.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order