| Course | NU 672 Counseling and Psychotherapy |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 5 |
| Paper type | Group therapy proposal |
| Length | About 730 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | MSN Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 672 Unit 5
Proposal for an Eight-Session Closed Cognitive Behavioral Group for Panic Disorder in an Outpatient Psychiatric Clinic
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 672: Counseling and Psychotherapy
Instructor Name
February 18, 2026
Proposal for an Eight-Session Closed Cognitive Behavioral Group for Panic Disorder in an Outpatient Psychiatric Clinic
Purpose and Structure
Purpose: to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy for panic disorder to adults on the clinic's waiting list for individual therapy, currently about 11 weeks long, in a format that can treat more people with the same staff hours. Size: 6 to 8 members. Membership: closed, all members starting and finishing together, because the sessions build on one another and exposure skills are taught in sequence. Sessions: 8 weekly sessions of 90 minutes, with a booster session one month after the eighth. Facilitators: a psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner as lead and a psychologist as co-facilitator, so that one can attend to an individual member in distress while the other continues with the group. Group cognitive behavioral therapy for panic disorder has been found effective, although in one comparison individual therapy produced somewhat greater gains on some measures, a tradeoff the clinic accepts for shorter waits (Sharp et al., 2004).
Screening
Each candidate meets one facilitator for a 30-minute screening interview. Questions asked before admission: How often have you had panic attacks in the past month, and what happens during them? What do you avoid because of them? Have you been told by a doctor that your heart and lungs are healthy? Are you taking any medication for anxiety, and how often? How much alcohol or other drugs do you use? Have you had thoughts of harming yourself? Would you be comfortable practicing exercises in front of others and talking about your attacks in a group? Can you attend all eight sessions on the scheduled evening?
Admitted: adults with panic disorder as the main problem, with or without avoidance, medically evaluated, able to attend all sessions, and willing to do home practice. Not admitted, and offered individual treatment or referral instead: people with active suicidal thoughts or recent self-harm; untreated substance use disorder; psychosis or current mania; avoidance so severe they cannot reach the clinic; panic occurring mainly as part of another disorder, such as posttraumatic stress disorder, better treated on its own; and people whose medical workup is incomplete, since interoceptive exercises are not appropriate until cardiac and respiratory causes are excluded.
Session Plan
The sessions follow a sequence that each builds on the last.
| Session | Content | Home practice |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Introductions; group guidelines; how panic works; each member names one goal | Record every attack and what preceded it |
| 2 | Catastrophic interpretations; examining evidence | Record interpretations during attacks |
| 3 | Interoceptive exposure introduced; members try exercises together | Daily interoceptive exercises with ratings |
| 4 | Safety behaviors; planning to drop one | Drop one safety behavior; continue exercises |
| 5 | Building a personal exposure hierarchy | First in vivo exposure step |
| 6 | Reviewing exposures; problem-solving setbacks | Next exposure steps |
| 7 | Harder exposures; combining interoceptive and situational practice | Hardest step attempted so far |
| 8 | Relapse prevention; written plan; celebrating progress | Continue practice; booster in one month |
The First Meeting
The first meeting sets the norms the group will depend on. The lead facilitator opens by describing the group's purpose and structure. Members agree to guidelines: confidentiality, with its limits explained; attendance; no advice-giving about medications; and speaking from their own experience. Each member introduces themselves and describes one recent attack in a sentence or two, which quickly shows everyone that they are not alone, a factor group therapists have long identified as one of the main benefits of groups (Yalom & Leszcz, 2020). The session ends with the first homework explained and each member stating when they will do it.
When One Member Takes Over the Room
If a member dominates discussion, the facilitator first acknowledges their contribution and redirects, for example: "Thanks, Mark, that's a clear example. Let's hear how this sounds to others. Karen, does any of this fit your experience?" If the pattern continues, the co-facilitator speaks with the member briefly after the session, describes the behavior without blame, and asks for their help in making room for others. If a member dominates because of distress, such as a panic attack in session, the co-facilitator accompanies them, coaches them to use the skills taught, and returns with them when ready; the group can then discuss what happened, since an attack in session is a live demonstration that attacks pass.
Measures and Evaluation
Each member completes the Panic Disorder Severity Scale at screening, session 8, and the booster session (Shear et al., 1997), and records weekly attack counts. The group will be judged successful if at least 60% of members who complete it show a meaningful reduction in their scale score and if dropout is below 25%. Members who do not improve are offered individual therapy without returning to the end of the waiting list.
Resources
Two facilitators for 13.5 hours of group time plus screening and preparation, about 40 staff hours in all, compared with about 96 hours to treat eight people individually for 12 sessions. A room for 10, available on a weekday evening. Printed materials adapted from the clinic's individual treatment manual.
References
Sharp, D. M., Power, K. G., & Swanson, V. (2004). A comparison of the efficacy and acceptability of group versus individual cognitive behaviour therapy in the treatment of panic disorder and agoraphobia in primary care. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 11(2), 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.393
Shear, M. K., Brown, T. A., Barlow, D. H., Money, R., Sholomskas, D. E., Woods, S. W., Gorman, J. M., & Papp, L. A. (1997). Multicenter collaborative Panic Disorder Severity Scale. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154(11), 1571-1575. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.154.11.1571
Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2020). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (6th ed.). Basic Books.
Reading the NU 672 Unit 5 instructions
Unit 5 asks you to propose a group therapy intervention for a defined population. Expect to state purpose and structure, set screening and exclusion criteria, plan sessions, describe group norms and how facilitators manage common problems, define measures and estimate resources. Many versions ask you to use a theoretical model, such as Yalom's therapeutic factors or a CBT protocol. Check whether your section wants a group you could run at work. Exclusion criteria should be specific, such as active suicidal intent or substance use that would prevent participation. Plan the first meeting carefully, because norms set there shape the group. Compare resources with individual therapy, since cost and access are usually part of the case for a group.
Inside the NU 672 Unit 5 example
The proposal opens with purpose and structure, including size, length and facilitator roles. The screening section lists the questions asked and the criteria for exclusion. A table gives the session plan, each session building on the last. The first meeting section describes how norms are introduced and agreed. The section on a dominating member gives specific facilitator moves, from acknowledgment to redirection to a private conversation. The measures section names the scale, its timing and how results will be reviewed. The resources section compares staff hours with individual therapy for the same number of patients. Each element cites the group therapy or panic literature, which grounds the design in evidence.
Reading the NU 672 Unit 5 rubric
Herzing's rubric for a group proposal typically covers the rationale, the structure, screening and exclusion, the session plan, group process and facilitation, evaluation and resources. Screening and facilitation draw careful reading, because a group that admits the wrong members or lacks a plan for common problems can harm participants. Structure points reward clear size, length and roles. Session plan criteria look for a logical sequence tied to the treatment model. Evaluation earns credit for a validated measure at set times. Resource points go to a realistic comparison with individual care. A theoretical model may be scored within rationale. Yalom and Leszcz and Sharp's comparison study belong in the APA 7 list.
NU 672 Unit 5 help before you submit
Group proposals in Unit 5 commonly lose credit by leaving screening vague, such as appropriate patients. Another frequent problem is no plan for group process issues, such as a dominating member or a member who stops attending. Students often describe sessions without a sequence. Measures are missing or limited to satisfaction. Resources are not estimated. The first meeting is not planned, though it sets the norms. Exclusion criteria leave out safety concerns. Finally, explain why a group suits this population, because graders look for a rationale beyond cost, such as the normalizing effect of hearing others describe the same fears. Booster sessions are often left out, though they help members keep gains after the group ends.
Get a NU 672 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 5 instructions and the rubric from your NU 672 classroom, and tell us the population and setting the group is for. We write a custom example with purpose fixed first, screening questions written out, a three-part session pattern and facilitator responses keyed to the events groups produce. First custom sample free, back within 24 to 48 hours.
More NU 672 papers and PMHNP samples
- NU 672 Unit 1: Therapeutic modality comparison
- NU 672 Unit 2: Boundary and self-disclosure review
- NU 672 Unit 3: Session transcript analysis
- NU 672 Unit 4: Treatment goal hierarchy
- NU 672 Unit 6: In-session ethical decision record
- NU 672 Unit 7: Treatment review and revision brief
- NU 672 Unit 8: Therapy episode portfolio
- NU 670 Unit 5: Metabolic monitoring protocol
- NU 671 Unit 5: Diagnostic criteria mapping
- NU 673 Unit 5: Medication and cognition review
- NU 674 Unit 5: Civil commitment statute analysis
NU 672 Unit 5 questions, answered
Does the proposal need a theoretical model?
Name one, then let it do work. A group run on interpersonal principles looks different in its screening, its opening session and its handling of conflict than a structured skills group does, and a reader checks the design against the model you claimed. Borrowing vocabulary from two traditions produces a proposal whose parts contradict each other in ways experienced facilitators notice at once.
How specific should the exclusion criteria be?
Specific enough to be applied by someone else doing the screening. Vague statements about suitability leave the decision unmade. Describe the presentations this group is not built for, say why in terms of what the group does, and name the kind of setting those people would be pointed toward, without asserting what any particular service accepts in your area.
Can the proposal be for a group I run at work?
Most sections allow it, and the document usually comes out sharper for it. Keep material out of the file that your employer has not published, describe members by role or pattern rather than individually, and treat anything you learned inside the room as belonging there. A described group with realistic constraints supports the same argument without the exposure.
Where can I find a free NU 672 Unit 5 sample paper?
You can read the whole NU 672 Unit 5 group proposal here for free, screening, session plan, facilitation and resources. A proposal for a different population or group model can be written on request.
How do you handle a member who dominates group therapy?
Acknowledge the contribution, redirect to others, use structure such as rounds, and if needed speak privately. This sample's proposal sets out those steps for facilitators of an eight-session panic group.