Exploring Multimodality with Online Peer-Facilitated Experiential Learning in Group Work Training

ABSTRACT We developed multimodality pedagogy with online peer-facilitated experiential learning that meets the required competency of 2016 standards from the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. The multimodality attends to various representational and communicational modes to support students’ use of multiple senses to connect cognitive processes in meaning-making. To determine the effectiveness of multimodality, we examined the student counselors’ self-rated group leadership skills competency before and after the group work training. Frequentist and Bayesian paired t-test results demonstrated significant increases with large effect sizes for general and technology-related group skill competency. This pedagogy provided students with an experiential opportunity and allowed for the modeling and observation of leadership skills.

There has been a growing demand for teletherapy, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic.Teletherapy was up to 85.5% of clinical work, with 88.6% group work during the pandemic among the 2,619 respondents, compared to only 7% before the pandemic (Pierce et al., 2021).This rapid shift in service delivery and the discrepancy in competency present the need for graduate programs to adapt and provide training in teletherapy to address the changing counseling landscape.By immersing in online experiential learning, the counselors-in-training become aware of the constantly evolving technological connections and are better prepared to interact in the working environment as they enter the counseling field.However, most existing pedagogies and textbooks focus on in-person groups emphasizing physical presence and here-and-now (Corey et al., 2018;Gladding, 2020;Kline et al., 1997;Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).To address this emerging trend of online experiential learning, we first review online group work pedagogies that meet the Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Education Programs' [CACREP], 2016) required competency.We then propose multimodality pedagogy grounded in empirical evidence and examine the effect of this pedagogical approach on online experiential learning through a pilot study.

Pedagogy of Group Work in Multimodal Learning Environment
From the pedagogical lens, the instructor guides learners to construct their knowledge by actively making sense of the instructional materials (Mayer, 2005).In the case of group work in graduate programs, the experiential group is part of the knowledge construction in the course.Therefore, it is imperative to address the pedagogy of both group courses and experiential learning.
From the instructional design, combining verbal and non-verbal representations of knowledge using mixed modality is the most effective (Moreno & Mayer, 2007).This mixed-modality (i.e., multimodal learning environment) involves students' multiple senses when interacting with the material and peers to immerse in the learning experience fully.The multimodal characteristics of the classroom are central to how students learn.These characteristics include talk, visual communication, action, gesture, gaze, posture, and movement, all contributing to teaching and learning (Jewitt, 2003).Moreno and Mayer (2007) applied the cognitive-affective theory of learning to design a multimodal learning environment where the occurrence of learning depends on the learner's actions.They identified the following five practical instructional design principles to promote interactive learning: guided activity, reflection, feedback, students controlling the pace of presentation, and receiving focused pretraining providing relevant prior knowledge.Multimodal learning encourages dialoguing, controlling, manipulating, searching, and navigating in technology-mediated environments for knowledge construction rather than mere information acquisition (Moreno & Mayer, 2007).
Similarly, in virtual collaborative learning or online groups, meaningful learning occurs when individuals process cognitive information to select, organize, and integrate new information with prior knowledge to coordinate activities, problemsolve, and steer the interaction process (Kopp et al., 2014).Doumanis et al. (2019) evaluated the impact of a multimodal collaborative virtual immersive environment on learning.Their design of multimodal synchronous collaboration resulted in a more positive effect on the student's ability to generate ideas than a nonmultimodal control.It also facilitated students' emotional immersion (feelings of happiness or sadness toward the experience, peers, and teachers).Their multimodality included 10 principles in the learning environment: ask questions and correct misconceptions, stimulate background knowledge and expertise, capitalize on the presence of others, facilitate interactions, support distributed cognition, share tools and resources, encourage exploration and discovery, provide and delineate context and goals, foster reflective practice, and utilize technology to achieve and disseminate results.
Multimodality with project-based learning has been implemented in other competencybased adult learning environments.For example, Prieto-Velasco and Fuentes-Luque (2016) designed a multimodal working environment to support the student translators' development of professional competencies through a project-based translation group collaboration.Students in their study developed group projects and managed the different stages to completion.In that learning process, students learned the translation competencies while acquiring interpersonal skills in creating a collaborative teamwork environment.Spikol et al. (2018) used supervised machine learning approaches to investigate small groups of learners interacting from various sensors to examine the predictors of successful projectbased group collaboration.They identified that distance between learners' hands and faces was linked to work quality from student collaboration.These showed the value of nonverbal communication and the quality of group interactions and provided instructors insight to design better and support students' group work as they engage with learning materials with each other.
In counselor education, students are expected to become reflective practitioners with strong critical thinking skills.To better support students in becoming reflective practitioners, the instructors must consider multimodality, including non-verbal expression and meaning-making in social and cultural contexts, reflective thinking, and professional knowledge-building (Barton & Ryan, 2014).Similarly, to promote effective experiential learning, Chiriac (2014) identified the following three prerequisites of the pedagogy in effective group work: collaborative learning, study-social function to increase student affiliation, and well-organized group composition and structure.Students ' overall learning process improved after incorporating structured reflection journals into online courses (Guthrie & McCracken, 2010).

Managing Ethical Issues in Experiential Learning
In addition to considering multimodality pedagogy for group work, evaluating and addressing ethical dilemmas in student counselors' experiential learning groups is equally critical.The common ethical dilemmas include dual relationships, mandatory participation, selfdisclosure, and informed consent (Barlow, 2004;Kolbert et al., 2002;Shumaker et al., 2011;Thomas, 2006).When designing the group course with an experiential component, instructors must consider the impact of students' management of their dual relationships as peers and group members.When faculty lead the experiential groups, significant dual relationships can increase the risk of student privacy invasion and instructors abusing power (Merta & Sisson, 1991).The faculty's dual role as facilitator and the instructor does not reduce the ethical responsibility of gatekeeping but requires that the educator simultaneously model and teach ethics (Kitchener, 1992).Some Master's degree programs employ doctorate students to facilitate or separate the experiential learning from the course as a lab facilitated by professionals to reduce the challenges of dual relationships of the instructors in providing experiential learning (Kline et al., 1997;Shumaker et al., 2011;Urkmez et al., 2021).
In summary, when incorporating multimodality pedagogy into group work, it is crucial to evaluate ethical dilemmas in student counselors' experiential learning groups.Additionally, it is imperative to have a comprehensive understanding of psychoeducationalfocused experiential learning within the context of counseling programs.Instructors should ensure that the format of the experiential learning groups aligns with the guiding principle of the Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW).

Psychoeducational-Focused Experiential Learning
According to Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW, 2021), psychoeducational groups aim to promote personal and interpersonal growth and development, often focusing on preventing future difficulties and enhancing personal attributes and abilities.The common format of experiential groups in counseling programs included psychoeducation, interpersonal process (unstructured, focuses on here-andnow interpersonal interaction), and skills-based groups (curriculum-based skills training) (Zhu, 2018).Ohrt et al. (2013) compared the effects of psychoeducation and personal growth groups and found no differences in masters' students' empathy, group leader self-efficacy, or cohesion between the groups.Meanwhile, personal growth groups had more therapeutic experiences, such as catharsis and insight, than the psychoeducational groups (Ohrt et al., 2013).

Attending the Challenges of Online Groups
In regards to the effectiveness of online groups, a meta-analysis indicated that online psychotherapy groups were as effective as in-person (Barak et al., 2008).Therapeutic factors found in face-to-face groups also operate in online groups; still, it is challenging to manage relational issues (Gullo et al., 2022) and maintain a therapeutic presence (e.g., warmth, empathy, positive bond) (Lin et al., 2021) in online groups.For example, an online skills-building group mirroring the content and process of a face-to-face group had lower cohesion despite the greater weekly attendance (Lopez et al., 2020).Online groups encounter norm-and cue-detection problems, uncoordinated communication, and opportunities for distraction (Parks, 2020).Other challenges included artificial feelings, lacking attending skills, and difficulties achieving cohesion and connectedness (Kozlowski & Holmes, 2014;Urkmez et al., 2021).The missing body language and physical cues were difficult for group dynamics and processes (Urkmez et al., 2021).Technology difficulties contribute to the disembodied environment, hinder rapportbuilding, and disrupt real-time communication (Chen et al., 2020;Urkmez et al., 2021;Weinberg, 2020).When conducting online groups, it is crucial to be familiar with the technology tools before each session and thus be less distracted by the technology and more focused on interpersonal dynamics (Parks, 2020).
The literature review discussed online group work pedagogies meeting CACREP's required competency.To support student counselors' reflective practice, instructors should incorporate multimodality approaches, including non-verbal expression, meaning-making, reflective thinking, and professional knowledge-building.Ethical dilemmas in student counselors' experiential learning groups must be addressed, necessitating instructors' comprehensive understanding of psychoeducational-focused experiential learning.Despite therapeutic factors in online groups, managing relational issues and maintaining a therapeutic presence is challenging.Instructors should be aware of these challenges.
In response to the dearth of knowledge on the effectiveness of acquiring group skill competency through online experiential groups, we conducted this research to contribute to a gap in the knowledge base.The research findings could inform counselor educators and practitioners about multimodality pedagogy with online peer-facilitated experiential learning that meets CACREP's (2016) required competency.First, we developed and implemented the multimodal group course.Second, we tested the pedagogy by conducting a pilot study through a peer-facilitated experiential psychoeducation group.We examined the effectiveness of multimodality on students' group leadership skill competency and technology-related group skill competency.The terms group course and (experiential) group are interchangeable.The pilot study aimed to determine differences in the general group skills competency level after counselors-in-training participated in the online experiential group from 2019 to 2022.The research also sought to examine differences in the technologyrelated group skills after the hybrid group in 2019 and the synchronous group from 2020 to 2022.

Research Questions (RQ)
Given the aforementioned, we designed the following three research questions to guide this pilot study.These questions were:

Design
This pilot study employed a single-group pretest-posttest design (Campbell & Stanley, 1963).This study examined a whole-course intervention in the area of group counseling.We collected cross-sectional data in four cohorts ranging from 2019 to 2022.The variables are general group competency skills and technology-related group competency skills.The level of measurement is continuous.This study underwent human subjects review and subsequent approval.

Participants
We invited all enrolled students in the group course between 2019 and 2022 to participate in the study by completing anonymous pre-and post-survey.All enrolled students were seeking a Master's degree from a counseling program in a rural area in the United States -all study participants enrolled in the program at the time.Participation was voluntary.We intended to reduce the risks of misuse of power and protect all students' autonomy in choosing (not) to participate without the fear of affecting grades in the small cohort sizes.Therefore, we did not collect identifying or demographic information to protect the participants' anonymity and privacy.The following are the aggregated demographics of all enrolled students between 2019 and 2022.The students were 81% firstgeneration college/graduate students, with about 79.2% White, 9.5% Hispanic, 7.5% Black, and 3.8% Native American over the last four cohorts.About 77% self-identified as female.The age range was from 22 to 56.Out of 53 enrolled students, 26 (49.1%) completed both the pretest and posttest.See Table 1 for detailed counts in each cohort.

Overview
We developed an 11-item Group Skills Competence Questionnaire (GSCQ).The first eight items were based on the CACREP standards to measure the required competency, while the last three items were about students' experience with technology in group work.The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) confirmed two components to extract, and we retained all 11 items.We named these components General (GSCQ-G) and Technology Subscale (GSCQ-T).The GSCQ internal consistency (α = .96)was calculated based on the 74 entries (40 pretests and 34 posttests) using the JASP (2022) Reliability unidimensional module.The output of JASP, PCA results, and text can be viewed on this study's research project web page (https://osf.io/k4y8h/).In addition to the evidence for the construct validity of this measure provided by the PCA results, there exists research evidence as to the content validity of the CACREP accreditation standards that underlie this measure (Vacc, 1992).A sample question is: "The course has prepared me to understand the theoretical foundations of group counseling and group work."All items on the GSCQ were from "0-not sure" to "5-highly prepared".

Group Skills Competence Questionnaire-General Subscale (GSCQ-G)
Each item of the GSCQ-G is on a 6-point fully anchored Likert from 0 to 5. Thus, the total score of the eight items can range from 0 to 40.The internal reliability result for the subscale was a Cronbach's α of .97.

Group Skills Competence Questionnaire-Technology Subscale (GSCQ-T)
This subscale measured the perception of technology in experiential learning.Each item is on a 6-point fully anchored Likert from 0 to 5. The total score of the three items can range from 0 to 15.The internal reliability result for the subscale was a Cronbach's α of .94.

Procedure
The procedure section of any whole-course intervention tends toward the complex.This complexity increased because the interventions recorded in this article spanned prepandemic and pandemic periods.In this section, we will detail the intervention.Additionally, we will describe the adjustments made because of the pandemic and the impact of these adjustments.and development (ASGW, 2021).Please see Table 2 for a sample schedule, psychoeducation group topics, and session summaries.All enrolled students were required to facilitate a psychoeducational group session and participate in an experiential group while taking the group course.The experiential psychoeducation groups, facilitated by students, offered structured learning activities instead of a personal growth group since the therapeutic experience was not the purpose of experiential learning in this course.Each student developed their psychoeducational session proposal under supervision.The students facilitated the session after I (the instructor and first author) or another evaluator (i.e., faculty in the program) approved the proposal.

Intervention
All students consented to the confidentiality agreement by participating in the experiential group.Each cohort was divided into two experiential groups of six to 10 to ensure therapeutic factors (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).The faculty team determined the group membership with the primary consideration of group cohesion, as the students learn more effectively in a well-organized group when cohesion and affiliation are established (Chiriac, 2014).

Ethical Considerations for Managing Multiple Roles.
Several ethical dilemmas had to be managed from course design to implementation.First, I (the lead author) had multiple roles in interacting with the students.I was an academic advisor to some students and had prior working experience with them.I was the instructor, evaluating students' course performance and providing grades.I was also the supervisor, assessing their group leadership skills while facilitating their professional growth.To reduce the impact of power deferential and increase the clarity of my professional boundaries, I applied informed procedures in multiple classes throughout the quarter term.I modeled the structured format by facilitating an orientation session to clarify expectations, discuss informed consent, and establish the group rules.The common group session rules and expectations included, but were not limited to, maintaining confidentiality and authenticity, expanding the comfort zone, and respecting boundaries.The orientation session addressed roles, responsibilities, and power differentials.I facilitated discussions of how and when the various roles might occur and how I managed my multiple roles.For example, my evaluation as supervisor of the student's group leadership skills was not part of the overall course grade.The course evaluation did not include my observation of experiential groups.I also invited another faculty member to co-evaluate assignments to reduce role conflicts.
In supporting the management of students' multiple roles (facilitators, observers, peers, friends, and future colleagues), I included several steps to provide an informed procedure.Similar to managing my numerous roles, the process of informing students took place in various classes and reflective activities.Students could substitute experiential hours in the community to complete the experiential learning requirement if they chose to.In addition to consenting to participate in the experiential psychoeducation group, students reflected on their expectations for the course and experiential learning through multiple written assignments and lecture discussions.Most of the reflective papers had structured questions to guide students toward deep understanding.When the students established common group rules, they also discussed the balance between intentionally navigating their boundaries within the multiple roles and taking risks to expand their comfort zone to be more authentic.I framed these experiences as teachable moments for practicing as future counselors under the faculty's supervision.Timeline, Roles, and Assignments.The project occurred from 2019 to 2022.The course was hybrid, using technology to enhance learning in 2019.The lectures were online, and each student facilitated an in-person psychoeducation session and observed the other group via Zoom instead of the traditional fishbowl.From 2020 to 2022, all groups were synchronous online via Zoom.Participants had a camera on while observers turned off the video.Despite the experiential group format change, the multimodality pedagogy did not change.
Regarding the instructor's role, I (the instructor) developed the Psychoeducation Group Participation Form (see the project site at https://osf.io/k4y8h/) to address goals, participation, communication, confidentiality, risks and benefits, and self-care.Before agreeing to take part in a 10-hour psychoeducational group that their peers would facilitate, the students discussed the participation form.Three weeks before their scheduled facilitation, I met with students individually to explore the topics of interest and discuss the psychoeducation contents.Another faculty member offered co-evaluation to reduce the conflicts between my (the primary instructor's) roles.The class discussed the instructor's and students' power differential and responsibilities and how we managed those.For example, the instructor's evaluation of the student's group skill competency was not part of the overall course grade.The instructor provided feedback on group leadership skills in the supervisory role.This evaluation was a process-oriented didactic discussion during one-on-one individual supervision.The student's overall course grade was based on the required written assignments.
Each group session included a 20-minute debriefing to offer supervisory feedback afterward.The debrief focused on the facilitator's and members' strengths and addressed their immediate questions.I provided additional 30-minute one-on-one supervision to each facilitator.The supervision typically included facilitators' reflective discussions on stage development, the roles and behaviors observed in themselves and members, techniques, and leadership style.
Regarding the students' roles, each experienced being a session facilitator, participant, and observer throughout the course.Each student submitted their group session proposal for approval after the initial one-on-one meeting with the instructor to brainstorm ideas and clarify expectations.The proposal included a rationale, structures, and activities (https://osf.io/k4y8h/).When needed, students revised and resubmitted their proposals based on the instructor's feedback before facilitating a 90-minute session.Additionally, all observed two to three sessions of the other groups they were not members of.
The study did not include students' responses to their course assignments.Each facilitator completed a written group proposal and received the instructor's feedback before facilitation.All students submitted three types of reflective journals: group facilitation, group participation, and group observation reflective papers.

Assessment Activities and the Impact of Pandemic Adjustments
The participants completed a survey on an online survey platform (Qualtrics.com).The survey included a research statement, a self-selected participant's identification number, and an 11-item Group Skills Competence Questionnaire.After reviewing the research statement through Qualtrics.com,the participants completed the survey or declined to do so by closing the survey.The participants assigned themselves a number with two to four digits and used this same number for both the pre-and post-surveys to be paired.They completed the pretest between weeks one and two and the posttest after the last session during weeks 10 and 11.
Because the pilot study spanned from hybrid (technology-enhanced in-person) groups in 2019 to fully synchronous online in 2020 to 2022, we first determined if there were any delivery differences in group leadership competency.See Table 1 for detailed counts in each group.Due to the deviation from normality, we conducted Mann-Whitney U instead of independent t-tests before addressing the research questions.The results indicated no general group skills differences between the hybrid (Mdn = 15, n = 11) and synchronous (Mdn = 14, n = 29) before taking the group course, U = 163, p = .927,r = 0.022.However, there were technology-related group skills differences before the course between hybrid (Mdn = 6, n = 11) and synchronous (Mdn = 9, n = 29), U = 86.5, p = .027,r = −.458 with an alpha of p < .05.We also conducted Mann-Whitney U to determine the cohort differences after taking the course.There were no statistical differences in general skills between hybrid (Mdn = 25.5, n = 10) and synchronous (Mdn = 32, n = 24), U = 68.5, p = .053,r = −.429.There were statistical differences in technology-related skills between hybrid (Mdn = 12, n = 10) and synchronous (Mdn = 15, n = 24), U = 63, p = .025,r = −.475 with an alpha of p < .05.We were interested in the effectiveness of pedagogy and multimodality, focusing on group leadership competency development through psychoeducational group facilitation and participation.The pedagogy did not change during the four-year project period, despite the change in experiential group format from hybrid to synchronous online.Since there were no between-group differences for general group skills, we combined the participants from both deliveries and named them the online psychoeducation experiential group.However, the technology-related group skills were significantly higher in synchronous than hybrid cohorts before and after the course.Therefore, we considered technology-related skills in two separate groups (i.e., hybrid and synchronous).The experiential group was part of the multimodal group course, and the terms experiential group and group course described below are interchangeable.

Data Analysis
For the three research questions, we conducted descriptive statistics (median, standard deviation, and skewness).In addition, we performed paired samples t-tests to analyze each RQ, utilizing both Frequentist and Bayesian analyses.We used a pre-set alpha level of p < .05for the Frequentist analyses, and we will include effect sizes accompanied by qualitative descriptors using the matched rank-Biserial correlation (Cureton, 1956).To conduct the Bayesian t-tests, we employed the standard default prior (.707) and referred to Schönbrodt and Wagenmakers (2018) for the Bayes factor evidence descriptors.All analyses were carried out using JASP (2022).

Discussion
The results of RQ1 indicated low perceived general competency at the beginning of the course but significantly increased at the end.The participants' general group skills competency scores increased statistically significantly by 16.5 points (2.1 points for each item) after the course.The increased competency may be attributed to multimodal learning course design.Students appreciated that they learned the concepts (e.g., group stages, group therapeutic factors) from the group counseling class manifested in their experiential learning (Ieva et al., 2009).This indicated that multimodality is needed in online group work classes to link digital and physical interactions and shed light on collaborative learning and collective sense-making in small groups (Martinez et al., 2011;Pijeira-Díaz et al., 2016).This multimodality through the online platform is more consistent with and complementary to human communication (Calvo et al., 2015).Additionally, increased diversity in learning experiences, such as experiential activities, applicable discussion, guided reflection, and group work and collaboration, promotes a more well-rounded training program (Kwong, 2017).
In addition to multimodal learning, the gain of group competency may be attributed to the focus on the clearly defined group structure with the following proposal requirement to balance content and process: purpose, goals, objectives, content planning, exercise design, and evaluation (Furr, 2000).Students facilitated group sessions concurrently as they learned the theory and skills.This success in skill-focused training was also documented in Smaby et al. (1999) study, where counselors-in-training who completed systematic group skills training demonstrated significant gains in skill acquisition and performed significantly higher than those from a conventional group-counseling class.
There were group differences in technology-related group skills competency both before taking the course and after.RQ2 addressed the technology-rated group skill competency in the hybrid cohort, while RQ3 addressed synchronous cohorts.The results of RQ2 indicated that the student counselors rated their technology-related group skills from "little prepared" before the hybrid course to "highly prepared" after.The technology-related group skills increased significantly in the hybrid cohort.The results of RQ3 demonstrated that the student counselors rated their technology-related group skills from "highly prepared" before the synchronous online course to "very highly prepared" after.The technologyrelated competency in the synchronous groups was rated higher than the hybrid group both before and after the training.This result suggested that the synchronous cohorts in 2020-2022 had greater digital literacy even prior to the group course since all the learning had to be online.Yu's (2022) meta-analysis also confirmed that students' digital literacy significantly improved compared to before COVID-19.Additionally, students engaged in multiple roles socially and cognitively through virtual platforms, which was also promoted by information technologies (Yu, 2022).
Previous studies indicated that the online format would limit group bonding and icebreaking exercises (Kozlowski & Holmes, 2014;Urkmez et al., 2021), but students in this study did not seem to have issues bonding with each other.The student participated in grounding activities synchronously (e.g., mindfulness, reflective writing, drawing) and linked these activities to the group objectives in place of physical ones (e.g., throwing balls, music chairs) when the course was online.The class emphasized the ethical issues that accompany the use of technology.Additional privacy requirements (e.g., headphones, participating in the session in a private room) were enforced to ensure confidentiality.
With the initial preparation and informed consent, the students seemed to manage effectively when the class experienced the common vulnerability to the impact of technology glitches and disruptions in connectivity.Those experiences became teachable moments for creativity and flexibility, as it is unavoidable to have the occasional technology breakdown.The students benefited from the reflection papers with structured questions to address their understanding of ethics and technology.This reflective learning has proven effective as it addresses ethical considerations (Black & Plowright, 2010;Mann et al., 2009;Thorpe, 2004).It is especially meaningful when assessed through a multimodal approach (Barton & Ryan, 2014).
In 2019, video conferencing allowed the observers to watch the in-person group sessions in a different room synchronously without intruding or using the fishbowl method.In 2020-2022, the video conferencing technology allowed the modeling of group facilitation skills and group dynamics to form synchronously. Echoed with the previous study by Smith and Davis-Gage (2008), students gained first-hand experience as a member to build their empathy through their experiential learning as group members and observers.Virtual social interactions and digital technologies improved online learning achievements (Yu, 2022).
While the gain in technology-related competency was statistically significant, especially in the hybrid cohort, challenges still existed.The participants in a previous phenomenological study indicated experiences of a linear or one-dimensional discussion due to the inability to utilize body language, role confusion, and feeling disconnected, isolated, and unheard (Kozlowski & Holmes, 2014).During the virtual session, the participants could feel either weaker or stronger about the moments of silence between discussion and activities due to the virtual environment and the mute feature (Urkmez et al., 2021).These factors may hinder students' training in recognizing nonverbal messages and interpersonal skills (Chen et al., 2020).

Limitations
Although this pilot study is unique in exploring peer-facilitated psychoeducation experiential groups, it is not without limitations.First, the sample sizes were small, impacting the statistical analysis's power and the reliability of the survey results.Second, all questionnaires were self-reported and thus could influence the validity of the results.Third, this study conducted cross-sectional analyses with data collected from four cohorts.The experiential group was switched from hybrid (in-person with technology enhancement) in 2019 to synchronous sessions in 2020-2022.While Mann-Whitney U tests indicated no group differences in general skills between hybrid and online, there were differences in technology-related skills between the two groups both before the group and after.Additionally, the extent of the technology used differed across the participants.Fourth, there was no control group.It is hard to know what components used in the study were related to the results.One should be cautious in interpreting the data, and the results cannot be generalized to counselors-in-training as a whole due to the abovementioned limitations.

Implications
Despite these limitations, this experiential group training has practical pedagogical and research implications.Counselors-in-training benefit from group course-related opportunities to develop valuable and relevant clinical skills (Steen et al., 2014) and gain insight into future clients' experiences when participating as group members (Anderson & Price, 2001;Kottler, 2004;Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).The concerns related to dual relationships during process-oriented experiential learning (Barlow, 2004;Kolbert et al., 2002;Merta & Sisson, 1991;Thomas, 2006) seemed minimized with the informed procedures and psychoeducational structured format.The group's clear goals, expectations, and rules also provided a healthy boundary for group members.Therefore, it is imperative to designate time in the first class to clarify the counselor's-in-training expectations about the process and outcomes of acquiring group counseling knowledge and facilitation skills.The topics should include students' responsibilities in group learning and appropriate expectations about the experiential learning model.Allowing time to explore students' fears and challenges in technology may also clarify their concerns about acquiring group facilitation skills.
The project had psychoeducation groups through Zoom between 2020 and 2021, but the cohort in 2019 also benefited from the technology-enhanced training combined both inperson and online.The results provided preliminary insight into the effectiveness of multimodality and the challenges of delivering peer-facilitated psychoeducation experiential group work.Due to the inherent challenges of communication via video conferencing (e.g., the missing body language or physical cues), students may have difficulty connecting with others or processing the group dynamics (Urkmez et al., 2021).The prerequisite of a foundational course on basic micro-skills benefited the students when facilitating online groups.Future instructors should offer peer-facilitated experiential groups only after students complete the micro-skill training or pre-practicum.
To promote group cohesion, the program faculty assigned the group membership purposefully.This seemed to reduce the potential barriers to cohesion and managing relationships through online sessions.Future instructors may combine in-person and online sessions to offer flexibility while allowing interpersonal connections with nonverbal communication to provide a supportive environment (Urkmez et al., 2021).In evaluating the acquired group skills, one may consider multiple assessments.Such examples may include reflective papers, exams, student self-assessment of core group work competencies at the beginning and end of the semester, and recorded or live observation of actual group sessions with feedback by the instructor and peers (Guth & McDonnell, 2004).
Graduate programs may consider increasing the academic credit hours or advanced group work to allow for more discussions on educational, developmental, and systemic strategies applied in here-and-now interaction, with attention to group content and process (ASGW, 2021).The course included synchronous class time (two to three hours weekly) for students' experiential learning through psychoeducation groups.The other lecture contents (e.g., group theory, process-oriented group counseling techniques) were delivered through prerecorded videos.Some students may not prefer or prioritize this asynchronous and passive learning by watching videos.Additional training and fieldwork experience in group work is necessary for advanced practice in group work (ASGW, 2021).
In this project, each psychoeducation group session had a different topic and was facilitated by a different student each week.Therefore, each session seemed new, with no continuity among topics, and the group stage development and members' experiences may vary from a group with a consistent topic.Future instructors and researchers may consider applying one core psychoeducation topic while each facilitator brings in relevant content and uses appropriate strategies based on the group stage development.Despite several steps to address the ethics and multiple role-management challenges with experiential learning during this course, students may still have difficulties shifting roles between group members and facilitators from week to week (Anderson et al., 2014).The facilitator's role required more advanced preparation, or members had to pause or hold back from self-discovery when switching to facilitation (Anderson et al., 2014).Future studies may explore students' in-depth experience managing multiple roles as facilitators, group members, and peers.

RQ1:
Does the general group skills competency level differ after online experiential group work with counselors-in-training during 2019-2022?RQ2: Does the technology-related group skills competency level differ after hybrid experiential group work with counselors-in-training in 2019?RQ3: Does the technology-related group skills competency level differ after synchronous experiential group work with counselors-in-training in 2020-2022?
Figure 1.Multimodal learning with experiential group course design.

Table 1 .
Counts in hybrid and synchronous groups.

Table 2 .
Sample course schedule with psychoeducation group topics and summaries.