|
Clinical Supervision > Chapter 7 - THE SUPERVISION PROCESS
|
|
Chapter 7: THE SUPERVISION PROCESSThe Supervision ProcessThe American Board of Examiners in Clinical Social Work (2004), in their executive summary of clinical supervision, recognized two areas of the supervision process in the development of clinical supervision practice competencies: knowledge and skills. Most of these have been discussed earlier in the course, but they're presented here in outline form as a reminder and to tie it together with the full supervision process.
The three areas of knowledge that they listed were that the supervisor:
Several of the skills brought forward were:
The rest of the skills were specifics of areas in which the supervisor acts as a guide and evaluator. The supervisor guides and evaluates the:
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES BETWEEN SUPERVISEE AND SUPERVISORAccording to Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz (1979), there are four different models of supervision. These four models actually give an image, and therefore a method for conceptualizing, of developmental stages of supervision. During supervision, professionalization takes place as the supervisee takes on increasing responsibility for the content of the supervision. These stages are:
Both parties outline the part they are to play and what is expected of each. Rules, goals, and objectives are defined, and supporting measures are established. Specific teaching interventions will be detailed. The when, where, and frequency of supervisory meetings are established, as well as procedures for handling emergencies should they come up. Once both parties are content with all the details of these arrangements, this stage is completed (Malone, 2009). During this stage the supervisee is fairly dependent on the supervisee's advice and counsel for skill and insight development. It's during this stage that resistances are most likely to occur. This phase is largely to increase the supervisee's autonomy. A more peer-like relation is developed, and each is less role-bound. The supervisee has developed enough expertise and skills that he needs less supervisory direction and is more confident. The primary foci of the relationship is coaching, support, encouragement, and tweaking of knowledge or skills that may come up (Malone, 2009). During this termination phase, the supervisee's competency is quite firm. The supervisory purpose has been satisfied, and the supervisee demonstrates understanding of relationships between practice and theory as they related to specific clients. The relationship between the two parties may move into a peer-supervision style Malone, 2009). [QN.No.#73. Developmental supervision stages between supervisor and supervisee include:] OBSTACLES TO LEARNING AND TEACHINGThere are a number of conditions for effective learning and teaching (Kadushin, 1992):
Some suggestion that add a positive approach to aiding teaching and learning include:
Recognize that problems between supervisor and supervisee are not always the supervisee's fault. Earlier we looked at games supervisee can play; there are also games that supervisor play (Malone, 2009; Munson, 1979). The reasons supervisors play game are often the same or similar to the reasons supervisees play their games:
[QN.No.#74. Sometimes problems between a supervisor and a supervisee occur because of the supervisor's: Some of the games you may be tempted to play are:]
COMMUNICATION IN CLINICAL SUPERVISIONClear communication is mandatory in good clinical supervision. The best way to begin that communication is with the written supervisory contract that should be made at the beginning of any supervisory relationship. This is discussed more fully below.
For communication--written or spoken--to be effective, it must be clear and understandable to all the parties involved. But the person on the receiving end of the communication, whether it's a long speech or a single element of a conversation, must also be a good listener. Communication is a continual two-way process. Questions to promote clarity are also an important part of communication. As supervisor, you can clearly communicate needed information to your supervisee. You can watch to see if she appears to "get" what you said, and you can ask question to be sure she did "get" it. Although the supervisee has responsibility for learning, it's still your job to be sure your communications are understood. APPROACHES TO AND STRATEGIES OF SUPERVISIONThere is no one unifying theory of clinical supervision. Supervisors choose to follow different models which stress certain techniques. Every model has a central set of principles to guide the supervisor:
In traditional models, the relationship of the supervisor and supervisee is based on the legal and professional jurisdiction of the supervisor for the performance of the supervisee, in the manner authorized by the employing organization (American Board of Examiners in Clinical Social Work, 2004). The supervisor constantly must deal with a complex set of responsibilities towards:
First Stages of All ApproachesNo matter what approach to supervision you might choose, there are two issues that you need to do at the very beginning. The first is designed for use with every supervisee. The second is specific for each individual supervisee.
[QN.No.#75. Certain issues need to be taken care of at the beginning of a supervisory relationship. These include] Behavioral Contracting in SupervisionIf you've ever played a game with a small child who makes up and changes the rules at will whenever it's in her interest to do so, you can imagine what it would be like if supervision took a similar tack. What are the "rules" that should be included in a supervisory contract?
In forming a contract, remember that it's a mutual agreement between supervisor and supervisee, and that both parties sign it (Malone, 2009). This contract can be identical for all of your supervisory situations. The contract will include:
Once this contract has been constructed, an individual development plan should be made. Individual Development PlanThe Individual Development Plan (IDP) is a detailed supervision plan with the goals that you and your supervisee want to focus on for a given period of time, such as three months. It's dynamic, and--as the child's game rules--will change over life cycle of the relationship--not on the basis of a whim, but based on mutual agreement (Malone, 2009). Both of you should sign it and keep a copy for your records (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a).
Goals are most often skills the supervisee wants to cultivate or professional resources she wishes to develop. Both the resources and skills are aligned with the supervisee's job in the program or with activities that would promote his professional development. The IDP should designate:
As a supervisor, you should also have your own IDP that addresses your own training goals based on the lists of competencies given earlier in the course. Your IDP can be developed with your supervisor, peer input, mentorship, academic advisement, or in external supervision (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a). Supervision ModalitiesJust as there are a number of modalities for therapy (e.g., individual, couple, family, group), there are also several modalities of supervision. They might be divided into two broad categories: in person supervision and distance supervision. Distance supervision generally takes place when the supervisee is working in a remote location. Most sub-modalities can be used in either of these categories. The list below categorizes the sub-modalities under the division to which they pertain.
In Person Supervision Live supervision/Direct observation (In the same room, one-way mirrors) Distance Supervision Telephone supervision Internet supervision
Either/Both Delayed review (audiotape, videotape) Case presentation (post-session) Written reports Verbal reports [QN.No.#76. Supervision approaches or modalities may include:] Studies indicate that distance supervision generally has greater focus on training than on service or client needs. Supervisees reported that the multiple sensory aspect (audio, visual, and text) in computer-mediated models were very useful for documenting consultations and outlining supervisory content (Hurley and Hadden, 2005). In-person and distance modalities appear to be equally effective for establishing rapport with in the context of supervision (Lenz, Oliver, and Nelson, 2011). Live Supervision/Direct ObservationLive supervision and supervision by direct observation are generally used synonymously, even though--strictly speaking--there is not 100% overlap. The terms are used interchangeably in this section of the course. In live observation, the supervisor sits in on a counseling session with the supervisee and client, thus observing the session first hand. Informed consent from the client is required. An alternative to actually sitting in on the session is observation through a 1-way mirror. Sometimes this is combined with videotaping the session for later review (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a).
Direct observation is direct, intentional, and structured (Ackroyd, Beddoe, Chinnery, and Appleton, 2010)--a constructive tool for learning, not a weapon for criticism. It's an opportunity for the supervisee to do things well and correctly, so that positive feedback follows. When the supervisee "goofs," it's an opportunity to discuss other ways the situation might have been handled. You should be aware of a number of things regarding direct observation in supervision (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a):
Point out what went well and areas of possible change. Ask the supervisee if she was conscious of aspects of any of the areas you brought up and if she has suggestions about different actions that might be taken. If the supervisee has no suggestions, offer your own and together work out the next steps to be taken (Ackroyd, Beddoe, Chinnery, and Appleton, 2010). The final phase is to plan the next learning steps to be taken. Make them as behaviorally specific as you can. Plan for opportunities for the supervisee to practice the tasks that will make up their final observations. Set a time for the next observation. Telephone SupervisionSupervision by telephone--or in the Internet world, by Skype--is becoming more common. It's a common practice for clinical supervision of junior doctors, and for supervising counselors and psychotherapist (Wajda-Johnston, Smyke, Nagel, and Larrieu, 2005), as well as nurses (Thompson and Winter, 2003). It's often used when the supervisee is in a remote location, and is used in group supervision situations when participants may be located in different portions of the country--or the world.
In 2005, the Psychoanalysis Division of the American Psychological Association (Manosevitz, 2006) had a roundtable discussion on telephone supervision, and made the following conclusions about it:
Telephone supervision is not limited to individual supervision, but also is often used for group supervision. Feuerman (n.d.), a licensed clinical social worker and psychotherapist, was skeptical about telephone supervision because he thought that seeing the supervisor and other participants was necessary for group cohesion and connection, that emotional connections would be greatly hindered. When he experienced group telephone supervision, he was amazed that so many people wanted to participate. Reasons given were not necessarily related to remote locations, but also to the amount of travel time in metropolitan locations. Some reported that they found telephone supervision more effective than in-person supervision. Reasons given for more effectiveness were:
Feuerman wondered what kinds of feeling were transmitted over telephone lines, especially if participants were not reacting to feelings generated by seeing the other participants. He discovered that seeing and perception are both biological processes, and some biological processes are redundant in that they overlap--they're similar to one another but with some differences. When talking about missing facial cues over the phone, he concluded that that might be a good thing, at least in terms of supervision. "The mental dynamics evident in the speech pattern and verbal interactions with others are so manifest that when we concentrate on them only-we are able to "see" the person better." Of course, if the telephone supervision is via Skype, you at least see the other person's face. However, if you agree with Fueuerman's (n.d.) conclusions, you may prefer to avoid Skype. Internet SupervisionModes of Internet supervision can each be best described under one or more of the other modalities listed. Skype was included under telephone supervision; video-conferencing can also be included there. Chats, e-mail, online forums, and texting fit well in the category of Supervision via Written Reports.
That leaves the least-known modality of avatars, which could fit in telephone supervision or supervision by written reports, but--because of its uniqueness--will be discussed here. The method uses free software, such as Second Life, which is called a "Massive Multiplayer Online Environment (MMOE) software. The supervisor must set up a virtual setting for the supervision sessions. It's a fun, interesting way to approach this 2-way process, but it requires a great deal of initial preparation. So far it's used far more often for psychotherapy than for supervision. Because of the learning curve and setup time, that is likely to remain the situation. Delayed Review SupervisionDelayed review supervision is considered one kind of direct observation or live supervision. This is because a therapy session is videotaped, or at least audiotaped. Obviously the videotaped session is more complete as direct observation because you can see nuances that may not be indicated in an audiotaped session. It has been commonly used in both social work and in marriage and family therapy (Nichols, Nichols, & Hardy, 1990; Munson, 1993).
Video cameras are more and more common in professional settings, and are not expensive. This makes videotape supervision (VTS) simple and easily accessible. It's a complex, dynamic, and powerful tool--one that can at once be anxiety-provoking, challenging, humbling, and threatening (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a). Of course the client must sign an informed consent form for either audio- or videotaping of a session. Some clients may sign only consent for audiotaping because it seems less threatening. Videotaping is not allowed in most prison settings or during Employee Assistance Program services. It also might not be recommended when working with patients with diagnoses such as some schizophrenic illnesses or paranoia. In all of these cases, either simple live observation or audiotaping may be better choices (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a). Audiotaping and videotaping are the most reliable forms for examining counselor-client session (Borders and Leddick, 1987). Supervision can immediately follow a counseling session or it may occur a few days later and the data will remain the same with no need for mental retention. It's recommended that both supervisor and supervisee review the tape before the counseling session. This allows the supervisor to plan an intervention strategy and the supervisee to prepare discussion topics and questions (Hart, 1994). Case Presentation SupervisionThere are times when the supervisee needs to make a case presentation of a client. You might want a succinct or more detailed summary of a client's case to date. You might be holding group supervision sessions where during each session you may have one or several supervisees present a case for the group to review and discuss. A presentation may be made in a written report, to a referring colleague on the phone, in a peer-group review, in individual or group supervision, when preparing treatment plans, or in some other setting.
Whatever the reason for needing a case presentation, a supervisee needs to develop the skill of making and presenting them. If nothing else, making an effective, clear, and to-the-point case presentation leaves others with an impression of the supervisee's professional competence. No matter the reason or the setting, the art of making a case presentation is an ever-present challenge (Blatner, 2006). The length and completeness of the presentation depends on the context in which it will be given. If it's in a setting where each case can only be given a few minutes' attention, then it should be reduced to only a minute or two--enough to orient others to the identity and key features of the client being characterized and the most relevant current issues. In a setting where a more complete review of the origin, development and effects of the pathology or treatment course is required, a more comprehensive presentation is suitable. Clinicians should train themselves to present any given case at three levels (Blatner, 2006):
Before the presentation, supervisees should become clear about the purpose of the presentation
They need to determine what information they want to give to the audience. In most cases the audience only needs enough information to gain an internal picture of the presented situation. If all kinds of explanations and impressions are thrown out and the audience expected to put it all together, they will only be overwhelmed. What is presented should not contain a lot of information that is not essential or relevant to the presentation purpose (Blatner, 2006). The supervisees must put themselves in the audience's place and identify the basic facts needed to simply become oriented to the problem. Because of a supervisee's nervousness about making a case presentation, there are some steps that can be followed to reduce anxiety and make it easier to include the best information (Munson, 2002).
There are a variety of templates available online for case presentations. Here are two very basic ones . The first is for a general social work case presentation in which the social worker is involved primarily in emergency interventions, discharge planning, and case management:
This next one is for a person working in a therapy setting, and is more clinically focused:
Supervision via Verbal ReportsAmong different definitions to identify a variety of supervision forms, the definition for a trainee verbal report is "didactic discussion of a case presented in supervision by the supervisee" (DeRoma, Hickey, and Stanek, 2007), or "what the supervisee remembers and sees as relevant" (Hess, Hess, and Hess, 2008). Use of direct observation supervision is reported to be therapist oriented, whereas the verbal report process focuses more on generic, case-oriented issues (Hare and Frankena, 1970).
DeRoma, Hickey, and Stanek (2007) believe that supervision that does not include live material may focus less on strengths and more on weaknesses, because the supervisee is more likely to bring out obstacles and struggles in giving case progress. As supervisor, if you're aware of this, you can guide the supervisee's verbal report to include more than problems. Green (2004) indicates that understanding of "therapeutic relationship skills are best acquired through close observation of the therapist's behavior in role plays and in sessions (i.e., via live, videotape, or audiotape-based case supervision). Such skills are not as easily learned-or maybe impossible to learn-through 'delayed verbal report' supervision because the latter's effectiveness is constrained by what the therapist was aware of during the session, remembers after the fact, and can report in words to the supervisor. Verbal report supervision always loses emotionally relevant information because a lot of what transpires between therapist and clients is automatic and not necessarily within the therapist's awareness, especially when the therapeutic alliance is not functioning well. Paradoxically, the very areas where supervisees may need the most help are areas about which they're unaware and cannot articulate the relevant emotional information to their supervisors." Green further states that the supervisor's ability to correctly picture and give feedback about the relationship of the supervisee and the client is limited if it's based on delayed verbal reports. However, in a report of methods of direct supervision that supervisees endorsed (where they could choose more than one method), the first preference was "Any Type of Direct Supervision" at 85%, and "Traditional: Trainee Verbal Report" was close behind at 82.8% (DeRoma, Hickey, and Stanek, 2007). Supervision via Written ReportsGiving information to a supervisor via writing is basically the same as giving it verbally. The differences are that the supervisee can write the information down immediately following a therapy session, whether or not the supervisor is available, and that there are a variety of written formats that can be used.
The report written after the session generally becomes a part of the client's record. It can also be the basis of a conversation with the supervisor or appropriate co-workers via:
If any of these Internet means of communication are used, the issues of privacy and security must be taken into consideration, as has been discussed earlier. General ApproachesThe two basic approaches to clinical supervision are individual and group. It's often encouraged that the supervisor combine both of these approaches, so as to include the "best of both worlds." Yogev (1982) believes this will allow three goals to be met for the supervisee:
In both approaches, supervisee's needs are met in three stages:
Individual SupervisionAlthough there are a number of benefits for individual supervision, they can perhaps all be boiled down to the statement that at each supervisory meeting, attention can be concentrated on one supervisee who can focus all his time to her own reflection (Kobolt, 1999).
Lee and Everett (2004) state that issues that benefit from individual supervision are:
The relative privacy of individual supervision may allow the supervisee to reflect more profoundly and openly on interpersonal dynamics, evaluative issues, and "self-of-the-therapist." The supervisor may be able to offer a wider range of potential interventions, as well as to nurture and/or challenge certain trainees better than in group setting. The hallmark of individual supervision is individual attention, where the supervisor can focus on the unique training needs of each supervisee, including both process and content of the supervisory sessions. Beginning therapists often indicate confusion because of the many theoretical perspectives and interventions they experience in a group. The individual sessions allow the supervisor to more thoroughly and carefully address the learning style and developmental needs of each supervisee. However, even those that most vocally support individual therapy, point out that there are some concerns regarding it. The presence of several supervisees offers some rich relational experiences that cannot be found in individual therapy (Lee and Everett, 2004). Some supervisees may not be comfortable with the more intense supervisory relationship that can appear in the individual supervision settings. Supervisors sometimes feel freer to be more critical in individual supervision, and the supervisee may feel more intimidated. Supervisors have also sometimes stated that they are somewhat bored in individual settings, especially with particular types of supervisees. Supervisor who want to take more directive and active roles often prefer the interactive process of a group setting. Additionally, a subtle, defensive collusion between supervisor and supervisee can develop. For example, an especially dependent or vulnerable supervisee may elicit a parental, protective response from the supervisor (counter-transference). This can erode objectivity of both parties to the extent that the protective collusion hides learning issues or clinical errors. Boundaries between therapeutic and supervisory relationships may also be blurred (Anderson, Schlossberg, and Rigazio-DiGilio, 2000). Because there is no one to witness this process, supervisors need to be especially sensitive to their power relative to supervisees in regards to subjects related to sociocultural identification, gender, privacy and evaluation (Haber, 1996). Individual supervision works best when both parties are conscious of the limitations. These should be specifically addressed in conversations at the beginning of a supervisory relationship, as well as in formal training contracts that address needs and expectations of both parties. However, they will also need to be addressed periodically throughout the working alliance (Lowe, 2000). Group SupervisionThe tasks of clinical group supervision are similar to those of individual supervision. Some of the advantages of doing group supervision include (Malone, 2009):
The benefits of individual supervision are the disadvantages of group supervision. In addition to those mentioned in the individual supervision section, the supervisor may be less experience in group work, with the result that the clinical supervision experience is less effective. The variety of interests, skill levels, and relevance of cases can reduce the usefulness of group supervision. A group may have dysfunctional dynamics (competition, scapegoating, power grabbing) that can eliminate the effectiveness of the group. Confidentiality problems are also more frequent in the format of group supervision (Malone, 2009). It's recommended that a supervision group have no more than six members. This will give each member more opportunity to present their cases--one at least every other month, which is very good when combined with individual and/or peer supervision. Several cost effective principles of a useful structure for supervision include (Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009a):
Models of Group SupervisionA definition of group supervision is:
A setting in which a supervisor shepherds a supervisee's professional growth in a group of peers. The supervisor guides the group in a review of pertinent knowledge and feelings that are part of the group supervision process. An overview of models of skill acquisition is given, and the singular attributes of acquiring skills in a group environment are discussed. Suggestions are made for applying cognitive skills to group supervision and clinical situations (Hillerbrand, 1989). Billow and Mendelsohn (1987) identified three types of supervision groups:
They also pointed out that the most successful groups were those that could shift focus as needed. Todd and Pine (1968) pointed out that a successful supervision groups involve efficient management in norm-setting, gate-keeping, and protection of the group contract; Counselman (1991) added the protection of the group's purpose and objectives. A different focus on types of group supervision models looks at groups led by a supervisor and groups led by peers. Further discussions of these are in the next few sections of the course. Group ProcessGroup process usually refers to what happens in a group in terms of growth and evolution of the relationship patterns among and between participants in the group. The same basic process occurs in a supervision group as in a therapy group. The supervisor should guide and facilitate useful growth without stifling that which can occur naturally.
These processes may not always be observable, but may also be inferred. Those processes which can be observed--overt processes--include verbal behaviors (e.g., content of speech; expressed affects), and nonverbal behaviors. Covert group processes are those referring to needs, wishes, motivations, and intentions (conscious or unconscious) that are acted out in the group. They may be acted out by individuals, pairs of individuals, subgroups, or by the group as a whole. These processes can serve for the good when they're work-oriented towards promoting supervisory ends, or they can serve to block the purposes of the group if they're defensive, resistive, and work-avoidant (Hartman & Gibbard, 1974). The supervisory group is a social system with the supervisor as its manager. The supervisor's first function is to safeguard and monitor the work-ordered boundaries of the group so that the supervisees feel it to be a safe place to share and interact for the purposes of growth as therapists and social workers. A bond or cohesion generally occurs in a supervisory group in which members feel a commitment to one another and to the group's supervisory tasks. It's often seen as being equivalent to the supervisory alliance in individual supervision or therapeutic alliance in individual psychotherapy. This is the group process most basic to positive supervisory outcomes. As in therapy groups, a certain amount of transference and counter-transference is likely to occur between the supervisor and the group's members, and between members themselves. The necessary management of these reactions is self-care and self-awareness for each participant. Supervisor as Group LeaderViney and Truneckova (2008) label a supervisory group with the supervisor as the leader a "process of courage." In this model, the supervisor understands the processes of therapy, explains the makeup of therapists (Viney and Epting, 1997), and enters into a role relationship with the supervisees. In supervisor led supervision, groups depend on input from each member of the group. The supervisor actively promotes relationship building between members of the group, and shows an ability to comprehend the way each member views what is going on in the group processes (Viney and Epting, 1997).
The reason that Viney and Truneckova (2008) refer to this kind of group as a "process of courage" is because creative changes in supervision require "both the courage to confront experience at the most deeply personal levels and the integrity to bring those core constructions into form that can be explicitly considered, and thus shared, confirmed, disconfirmed, and ultimately revised" (Harter, 2007). Viney and Truneckova (2008) also state that the supervisor must have the courage to develop an ability to influence the supervisory group processed and to take professional risks. The supervisor's courage also allows him to point out what could be keeping the supervisees from creating an open relationship with their clients. The process of courage also includes a willingness of both the supervisor and the supervisees to express with one another perceptions and observations they believe have clinical significance in these relationships. In supervisor led groups, the supervisor tries to assist and encourages supervisees to develop a sense of their own abilities as therapists to positively influence the good things that happen in a therapy session (Viney and Epting, 1997). A strategy the supervisor may use in this process is to give supervisees the control over what is to initially be presented in the supervisory group session. Even though a supervisor-led group has a good possibility that "saying what cannot be said" (Viney and Epting, 1997) will occur because of the number of people influencing the group dynamics, the supervisor must also be aware of the danger that group members may hesitate to take risks, for whatever reasons. The supervisor can encourage risk taking by supporting members that raise risky issues and by role playing taking risks. Because group supervision sessions are not primarily one-on-one relationships, but rather those of role-taking, each supervisee can demonstrate great courage and risk-taking by sharing professional thoughts, giving opinions, and accepting feedback. All of this happens when the supervisor is able to say, "I was able to help Lee Supervisee to express his/her deepest fears" (Viney and Truneckova, 2008). Peer SupervisionsIn peer supervision groups, there is not a person, such as a supervisor, to model the professional role. As such, a peer supervision group should be an adjunct to, not a replacement for a supervisor-led group for trainees.
A more appropriate term than peer supervision might be peer consultation. Supportive and critical feedback is stressed and evaluation is given little emphasis. In contrast to supervision, consultation is typified by the group members' "right to accept or reject the suggestions [of others]" (Bernard and Goodyear, 1992). However, both "peer consultation" and "peer supervision" describe non-hierarchical relationships in which those who participate have neither the purpose nor the power to evaluate one another's performance (Benshoff, 2001). Because of this, feelings associated with issues covered in the group session are less intense. A greater emphasis is placed on the commonality of what is shared in the group. Role relationships are usually developed more slowly than in supervisor-led groups, but can be just a productive once established (Viney and Truneckova, 2008). Characteristics of group members that are functioning well (Leitner and Pfenninger, 1990) and may be collectively labeled "empathy," include:
Facilitation of development of these characteristics is fostered when the supervisee/therapist experiences them as being applied to himself in supervision. When they're experienced in peer supervisory relationships, the supervisee can more easily use them in a therapy session. In a therapy session, "if the client demonstrates that he's not seeing the problem as the therapist does, some reconstruing is required on the part of the therapist" (Fransella, 1993). The same is true of members--"joint supervisors," if you prefer--in peer supervision groups; "defense" and "resistance" are also experienced in the groups. The group should try to resolve these problems by recognizing them, investigating them, and working through them. Still, there are unique problems for resolving resistance in peer supervision groups. At the beginning of the group, there is considerable dependency on members' readiness to be curious, but the boldness to follow through may be lacking. There may also be problems when offering personal information. Much of the group's development seems to be focused on managing resistance (Nobler, 1980). Because there are always more than one way of looking at any event, members of a peer supervision group must act like scientists by testing hypotheses and assisting experimentation by group members and their clients. In these groups, the question is not, "Did I do this right?" but rather, "What did we learn when we said or did that?" or "Do we now have information that will allow us to make new hypotheses?" (Allstetter-Neufeldt, 1997). The sum of the strengths--which can also be the weaknesses--of peer supervision groups is that the relationships are more equal, and the range of perspectives and hypotheses given is wide. Support is given without the need to "fix things." This can be both powerful and strengthening in the understanding that all members are having much the same experiences (Viney and Truneckove, 2008). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Objective 13. Name at least two of the developmental stages between supervisor and supervisee. Question 73. Developmental supervision stages between supervisor and supervisee include: a) Establishing the supervisor-supervisee relationship, setting goals and clarifying the contract b) The interpersonal dynamics in regards to boundary setting in the relationship c) The transition from supervisor/teacher to a consultant's role of exploration and reflection d) a and b e) a and c f) b and c Question 74. Sometimes problems between a supervisor and a supervisee occur because of the supervisor's: a) Perceiving threats in the hierarchy b) Anxiety about their competency c) Fear of losing control d) Seeking approval e) All of the above f) None of the above Question 75. Certain issues need to be taken care of at the beginning of a supervisory relationship. These include a(n): a) Behavioral Contract b) Individual Development Plan c) Assessment of Supervisee Readiness d) a and b e) a and c f) b and c Objective 14. Name at least four modalities or approaches to supervision. Question 76. Supervision approaches or modalities may include: a) Live supervision b) Delayed review (audiotape, videotape) c) Verbal or written reports d) Video conferencing e) All of the above f) None of the above |
|
|
Clinical Supervision > Chapter 7 - THE SUPERVISION PROCESS
Page Last Modified On:
Deprecated: Function strftime() is deprecated in /home/devxspeedy/public_html/lib/smarty-3.1.34/libs/plugins/modifier.date_format.php on line 81 April 19, 2015, 12:59 AM |
|
