Models of Supervision
Models of Supervision
Models of Supervision
ERIC Digest
EDO-CG-94-08
oftentimes believe that the best supervision is analysis of practice for true adherence to the therapy. The situation is analogous to the sports enthusiast who believes the best future coach would be a person who excelled in the same sport at the high school, college, and professional levels. Ekstein and Wallerstein (cited in Leddick & Bernard, 1980) described psychoanalytic supervision as occurring in stages. During the opening stages the supervisee and supervisor eye each other for signs of expertise and weakness. This leads to each person attributing a degree of influence or authority to the other. The mid-stage is characterized by conflict, defensiveness, avoiding, or attacking. Resolution leads to a working stage for supervision. The last stage is characterized by a more silent supervisor encouraging supervisees in their tendency toward independence. Behavioral supervision views client problems as learning problems; therefore it requires two skills: 1) identification of the problem, and (2) selection of the appropriate learning technique (Leddick & Bernard, 1980). Supervisees can participate as co-therapists to maximize modeling and increase the proximity of reinforcement. Supervisees also can engage in behavioral rehearsal prior to working with clients. Carl Rogers (cited in Leddick & Bernard, 1980) outlined a program of graduated experiences for supervision in client-centered therapy. Group therapy and a practicum were the core of these experiences. The most important aspect of supervision was modeling of the necessary and sufficient conditions of empathy, genuineness, and unconditional positive regard. Systemic therapists (McDaniel, Weber, & McKeever, 1983) argue that supervision should be therapy-based and theoretically consistent. Therefore, if counseling is structural, supervision should provide clear boundaries between supervisor and therapist. Strategic supervisors could first manipulate supervisees to change their behavior, then once behavior is altered, initiate discussions aimed at supervisee insight. Bernard and Goodyear (1992) summarized advantages and disadvantages of psychotherapy-based supervision models. When the supervisee and supervisor share the same orientation, modeling is maximized as the supervisor teaches and theory is more integrated into training. When orientations clash, conflict or parallel process issues may predominate.
Summary Are the major models of supervision mutually exclusive, or do they share common ground? Models attend systematically to: a safe supervisory relationship, task-directed structure, methods addressing a variety of learning styles, multiple supervisory roles, and communication skills enhancing listening, analyzing, and elaboration. As with any model, your own personal model of supervision will continue to grow, change, and transform as you gain experience and insight. References Association for Counselor Education and Supervision (1990). Standards for counseling supervisors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 30-32. Bernard, J.M., Goodyear, R.K. (1992). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Borders, L.D., Bernard, J.M., Dye, H.A., Fong, M.L., Henderson, P., & Nance, D.W. (1991). Curriculum guide for training counselor supervisors: Rationale, development, and implementation. Counselor Education and Supervision, 31, 58-80. Goodyear, R.K. (1982). Psychotherapy supervision by major theorists [videotape series]. Manhattan, KS: Instructional Media Center Leddick, G.R. & Bernard, J.M. (1980). The history of supervision: A critical review. Counselor Education and Supervision, 27, 186-196. McDaniel, S., Weber, T. , & McKeever, J. (1983). Multiple theoretical approaches to supervision: Choices in family therapy training. Family Process, 22, 491-500. Stoltenberg, C.D., & Delworth, U. (1987) Supervising counselors and therapists. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Worthington, E.L. (1987). Changes in supervision as counselors and supervisors gain experience: A review. Professional Psychology, 18, 189-208. George R. Leddick, Ph.D., NCC, CMFT, coordinates the graduate program in counseling and is an Associate Professor in Counselor Education at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, in Fort Wayne, Indiana.
ERIC Digests are in the public domain and may be freely reproduced and disseminated. This publication was funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Contract No. RR93002004. Opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the positions of the U.S. Department of Education, OERI or ERIC/CASS. For information on other ERIC/CASS products and services, please call toll-free (800) 414-9769 or (910) 334-4114 or fax (910) 334-4116 or write ERIC/CASS, School of Education, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC 27412.