True experimental designs (Designs 4, 5, and 6 of Campbell & Stanley, 1963) are thought to provide internally valid results. This paper describes five studies involving the evaluation of various treatment interventions and identifies a source of internal invalidity when self-report measures are used in a Pretest-Posttest manner. An alternative approach (Retrospective Pretest-Posttest design) to measuring
A standardized curriculum that can be applied to a variety of supervisor training programs is presented. Suggestions for implementation and research are included.
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the preferences of supervisors and supervisees for 4 styles of counselor supervision and the perceived frequency of use of the 4 styles during a 10-week supervision experience. The styles are labeled directive teacher, supportive teacher, counselor, and consultant. Data collected using 90 doctoral student supervisors and 168 master's-degree student supervisees showed significant correlations among the styles. Implications for the process of counselor supervision are offered.To evaluate the effectiveness of supervision and to teach students to conduct effective supervision, counselor educators and supervisors must have clear definitions of the various approaches that can be used and a theoretical conceptualization into which these approaches are logically integrated. Empirical evidence concerning the behavior on which approaches or styles are based varies widely and includes sources of power that a supervisor might use (Holloway, 1995); the supervisor relationship or working alliance (Martin, Garske, & Davis, 2000); and what Neufeldt, Beutler, and Ranchero (1997) described as social influence attributes (e.g" expertness, trustworthiness, and attractiveness). It may be assumed, as advocated by Bernard (1997) and theorized by Stoltenberg, McNeill, and Delworth (1998) and Holloway (1995), that a counselor supervisor may begin with an expectation of a style of supervision to use, but the decision whether to use it and other styles depends on the supervisee's needs and the context of the supervision experience. An examination of this process from the point of view of both the supervisor and the supervisee was the purpose of the present study,The literature describing approaches to providing supervision (often termed style,function, or role of supervision, depending on the theorist) has been summarized by Bernard and Goodyear (1992).They found that the styles counselor-therapist and teacher were most often cited in the supervision literature, followed by consultant and then monitor-evaluator. Styles seem to include the terms
This article presents an integrative model for selecting a progression of therapist styles as clients move through developmental stages during the course of counseling and psychotherapy. The model, Adaptive Counseling and Therapy (ACT), suggests an eclectic approach to the utilization of techniques in therapy. The ACT approach is compared and contrasted with other integrative models that suggest an eclectic practice of therapy, with both similarities and divergent recommendations being noted. ACT is intended to be useful to practitioners in case conceptualization and in the application of effective treatment planning. The assessment instruments required to operationalize the central constructs of ACT theory are presented and described, and data on both the instruments' psychometric adequacy and the relationship of ACT constructs to therapy outcome are reviewed. Finally, the ways in which ACT can serve as a rich heuristic device for counseling practice, research, and supervision are delineated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.