This exploratory survey investigated the issue of problematic students/trainees from the perspective of master's and doctoral students in clinical and counseling psychology programs. Findings suggest that students (a) were aware of problematic trainees in their programs; (b) believed faculty were primarily responsible for handling problematic peers, though students were unclear about procedures for handling this issue; (c) expressed greatest concerns about issues involving peers' interpersonal functioning; and (d) responded by gossiping or consulting with other peers, withdrawing, and, less often, confronting a problem peer. Problematic peers impacted respondents' own functioning, relationships with peers, and perceptions of faculty, and they disrupted the learning environment. Study implications and limitations are noted.

The purpose of this investigation was to explore three methods in examining the therapeutic process that (a) assessed how clients construct and interpret the change process and counselors' behavior over time, (b) assessed the content and valence of clients' and counselors' most memorable thoughts immediately after the session, and (c) compared the clients' and counselors' memorable thoughts with the actual content of the counseling sessions. A single-subject design was used to examine three counselor-client dyads across seven counseling sessions. The results provided preliminary but rather encouraging support of two methodologies, Guided Inquiry and thought listing, that assess how clients and counselors construct and interpret aspects of the therapeutic process.The data for this study were collected as part of a dissertation conducted by Joan I. Rosenberg under the direction of Charles Schmitz.

No abstract

No abstract

A sociocultural perspective for supervision practice uses the concepts of acculturation, apprenticeship, and reflective assessment to describe supervision in counselor education. Supervision can be viewed as a n intersubjective process that revolves around solving ambiguous and unstructured problems; key features include the coconstruction of shared meaning, framed by a continuous cycle of reflection and action, and the emergence of a professional identity. Implications for research and practice are offered.Supervision focuses on both knowledge and the process of counseling practice. I t has historically been conceptualized as a linear process based in a hierarchical relationship between a novice counselor -in-training and expert counselor, with a power differential between a supervisor and supervisee (Friedlander &Ward, 1984). Bernard and Goodyear (19981 offered the most common working definition of supervision as an intervention that is provided by a senior member of a profession to a junior member or members of that same profession. This relationship is evaluative, extends over time, and has the simultaneous purposes of enhancing the professional functioning of the junior member(s), and serving as a gatekeeper for those who are to enter the particular profession. (p. 4) A number of models have been used to study supervision in counselor education, and a body of research literature exists on which our thinking about supervision is based. For example, Stoltenberg (1981) offered the counselor complexity model (later revised as an integrated developmental model [IDM]; Stoltenberg, & Delworth, 19871, which integrated developmental constructs with supervision using "step-by-step approaches to task and conflict resolution . . . within an overall linear stage model" (p. 186).