Cognitions of Expert Supervisors in Academe: A Concept Mapping Approach

Abstract

Eighteen expert supervisors reported their thoughts while preparing for, conducting, and evaluating their supervision sessions. Concept mapping (Kane & Trochim, ) yielded 195 cognitions classified into 25 cognitive categories organized into 5 supervision areas: conceptualization of supervision, supervisee assessment, supervisory relationship, supervisor self‐assessment, and administration of supervision. Implications for future research and supervisor training programs are discussed.

A Delphi Study and Initial Validation of Counselor Supervision Competencies

“…These were retained for the final competency list. The first and second authors then reviewed the categorizations of supervision competencies in the literature (e.g., ACA, ; ACES, , ; Barnett & Molzon, ; CACREP, ; Dye & Borders, ; Engels et al, ; Kemer, Borders, & Willse, ) and separately sorted the responses, identifying common themes and groups of competencies, then came to consensus on the categories delineated in the final list (Wester & Borders, ).…”

“…The selection and makeup of the SMEs affected the results. Selection bias was present in SME eligibility criteria: Different researchers have different definitions of the term supervision expert (e.g., Kemer et al, ; Wester & Borders, ). Recruitment strategies for Phase I and Phase II SMEs also affected expert panel membership.…”

The Ruptured Supervisory Alliance and Its Repair: On Supervisor Apology as a Reparative Intervention

“…Bernard & Goodyear, 2014;Grant et al, 2012;Ladany et al, 2005;Nelson et al, 2008;Scaife, 2009). Openness, disclosure, safety, non-defensiveness, and goodwill on the part of the supervisor (and supervisee) all seem necessary to creating the opportunity for and realizing rupture resolution (Grant et al, 2012;Gray et al, 2001;Kemer, Borders, & Willse, 2014;Nelson et al, 2008;Nelson & Friedlander, 2001). As Nelson and Friedlander (2001) indicated, each alliance component-bond, goals, and tasks-is important to consider when addressing supervision difficulties.…”

“…identification of the presence of a possible rupture and internally processing how best to proceed; 4. bringing the identified rupture up in supervision for joint processing and discussion; and 5. working to achieve a rupture resolution that is satisfactory to the supervisee and restores the good standing of the supervision alliance (Grant et al, 2012;Kemer et al, 2014;Nelson et al, 2008).…”

Untitled

“…As an essential aspect of counselor preparation, supervision calls for models that demonstrate consistent effectiveness (Borders, 2012;Kemer, Borders, & Willse, 2014 Researchers carefully investigate core components, and new structured models are brought forward to enhance supervision practice (Oliver et al, 2010).…”