Supervisors' Theory and Experience in Supervisory Focus

Goodyear, Rodney K.; Robyak, James E.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1982.51.3.978

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, the model has been used primarily as a guide for clinical supervision of individual counseling. In the decade that followed its inception, the Discrimination Model was the subject of considerable empirical investigation, generally supporting its use within clinical supervision (Ellis & Dell, 1986;Ellis, Dell, & Good, 1988;Glidden & Tracey, 1992;Goodyear, Abadie, & Efros, 1984;Goodyear & Robyak, 1982;Stenack & Dye, 1982;Yager, Wilson, Brewer, & Kinnetz, 1989). More recently, the Discrimination Model has been incorporated into conceptual schemas for the supervision of group work (Rubel & Okech, in press), for spirituality as a focus of supervision (Polanski, 2003), and supervising for concerns regarding suicide (McGlothin, Rainey, & Kindsvatter, 2005).…”

Section: The Discrimination Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The School Counseling Supervision Model: An Extension of the Discrimination Model

Luke

Bernard

2006

Couns Edu & Supervision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well documented that clinical supervision in school settings is underutilized. One hypothesis for this situation is the lack of fit between current supervision models that emphasize the supervision of individual counseling and the multiple roles of school counselors within comprehensive school counseling programs (CSCPs). The authors propose the School Counseling Supervision Model (SCSM) as an extension of J. M. Bernard's (1979, 1997) Discrimination Model. The SCSM uses a 3 (focus of supervision) × 3 (supervisor role) × 4 (CSCP domain) matrix. Examples are provided for potential supervision interventions using the SCSM. Implications for training, practice, and research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: The Discrimination Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The School Counseling Supervision Model: An Extension of the Discrimination Model

Luke

Bernard

2006

Couns Edu & Supervision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At least one study found this to be true in practice. Goodyear and Robyak (1982) looked at the differences in beginning and more experienced supervisors, and found that the more experienced supervisors shared much of their emphasis in common, while the less experienced supervisors differed more in ways consistent with their individual theories of supervision. It seemed that with experience, the salience of a particular theory's unique style of supervision faded in favor of more common supervision elements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a Common‐factors Approach to Supervision

Morgan

Sprenkle

2007

J Marital Family Therapy

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the proliferation of supervision models, there is no evidence to suggest that any one model of supervision is in any way superior to any other. Many in the field have called for models that can bridge the various theoretical approaches to clinical supervision, and identify the essential elements of supervision. This article briefly explores the range of existing supervision models, and suggests a rationale for seeking factors common across the various models. The authors highlight the development of a new supervision model that synthesizes current thinking about supervision into three dimensions. The three dimensions are defined, and resulting supervisory roles explored. Implications for supervision practice, research, and training are discussed.

show abstract

“…That is, it logically follows that what a supervisor regards as important goals for a particular trainee will affect not only how that trainee is evaluated at the end, but also what the supervisor's focus will be during supervision sessions. This focus apparently is affected by a number of variables, including the supervisor's models of therapy (e.g., Goodyear & Robyak, 1982;Holloway, Freund, Gardner, Nelson, & Walker, 1989) and of supervision (e.g., Bernard, 1997). as well as the trainee's level of development (e.g., Stoltenberg, 19811. But there remains a need to learn yet more about the factors that affect how trainees are finally evaluated.…”

Section: Evaluation and Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Supervision: Lessons From the Literature

Goodyear

Bernard

1998

Couns Edu & Supervision

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several characteristics of supervision research create barriers to drawing inferences about which models of supervision are better than others, or even if supervision is effective in improving trainees' overall levels of therapeutic effectiveness. There are important lessons to be learned from the supervision research. This article discusses some of the lessons that were judged especially important.

show abstract

Supervisors' Theory and Experience in Supervisory Focus

Cited by 26 publications

References 2 publications

The School Counseling Supervision Model: An Extension of the Discrimination Model

The School Counseling Supervision Model: An Extension of the Discrimination Model

Toward a Common‐factors Approach to Supervision

Clinical Supervision: Lessons From the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About