The concept of double stimulation provides a framework for understanding the promotion of volitional action. In this article the concept is applied "in the wild", to analyse professional practice in parenting services for parents with young children at risk. We answer questions about (i) how concepts of double stimulation account for features of professional-parent interactions and what new insights are offered by this, and (ii) how double stimulation in the wild relates to the processes specified in a recently articulated model of double stimulation, and wider concepts of expansive learning. Examples of interactions between a professional (nurse) and a new mother illustrate how an absence of auxiliary stimuli may trap parents in conflicted situations. We found that in promoting double stimulation, professionals work simultaneously in two dialectically related fields: getting the parent to act using new auxiliary stimuli and getting them to think differently about the object. Such work may unfold in non-linear and discontinuous fashion and places complex demands on professionals.

Purpose Clinical supervision is a crucial workplace practice for professional learning and development. Research is needed to investigate in detail what happens in supervision to understand how this practice contributes to learning. This paper aims to examine how professionals work with knowledge and navigate epistemic challenges in working with problems of practice. Design/methodology/approach Three pairs of psychologists audio-recorded five consecutive supervision sessions and were interviewed twice during that time. Analysis considered supervision as a site of emergent learning, focusing on what was discussed and how problems were worked on, whether as epistemic objects (open-ended, aimed at generating new insights) or by using an approach to knowledge objects that focused more directly on what to do next. Findings One pair consistently adopted an epistemic object approach, while another was consistently more action-oriented, focused on knowledge objects. The third pair used both approaches, sometimes expanding the object with a view to gaining insight and understanding, while at other times focusing on next steps and future action. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to study clinical supervision in terms of how knowledge work is done. Foregrounding the epistemic dimensions of supervision, it reveals previously unexplored but consequential differences in how knowledge is worked with and produced as supervisory pairs discuss complex issues of practice.

This article examines how transformative agency arises in families where parents are struggling with aspects of caring for young children. The mechanisms of how volitional action develops into transformative agency in everyday settings are not well understood. A fine-grained analysis of change is presented in the case of a parent who resolved difficulties relating to her daughter's feeding. This case is situated within a broader dataset relating to diverse Australian parenting support services. Through double stimulation, parents used multiple auxiliary tools to construct new motives, enabling them to expand understandings and develop new possibilities for action. Evidence of transformative agency was apparent in longer trajectories in which the conditions of parenting were transformed. Relationships between expansive learning, double stimulation and transformative agency are conceptualised dialectically, offering fresh insights into the dynamics of transformative agency 'in the wild'.

Clinical supervision is crucial for the professional learning and development of practitioners in many fields. While many have articulated what should happen in clinical supervision, and evaluative research has been undertaken, little is known about the details of what actually happens in clinical supervision. This study addresses this gap, focusing on how professionals (psychologists) work with knowledge while collaboratively working through complex problems of practice. Six psychologists (three pairs) participated, audio-recording five supervision sessions, and giving two interviews each. Transcripts were analysed to uncover what was discussed and how problems were approached. Four ways of working with knowledge (epistemic practices) were found: recontextualising practice knowledge, recontextualising theoretical knowledge, story-telling, and asking expansive questions. These highlight important features of professional supervision practice that have not previously been approached theoretically as epistemic practices.