Communication flow and change theory within a family therapy supervision model

Taylor, Raymond J.; Gonzales, Felix

doi:10.1007/s10591-005-4037-3

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The microcounselling models of Ivey and colleagues are also well articulated (Daniels et al 1997). Within the family therapy supervision literature, Taylor & Gonzales (2005) outline a model based on Change Theory. Finally, one of the best-known models is the interpersonal process recall (IPR) method used in psychodynamic supervision (Kagan & Kagan, 1997;Crews et al 2005;Hill et al 2015).…”

Section: Rationale For the Current Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

Video feedback in CBT supervision: review and illustration of two specific techniques

Gonsalvez

Brockman

Hill

2016

tCBT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is now expert consensus that directly observing the work of trainee therapists vs. relying upon selfreport of sessions, is critical to providing the accurate feedback required to attain a range of competencies. In spite of this expert consensus however, and the broadly positive attitudes towards video review among supervisees, video feedback methods remain under-utilized in clinical supervision. This paper outlines some of the weaknesses that affect feedback based solely on self-report methods, before introducing some of the specific benefits that video feedback methods can offer the training and supervision context. It is argued that video feedback methods fit seamlessly into CBT supervision providing direct, accessible, effective, efficient and accurate observation of the learning situation, and optimizing the chances for accurate self-reflections and planning further improvements in performance. To demonstrate the utility of video feedback techniques to CBT supervision, two specific video feedback techniques are introduced and described: the Give-me-5 technique and the I-spy technique. Case examples of CBT supervision using the two techniques are provided and explored, and guidance as to the supervision contexts in which each of the two techniques are suitable, individually, and in tandem, are outlined. Finally, best practice guidelines for the use of video feedback techniques in supervision are outlined.Abstract. There is now expert consensus that directly observing the work of trainee therapists vs. relying upon self-report of sessions, is critical to providing the accurate feedback required to attain a range of competencies. In spite of this expert consensus however, and the broadly positive attitudes towards video review among supervisees, video feedback methods remain under-utilized in clinical supervision. This paper outlines some of the weaknesses that affect feedback based solely on self-report methods, before introducing some of the specific benefits that video feedback methods can offer the training and supervision context. It is argued that video feedback methods fit seamlessly into CBT supervision providing direct, accessible, effective, efficient and accurate observation of the learning situation, and optimizing the chances for accurate self-reflections and planning further improvements in performance. To demonstrate the utility of video feedback techniques to CBT supervision, two specific video feedback techniques are introduced and described: the Give-me-5 technique and the I-spy technique. Case examples of CBT supervision using the two techniques are provided and explored, and guidance as to the supervision contexts in which each of the two techniques are suitable, individually, and in tandem, are outlined. Finally, best practice guidelines for the use of video feedback techniques in supervision are outlined.

show abstract

Section: Rationale For the Current Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

Video feedback in CBT supervision: review and illustration of two specific techniques

Gonsalvez

Brockman

Hill

2016

tCBT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social constructionists, on the other hand, privilege the socio‐cultural (macro) and immediate dialogical (micro) contexts shaping therapists’ responses in interaction with clients. They attend to how the context forms and informs interpretations or observations of therapists’ characteristics and abilities (e.g., Anderson & Swim, 1995; Taylor & Gonzales, 2005; Whiting, 2007). While some (micro‐oriented) social constructionists endorse individual agency that, for them, helps explain people’s choice and resistance to dominant social practices and forces (Hair & Fine, 2011), constructionists of both micro‐ and macro‐orientations would view competencies as part of a discursive process.…”

Section: Constructionist Critique Of Competenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Core Competencies in Social Constructionist Supervision?

Sutherland¹,

Fine²,

Ashbourne³

2012

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family therapy is moving increasingly toward evidence‐based practice and competency‐based training. This article explores what might seem to be an unlikely link between social constructionist supervision, which is based on dialogic and fluid processes of meaning‐making, and the increasing reliance on discrete core competencies in the education and training of family therapists. We propose an alternate approach to competencies for supervision with therapists in training that, among other things, invites accountability and provides evaluative props. The approach we propose is based on a set of orientations that we hope reflect the dialogic and contextual nature of social constructionist practice and supervision. These orientations consist of reflexivity and attention to power, fostering polyphony and generativity, collaborative stance, and focus on client resourcefulness. Ideas and questions for supervisors and therapists in training to address the orientations are articulated.

show abstract

“…Clinical supervision is necessary for the training and competency needs of the developing family therapist (Taylor & Gonzales, 2005). Todd and Storm (1997) define supervision as the process in which a qualified therapist monitors the professional development of supervisees and their socialization into the profession.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Live Supervision Make a Difference? A Multilevel Analysis

Bartle‐Haring

Silverthorn²,

Meyer

et al. 2009

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the benefit of live supervision on clinical training is largely unquestioned, research that examines how live supervision affects the therapeutic process is lacking. Although marriage and family therapy has embraced this method of supervision, there is little empirical evidence suggesting it "works." This study uses hierarchical linear modeling to examine how therapy cases utilizing live supervision affect perceptions of progress on the problem. Findings indicated that live supervision does appear to make a difference for therapists' ratings of progress on the problem over the course of therapy; however, clients did not rate their progress as improving to the same degree. Implications for the use of live supervision as well as limitations of the study are discussed.

show abstract

Communication flow and change theory within a family therapy supervision model

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Video feedback in CBT supervision: review and illustration of two specific techniques

Video feedback in CBT supervision: review and illustration of two specific techniques

Core Competencies in Social Constructionist Supervision?

Does Live Supervision Make a Difference? A Multilevel Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About