Responding to Remediation and Gatekeeping Challenges in Supervision

Abstract

Thirty faculty in randomly selected Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education (COAMFTE) programs representing four geographical regions of the United States were asked to respond to a survey that included seven brief vignettes depicting gatekeeping and remediation challenges supervisors may face when working with therapists-in-training. Research participants were asked to select from among a range of 17 response options and were also asked to provide a rationale for the selection of their responses. The response rate for the mailed survey was 34%. Telephone interviews were conducted with three respondents who had provided especially detailed responses to the open-ended portions of the mailed survey and who also volunteered to be questioned regarding how supervision decisions are made. Results support the conclusion that COAMFTE faculty take their gatekeeping function seriously as they balance commitments to multiple stakeholders. When presented with hypothetical "bare-bones" vignettes, the supervisors in our study consistently recommended talking with the student in order to more fully understand the context of the student's performance problem before deciding how to proceed. Supervisors recommended a variety of remediation efforts, but reserved the most severe consequences, such as probation, dismissal, and filing an ethics complaint, for the vignette involving dishonesty and lack of personal integrity.

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Dismissing Students From MFT Training Programs

“…Students can create a dialogue with faculty about any questions or clarifications in their program's code of conduct policies. Classmates also have a role to play when it comes to addressing unethical or inappropriate behavior on the part of colleagues (Russell et al, 2007). In order for students to increase their awareness around this role, it is up to faculty members and supervisors to incorporate these discussions into ethics courses throughout the supervision process and to establish a culture in the program that encourages students to take on this same gatekeeping role for the profession.…”

“…However, based on the minimal amount of research done on this topic in the MFT field (e.g., Russell et al, 2007;Russell & Peterson, 2003), it appears there is a general lack of concrete guidance for dismissal decisions, which may lead to difficulty in negotiating this process for faculty members and supervisors. This paper is written to increase discussion around the student dismissal process, as called for by previous work (Russell et al, 2007).…”

“…However, based on the minimal amount of research done on this topic in the MFT field (e.g., Russell et al, 2007;Russell & Peterson, 2003), it appears there is a general lack of concrete guidance for dismissal decisions, which may lead to difficulty in negotiating this process for faculty members and supervisors. This paper is written to increase discussion around the student dismissal process, as called for by previous work (Russell et al, 2007). The article will not discuss the process of identifying a trainee who is not suitable for the field because this information has been published elsewhere (Russell, et al 2007), but rather, offers strategies on how to dismiss an impaired student from the program.…”

“…While rates of student impairment in clinical training programs are generally reported to be quite low-less than 5% (Forrest, Elman, Gizara, & Vacha-Haase, 1999;Olkin &Gaughen, 1991)-Russell, DuPree, Beggs, Peterson, andAnderson (2007) found that for many programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education (COAMFTE), the threshold for faculty members' decisions to dismiss students is relatively high; just 17% of students deemed to be impaired by their faculty are actually dismissed from the programs (Russell & Peterson, 2003).…”

“…This paper is written to increase discussion around the student dismissal process, as called for by previous work (Russell et al, 2007). The article will not discuss the process of identifying a trainee who is not suitable for the field because this information has been published elsewhere (Russell, et al 2007), but rather, offers strategies on how to dismiss an impaired student from the program. For the sake of this article, the students we are referring to are those individuals whose actions to warrant dismissal have been egregious and unethical, or those who, despite multiple interventions and considerable time invested in attempts at remediation, have been either unable or unwilling to make the necessary adjustments that would demonstrate they could develop into competent MFT professionals.…”