Setting the stage for an evidence-based model of psychotherapy supervisor development in clinical psychology.

Abstract

In this study, we use a "best evidence synthesis" (BES) approach to help build an evidence-based model of psychotherapy supervisor development. First, a definition of psychotherapy supervisor development was created using Milne's (2007) framework of 4 criteria necessary for a useful definition. This definition combined Watkins' (2012a) definition of psychotherapy supervisor development with elements from Falender et al. 's (2004) statement on defining competencies in clinical supervision. Second, the resultant definition was used to guide a systematic review, using 4 databases (PsycInfo, MedLine, ERIC, and CINAHL), to assess how researchers have investigated psychotherapy supervisor development over the last 2 decades (1994 -2012). Third, a BES was undertaken, by applying a qualitative-constructivist methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) to analyse and review data collected. Twelve empirical studies on the topic of psychotherapy supervisor development provided a focused and interpretable dataset of the extant literature. Results show moderate to good support for our proposed definition, but only modest support for the efficacy of psychotherapy supervisor training in the development of psychotherapy supervision competencies. Based on the BES, a basic evidence-based model of psychotherapy supervisor development is proposed. Discussion highlights main findings as well as areas for growth. Implications for research relating to psychotherapy supervisor development as well as standards of practice for the training of psychotherapy supervisors are presented.

Science of Learning: Evidence‐Based Teaching in the Clinical Supervision Classroom

“…The broader goal would be to examine whether, and how, ScoL-oriented supervision instruction contributes to effectiveness of supervisors and, subsequently, their counselors. Such studies might help address critiques of supervision training research as "unfocused and atheoretical" (Gosselin et al, 2015, p. 388) and lacking in rigor (e.g., Gosselin et al, 2015;Watkins, 2012). Application and examination of ScoL principles in other supervision contexts also might be fruitful, including supervision of supervision, supervision training for master's-level practitioners, as well as supervision practice itself.…”

Training confident school-based consultants: The role of course content, process, and supervision.

“…Preliminary analyses indicated that the unweighted and weighted composite scores yielded comparable scales in terms of kurtosis and skew. Although both approaches yielded similar results, the weighted approach captured the differences in supervision between graduate student supervisors and professional supervisors; that is, in addition to other variables such as training, competency to supervise develops over time and with professional experience (see research syntheses by Gosselin, Barker, Kogan, Pomerleau, & d′Ioro, 2015, and Watkins, 2012). Specific supervision strategies were first weighted and then summed to create composite scores, with higher scores indicating more supervision experiences ( M = 15.18, SD = 6.78, range = 2–36 out of 48).…”

Signature Pedagogy and Beyond: Reflections on Baltrinic and Wachter Morris (2020)

“…Using Shulman's (2005b) signature pedagogy language, most supervision research to date is focused on surface (interventions supervisors use) and implicit (values addressed in supervision, such as gatekeeping and cultural responsiveness) dimensions, with much less attention on its deep structures (e.g., pedagogical foundations). Indeed, despite a large body of supervision literature in counseling journals, research about both supervision practice and supervision training rarely are grounded in pedagogy (Bernard & Luke, 2015;Borders, 2019), not unlike supervision literature in other professions (e.g., Gosselin et al, 2015;Olds & Hawkins, 2014). Perhaps ironically, more work is needed to understand the pedagogy underlying counseling's signature pedagogy.…”