Historical development of supervision knowledge
Author(s)
Mo, Kitty Yuen Han
Date Issued
2017
Conference
25th IFTA World Family Therapy Congress
Abstract
Supervision was a highly dynamic and multi-faceted discipline which demanded supervisors to fulfill various expectations and responsibilities. This presentation discussed the development of knowledge in social work supervision throughout histories. Social work supervision had long been defined as an educational process for social workers to maintain the quality of service (Robinson, 1949). Supervisors were expected to support supervisee professional development, facilitate the self-growth of supervisee and develop a reflective practice. Since Kadushin’s (1976) title, Supervision in Social Work had placed the focus on the practice principles and techniques of administrative supervision, educational supervision, supportive supervision and evaluation which was applicable to a wide variety of settings. Themes or trends of supervision were identified through a literature review. The earliest literatures focused on the clinical purpose of supervision, diverted attention to enhance casework skills of their supervisees. Numerous models of supervision had been established and applied in 1900s. For example, Kadushin’s model (1992) of supervision functions; Shulman (1992) advocated interactional model of supervision; Tsui and Ho (1998) developed a culturally sensitive model of social work supervision; and Kaiser’s (1997) model of supervisory relationship. The different models were of equal importance and they were all used in ways that guided understanding and action. The 2000s were, for the most part, as supervision was affected by different forces. Unlike many past decades, the researchers took a slightly different approach by holding that culture, racism, feminism, political context had made an effect to define supervision and to make it as a new operation. Factors such as managerialism, professional standards and practice accountability affected the practice of social work supervision deeply. Therefore, a multi-faceted approach to knowledge building was being advocated. It is our view that, to advance knowledge in social work supervision, the development needs to establish a) a knowledge base in measuring supervision influences on service outcomes; b) knowledge to evaluate the effectiveness of various supervision models; c) knowledge for contemporary social work practices especially by drawing from different disciples; and d) Consider the ways of
capturing, sharing and using knowledge in supervision more effectively.
SFU Affiliated Publication
Yes
Availability at SFU Library
No database links found.