Abstract

Understanding how different forms of supervision support good social work practice and improve outcomes for people who use services is nearly impossible without reliable and valid evaluative measures. Yet the question of how best to evaluate the quality of supervision in different contexts is a complicated and as-yet-unsolved challenge. In this study, we observed 12 social work supervisors in a simulated supervision session offering support and guidance to an actor playing the part of an inexperienced social worker facing a casework-related crisis. A team of researchers analyzed these sessions using a customized skills-based coding framework. In addition, 19 social workers completed a questionnaire about their supervision experiences as provided by the same 12 supervisors. According to the coding framework, the supervisors demonstrated relatively modest skill levels, and we found low correlations among different skills. In contrast, according to the questionnaire data, supervisors had relatively high skill levels, and we found high correlations among different skills. The findings imply that although self-report remains the simplest way to evaluate supervision quality, other approaches are possible and may provide a different perspective. However, developing a reliable independent measure of supervision quality remains a noteworthy challenge.

Highlights

  • Supervision is widely considered an essential form of support for good social work practice

  • Using a Self‐Report Questionnaire Based on the Same Framework, How Do Social Workers Assess the Quality of Their Supervision Generally?

  • Considering the same dimensions collected with the social work questionnaire, average scores were relatively high (Fig. 2)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Supervision is widely considered an essential form of support for good social work practice. Clinical Social Work Journal (2018) 46:350–360 information directly; self-report includes any method involving asking participants about their feelings, views, attitudes, beliefs, and experiences (Lavrakas 2008). People find it hard to assess themselves or others accurately, reliably, and consistently in relation to specific characteristics or competencies (Gurbanov 2016). The use of self-report methods to evaluate quality and outcomes is further complicated when the same respondents are asked to provide more than one type of data, as often happens in supervision and worker-outcomes studies. The use of self-report methods to evaluate quality and outcomes is further complicated when the same respondents are asked to provide more than one type of data, as often happens in supervision and worker-outcomes studies. Mor Barak et al (2009) summarized the problem as follows:

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call