EJSW Supervision 2010

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252629885
Field practice supervision of social work

students: A psychodynamic view on the
emotional context of the process and the
setting during the client assessment phase
Article in European Journal of Social Work December 2010

Impact Factor: 0.58 DOI: 10.1080/13691451003603448
CITATIONS READS
6 57
1 author:
George Karpetis
Flinders University
14 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: George Karpetis
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 16 May 2016
This article was downloaded by: [HEAL-Link Consortium]
On: 16 December 2010
Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 929655569]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
European Journal of Social Work

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713421612
Field practice supervision of social work students: a psychodynamic view

on the emotional context of the process and the setting during the client
assessment phase
George Karpetis
First published on: 07 April 2010
To cite this Article Karpetis, George(2010) 'Field practice supervision of social work students: a psychodynamic view on
the emotional context of the process and the setting during the client assessment phase', European Journal of Social
Work, 13: 4, 503 522, First published on: 07 April 2010 (iFirst)
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/13691451003603448
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691451003603448
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
European Journal of Social Work
Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2010, pp. 503522
Field practice supervision of social

work students: a psychodynamic view
on the emotional context of the
process and the setting during the
client assessment phase
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 13:00 16 December 2010
George Karpetis
This empirical study is a psychodynamic view of the supervision setting and key
emotional parameters during the client assessment process. The supervisor, through
reflectivity, studied his own supervision practice with undergraduate social work students
during their first field practice placement. By using supervision critical incidents, he
formulated the basic characteristics of the supervision setting, and followed it up with
discussion on the key emotional parameters of the supervision process. Particular
emphasis was laid on psychodynamic understanding of the supervision process and the
consequences of supervisors interventions for both supervisees and clients. The emotional
context of the supervision process during the client assessment phase was predominantly
shaped by four emotional parameters: (i) the supervisor identifying with both client and
supervisee needs; (ii) the supervisor concentrating on exclusively the educational
character of supervision by avoiding dealing with students personality issues; (iii) the
Correspondence to: Dr George Karpetis, Lecturer in Social Work, Department of Social Work, Technological
Educational Institution (TEI) of Athens, 274 Thevon Street, Egaleo, Athens 12241, Greece. Tel.: 302105385686;
Email: karpetis@teiath.gr
ISSN 1369-1457 (print)/ISSN 1468-2664 (online) # 2010 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/13691451003603448
504 G. Karpetis
supervisor dealing with client and supervisee transferences to the setting; and (iv) the
supervisor setting and safeguarding the supervision limits and boundaries.
Keywords: Supervision; Student; Social Work; Psychodynamic; Assessment

Defining of the key terms

Social work supervision is broadly defined as the process by which a skilled person
(supervisor) helps a less skilled person (supervisee) with ideas and theoretical
knowledge transferable to practice, in order to facilitate clients receiving the highest
quality services possible (Itzhaky, 2000).
The history of social work supervision seems to have developed parallel to the
evolution of the profession and the corresponding theories of practice adopted in
each developmental phase. There are 130 social work practice theories (Munson,
2002), but there is no consensus on which one should be considered the most
appropriate (Montigny, 2007). As a result, there is neither a single unifying theory
(ABECSW, 2004) nor an empirically grounded supervision theory (Tsui, 1997).
Likewise, the helping professions use numerous practice and supervision theories/
models (Bruce & Austin, 2002) embodying divergent definitions of their meanings,
methods and purposes (Rich, 1993). Overall, the vagueness, and complexity of
supervision seem to be the result of multiplicity of the models and theories used,
various interpretations of the term supervision model and the absence of detailed
process research studies.
Supervision has received little attention in social work research, even though it is
characterized as one of the most significant factors in job satisfaction and a
European Journal of Social Work 505
precondition for the delivery of quality services to clients (Kadushin & Harkness,
2002). Empirical studies are particularly scarce (Munson, 2002) and limited to
evaluating supervisees perceptions of the supervision process rather than its impact
and outcome on clients (Shulman, 1997). Correspondingly, the psychological context
of social work supervision has not been discussed or explored in the social work
literature (Tsui, 2005). There has been little theory or model building production
(Tsui & Ho, 1997), as many supervision training programs focus on adult training
theory, on building practice skills and on meeting concrete goals, rather than on the
process of building the supervision relationship (Bennett, 2008).
In Europe, the increased collective European Union identity*expressed through
the upcoming EU Constitution and the Bologna Convention*brought about a
common ground in the tertiary level education structure in most member states.
Exchange programs and the EU funded research projects also influence social work
education, a vital part of which is field practice supervision. The picture of European
social work research on field practice supervision, though, does not appear to
differentiate from the aforementioned international one.
Additionally, psychodynamic theories impact directly on European social work
curricula (Trevithick, 2003) through writings on psychosocial theory, psychosocial
social policy, psychosocial research methods and psychosocial social work*
particularly in the UK*indicating the pervasive influence of psychoanalytical
thought in the European social science (Frost, 2008). Psychodynamic social work
practice in particular, in which the relationship is considered the main vehicle for
understanding and intervening in client problems, appears to be remarkably
consistent with many of the principles that inform the nature of the relationship
between practitioners and clients across Europe (Adams et al., 2000).
Various supervision models appear in the social work literature (Tsui, 2005).
Among them, the following are worth mentioning: individual and group student
supervision (Arkin et al., 1999), the practitioner individual or group supervision/
consultation (Shulman, 1997), the clinical (ABECSW, 2004), the generic approach,
the mandated, the voluntary approach, the role systems approach (which introduces
an equal collaborative relationship between the participants through sharing tasks
and roles), the feminist approach (which criticizes the authority-based models) and
the task-centred approach.
Historically, the educational function of supervision*also called clinical super-
vision (Coleman, 2003)*has a semi-therapeutic tone and is aimed at exploring the
way the internal world and personality structure of the supervisee affect his practice
(Hamilton, 1954). Kadushin (1974) says that the therapeutic/educational attitude of
the supervisor is felt to be intrusive by students, who sense that the boundaries
between themselves and the supervisor are blurred. He therefore introduces the
supportive function of supervision that aims at helping the supervisees in dealing
with practice stress and blockages. Kadushin further maintains that the role of the
supervisor is to uncover the causes of the supervisees stress and connect it to his
reactions. He defines stress as the result of unfamiliar new learning material, the
506 G. Karpetis
accompanying experiences, the increased caseload and the powerful emotions

engendered by client problems. However, the terms stress and powerful emotions
can be hardly confined to the supervision theory/model alone, because they both
presuppose theories of human development and psychopathology.
The primary and ultimate objectives of group supervision are the same as those of
individual supervision (Tsui, 2005). In group supervision, periodic meetings between
the supervisor and supervisee aim to advance the supervisees understanding of his/
her professional self, of the clients and of the services offered. Advantages of group
supervision are many: it facilitates better coping with practice conflicts and problems;
peers assistance creates a containing and supportive environment; group members
acquire a sense of belonging and security; feelings of isolation are reduced (through
realization of the universality of experience) and so is the dependence of the
supervisee on the supervisor (Arkin et al., 1999). Student group supervision aims at
evaluating the supervisees progress toward meeting certain requirements for

successful course completion, and ultimately graduation (Gregurek, 2007).
Based on the fundamental ideas of psychoanalytic theory and its developments
(e.g. object relations theories), psychodynamics or dynamics refers to the systematic
study and knowledge of mental forces and motives that affect human behavior, as
well as the functional primacy of emotions (Rustin, 2003). Behavior is considered the
outcome of past experiences, genetic constitutional factors and the current reality/
environment (Encyclopaedia of Social Work, 1997). Psychodynamic theory is the first
to use relationship as a tool for understanding and treating clients emotional
problems. Nowadays, although most supervision theories emphasize relationship as
the key practice component (Kadushin & Harkness, 2002) and the literature abounds
with books and articles on psychodynamic treatment, little has appeared on the
psychodynamic model of supervision in the helping professions and much less in
social work (Ganzer & Ornstein, 2004).
A therapeutic component of the psychodynamic approach to supervision, called
parallel process (Ekstein & Wallerstein, 1958), received great attention in the
literature. In parallel process, the supervisee*owing to unconscious identification
with clients*replicates the clients difficulties in his/her relationship with the
supervisor (Stewart, 2004). The arguments for and against its use pertain to the right
of the supervisor to discuss personality issues, the transference, or the defenses of the
supervisee. Some authors argue that therapeutic aims should not be transplanted into
supervision whose aim is to teach professional skills (Lane et al., 1998), and the main
responsibility of the supervisor is protection of the clients interests (Page & Wosket,
2001). Others consider therapy issues an integral part of supervision (Ganzer &
Ornstein, 2004; Stewart, 2004). Most researchers, however, think that supervision
should deal with trainee personality problems only when they affect relationships with
clients (Cooper & Lesser, 2002).
The present case-study attempts to describe from a psychodynamic point of view the
supervision setting and the key emotional parameters of student social work
supervision during the client assessment process. Assessment is a distinct process in
social work practice and a prerequisite*whether it is consciously applied, or not*for

planning and conducting any social work intervention with clients. Assessment is
differentiated from diagnosis*which may result from assessment*as it describes the
symptoms that support a particular diagnosis and helps practitioners to understand the
clients psychosocial history and resources (Hepworth et al., 2005). As a result of
the multiplicity of social work theories, the suggested social work assessment skills are
contested, with considerable variety between social work textbooks, resulting in diverse
advice given to readers as to what information they should be collecting (Crisp et al.,
2006).
Since students need opportunities to apply theoretical learning on assessment
(Crisp et al., 2004) and supervisors need tools to research their own practice, a
research attempt on field practice supervision, overlayed by a clear theoretical
framework (psychodynamic) during the client assessment phase, has the potential to
become both a useful and a fruitful experience for students and supervisors alike.
The practitioner-researcher (Shaw, 2005) studies through reflectivity (Fook, 2001)
his own supervision practice with a group of undergraduate social work students,
who are on their first field practice placement. The practitioner studied*ex post
facto*the process recordings of the 12 group supervision sessions (written right after
the end of each session), as well as the supervisees process recordings of the client
interviews.
So called practitioner research aims to understand ones own practice and improve
its effectiveness (Gibbs, 2001). The term reflective practice (Schon, 1983) refers to a
process of reflection upon professional practice that leads to practice improvement.
Reflexivity is the ability to recognize the influence of the researchers whole self and
context on every aspect of the research, as well as the ability to use this awareness in
the research act itself (Fook, 2001). One mode of reflection, the process reflection*
which is followed in the present study*draws on psychodynamic theory and focuses
on the unconscious as well as the conscious aspects of practice through emphasizing
the practitioners unavoidable impact on the emotional content of interactions.
Reflexivity in the supervisory relationship refers to the containment of the
practitioners anxieties, generated by field practice (Ruch, 2007).
There are arguments against and in support of the practitioners reflective research
on practice. It is characterized as untheorized and therefore an impediment to a
critical engagement with the phenomena in question (White, 2001). Such an
argument does not apply in the present study though, because it is directed by a clear
theoretical background*the psychodynamic. Others argue that it is not possible for
a practitioner to research himself (Padgett, 2004). An answer to this argument is
Devereuxs (1967, in Giami, 2001) view, who questioned the objectivity of the
researcher, stating that the researcher is also observed by the research subject. He
further noted that in order for knowledge to be generated, any research methodology
tool should contribute to the reduction of the researchers anxiety. He labeled
researcher countertransference as the researchers bias toward the research subject,
the research tools, and himself.
508 G. Karpetis
Finally, it is argued that practitioner research devalues ethical standards, like

informed consent and confidentiality (Shaw, 2005). In the current study, the
supervisor informed students from the beginning of the supervision process, on
the necessity for every practitioner to research and evaluate his/her own practice. He
particularly commented on his intention to research the present supervision practice
for evaluation and dissemination purposes (so that more students and supervisors
will learn from our own supervision experience); each participants consent was
further asked in order for their own contribution to be anonymously included in the
study (Fogel & Ellison, 2005). All students readily consented.
Practitioner reflective research*I think*has the potential to offer an effective
answer to recent research studies, which indicate that social work practitioners apply
social work research findings in a rather limited extent, possibly due to their reduced
quality, accessibility, and applicability to field practice (Trevithick, 2007).
The basic characteristics of the current supervision setting (the academic

institution, the group of students, the field practice agencies, the supervisees and
the supervisor) will therefore be initially portrayed. The key emotional issues of a
psychodynamic approach to the supervision process are afterwards presented
through instances from student and supervisor critical incidents, which according
to Lister and Crisp (2007) constitute a useful tool for understanding social work
supervision and practice. Particular emphasis will be laid on the psychodynamic way
of the supervisors thinking and intervening.
The supervision setting

The supervision took place in a state higher education institution, the Technological
Educational Institution of Athens, Department of Social Work, in Greece, where
students (during their four-year social work training) undertake two field practice
placement courses across their fifth and sixth semesters, on a three-days-per-week
basis. The final six month full-time practice placement takes place during the eighth
semester. Students are placed in either private or state funded social and health care
agencies, which deal with various biopsychosocial problems of children, adults and
the aged. A social work practitioner from each field practice agency is appointed as
the field practice manager to assign and attend to students day-to-day work. The
supervisor is an academic staff member, who*for three hours each week*meets the
student group, which consisted of six (four female, two male) students, aged between
20 and 26 years old. All the supervisees were in the fifth semester of their studies and
they had no previous field practice or supervision experience.
In the beginning of the practice placement, the supervisor collaborated with the
agencys field practice manager and the student to formulate the contract on the field
practice aims and purposes. Accordingly, a three-party meeting*called the interim
assessment*took place in the middle of the semester, where students strengths and
weaknesses were pointed out so that they could improve on their weaknesses.
The current supervision model, in which the supervisor evaluates the students
performance in the field on a 110 scale (with 5 as the pass mark) and makes
decisions on whether required standards have been reached, could affect the overall
nature of supervision and the dynamics of the relationships. Due to his status power,
the supervisors judgments might be biased and the supervisees might fear to share/
trust their inner reality, for fear of failing the course. In the current study, the
supervisors bias/countertransference are expected to be prevented from acting out
through the supervisors extended supervised field practice experience, his former
experience in supervising social work students, his undergraduate and postgraduate
social work training, his psychotherapy training, and his personal psychoanalysis.
The evaluation mark mostly reflects the students ability to emotionally engage in
the work with clients. Whenever the supervisor allows for trust to prevail*mainly
through containing students fears* the students become increasingly willing to
expose their practice mistakes and undertake an emotionally rewarding adult role,
according to which they view their mistakes as an opportunity for learning (not as
persecutory). Such an emotional situation necessitates that idealization of both
students own self and of the supervisor is progressively reduced and the defensive
projections of the students own emotionally painful internal parts, to either the
supervisor or the clients, progressively disappear. Such an experience is expected to
reduce or even extinguish the emotional burden of the mark itself, as well as the fear
(usually stemming from unconscious guilt) of a complete or partial failure in the
practice placement course.
As the practitioner (here the supervisor) is a part and tool of the case study (Fook,
2001), his supervision practice is thought to have been influenced by his training and
professional experience. The supervisor, a postgraduate in social work, underwent
clinical training in psychodynamic social work practice in the Tavistock Clinic
(London, Great Britain) and concurrently worked for his PhD on clinical social
work. He fulfilled the two-year introductory training in psychoanalytic child
psychotherapy and had the experience of personal psychoanalysis with a member
of the International Psychoanalytic Association. He worked full time for four years in
a deinstitutionalization hostel for handicapped and/or emotionally disturbed
children, for eight years in a Community Mental Health Centre for Children and
Adolescents (Child Guidance Clinic) and for 10 years (part-time) in a Therapeutic
Unit with families of psychotic and autistic children. All three institutions operated
on an interdisciplinary team basis and their scientific director was either a training
psychoanalytic psychotherapist, or a psychoanalyst. The supervisor finally had a five-
year field practice supervision experience with social work students.
During the first supervision session, the supervisor informed the students of the
content of their meetings. Each student would present a case for up to 30 minutes and
a group discussion would follow. The supervisor, through time allotment, intended
to indirectly convey the message that practice issues and difficulties would have to be
presented and could be dealt with within the given time limits, and also that all students
were of equal importance to him (enhancing positive transference). A list of
510 G. Karpetis
bibliographic references on human normal development and psychopathology, as well

as on relationship building in case and group work practice, was provided. Students
were asked to present their work in the form of an interview with a client, or an hours
observation of the institutional dynamics in the field practice placement. No specific
direction was provided on what this interview or observation should be, so as to allow
students to choose (even defensively) their most interesting or emotionally intense
experience.
At the beginning of their placement, students were expected to gain observation
experience so that they could begin to understand the way emotions are involved in
practice and unavoidably affect practitioner actions, as described by Trowell and
Milles (1991). The ability to hold on to the role of observer is an essential skill for
social workers and can be learned to a large extent (McMahon & Farnfield, 2004).
Field practice observation lasted for an hour and involved participant observation of
a practitioners case or observation of institutional dynamics, as described by

Menzies-Lyth (1992).
Anxious and defensive students considered observation unimportant and a loss of
time, because they were in a hurry to jump onto cases. They accordingly characterized
some field practice agencies as less important and interesting than others. The
supervisor replied by way of commenting on ethical issues (all clients and their
problems are of equal importance), on the developmental causes of client problems
(emotional and environmental) and on the need for students to understand individual
and institutional dynamics, irrespective of the problem type or client age group. He
additionally talked about probable student avoidance manoeuvres in dealing with the
emotionally painful client problems and how some students might partly distrust
the supervisor (who sent them there) with the fear that he might not be caring enough.
The supervisors reply aimed at strengthening the students ability to delay gratifica-
tions (Schamess, 2006b) and consequently improve their professional ego functioning.
Students were advised to take process notes right after the end of each practice
interview, so that they could remember most of what was said or what happened
(Midgley, 2006). Taking process notes is the best method for unpacking the process
(Lane et al., 1998). It safeguards both the supervisor and the supervisee from jumping
to premature conclusions and helps them understand the facts and interactions of the
case. In the context of psychodynamic thinking, the content of clients speech
represents thoughts and emotions that direct clients actions.
During each supervision session, the students presented their cases/interviews in
turn (Ford & Jones, 1987). The presentations were followed by group discussions,
where all group members could express their opinions and ask questions on the
material presented. The supervisor, emotionally identifying himself with both the
client and the supervisee, helped the students understand the emotions and motives
that led to the clients actions and the problems that arose thereby. Thus, the
dynamics of the case unfolded, facilitating the follow-up client assessment. Moreover,
the supervisor commented on the problems of the environment that contributed to
exaggeration of the clients problems.
For creating a sense of security and trust (positive transference feelings), the
supervisees were told that the supervisor had the overall responsibility for their
fieldwork practice (including the correction of any possible practice mistakes). They
were encouraged to ask the supervisor any questions they may feel like and were also
informed that they would be evaluated according to their willingness and capacity
to learn from experience and practice mistakes. In that way, the supervisor attempted
to prevent students from utilizing the manic defenses of omnipotence and
omniscience*those are in fact the main defenses that supervisees use (Stewart,
2004).
An anxious student, for example, was unable to write the process notes because she
could not remember anything of the first interview she had with a client.
Responding to her anxiety, the supervisor commented that sometimes it might be
emotionally difficult to engage in client problems, because they stir anxiety and fears,
which might block someones ability to think and remember. He prompted her to
write as much as she could remember and suggested that she read Salzberger-
Wittenbergs (1970) book on Psychoanalytic Insight and Relationships, which offers
a vivid presentation of the practitioners wishes and fears before and after entering
the helping process. As a result, the student*although emotionally vulnerable*
gradually managed herself to comply with the requirements of the supervision.
Remembering, in psychodynamic terms, is connected to the way one deals with
anxiety, which*if intense*deactivates the remembering of and thinking about
emotionally painful/traumatic issues. Supervision predictably evokes anxiety because
students are emotionally affected by patients problems and the supervisor
unavoidably represents a symbolic parent figure (Schamess, 2006a).
The supervisor identified himself with both the client and the supervisee needs and
directed his interventions towards students relationships with him, the clients, and
other practitioners. Student personality issues were not the subject of supervision*
especially in that group setting*nor did anyone ask for it. Even though every student
had the chance to indirectly realize and deal with his difficulties during supervision,
the setting (despite containing therapeutic relationship characteristics) was not in a
position to offer therapy, because its means and purposes were incompatible with
those of psychodynamic psychotherapy. Therefore, every supervisee practice problem
was characterized as a practice mistake that needed reparation. During the interim
assessment, when*despite the supervisors warnings*practice mistakes kept on
being repeated, the supervisee was cautioned of the possibility of his/her failure in the
course. Nonetheless, he/she was given a chance to think about the personal/emotional
causes of such situations and decide whether he/she wanted to deal with them or not.
The supervisor, for example, informed a student, during the interim assessment, of
her competitive behavior that resulted in collaboration difficulties with inter
disciplinary practice team members and the supervisor (refusal to use his practice
suggestions) at the expense of clients interests. It was made clear to her that she was
expected to modify her professional stance. She gradually managed to change her
attitude and improved her relationship with clients and practitioners. The same
512 G. Karpetis
student, after the completion of her social work training, asked the supervisor to
suggest someone he trusted for her personal psychotherapy in order to become a
better social worker. The supervisees resistance to accepting the requirements of the
professional role recalls Itzhaky and Ribners (1998) view on a supervisees resistance
to secondary socialization, which is unconsciously felt as a betrayal to the primary
socialization imposed by a supervisees parents in the past. Whenever the supervisor
imposes the demands of reality, he contributes to the strengthening of the
supervisees reality testing (Schamess, 2006b); therefore to his/her improved ego
functioning and professional role.
Key emotional parameters of the client assessment phase

Despite divergent theoretical underpinnings and the lack of consensus on its content,
assessment is considered a core professional skill in social work education and
practice (Crisp et al., 2006). Insistence on assessment during supervision provides

a clear enough picture of the client biopsychosocial problems in his environment.
According to Hollis (1970), assessment includes understanding of the clients
problem and the situation where it was created.
During assessment, students were expected to assist the clients in delineating the
causes of their problems, that is the problem situation and the relationships involved.
Since in psychodynamic thinking, relationships are thought to be a predominant
cause and remedy of a clients problems, students were expected to understand the
way those relationships are shaped and developed. Such a developmental view of the
causes of a clients problems is based on research pioneered by Spitz (1945) and
Bowlby (1958), who emphasized the importance of a childs early development to his/
her later mental health, as well as the consequences of early deprivation to later
pathological parenting behaviors. So, the completion of a client psychosocial history
provided an understanding of the quality of the clients primary relationships (mainly
with parental figures), the consequent shaping of his/her personality structure, his/
her following life choices and ultimately his/her current problem situation.
During the client assessment process, the clients problems were depicted in the
form of deficiencies in social role functioning, as described in the Person-in-
Environment System (Karls & Wandrei, 1999), which offers a holistic assessment of
the clients biopsychosocial situation and assists practitioners in identifying client
problems in social roles, environments (that harbor or accelerate the clients
problem), and in mental and physical health. Assessment of a clients strengths and
assets was also included, because they constitute an integral part of professional social
work identity (Cowger & Snively, 2002; Brandell, 2004) and reflect the clients ego
strength (Cooper & Lesser, 2002). The overall assessment was also expected to take
the form of a genogram (family tree) and a sociogram (Hartman, 1978) depicting the
clients relationships with members of his/her family and the environment.
At the very beginning of the assessment, students were expected to inform their
clients on the approximate length of time, the frequency and the number of sessions
(usually up to four) needed for completing the assessment. The implicit idea behind
conveying such information to clients was to highlight the need to understand the
problems before acting*a stance which reflects the ego ability to withstand and deal
with reality demands.
Important supervision subjects appeared to be the issues of time, place and
clients request. Time reflects reality demands (e.g. development, ageing and
separations) with their accompanying*often*painful emotions (Meltzer, 1967).
People with a weak ego have difficulty in keeping up with reality requirements,
because they are overburdened with their emotional needs. Time is important in
terms of the beginning, the duration and the end of an interview. Prescheduled
appointments set the time boundaries and safeguard the professional setting. Setting
deviations that impede practice are caused by an interview held ahead of schedule
(the client is allowed to intrude into workers personal time), the commencement of
an interview later than the schedule (the client might feel overprotected), the ending
of an interview earlier than the schedule (the client might feel unwanted by the
professional) and the ending of an interview later than the schedule (the client might
feel that the worker cannot stand separations).
Countertransference feelings (unresolved past emotional issues) appear to be the
cause for setting violations to set in. Inexperienced young students, fearful and guilty
of working with clients, might retreat to setting violations. A supervisee reported an
incident where the client, even though the interview ended, wanted to keep on talking
about his problems. The student was unable to end the session, which went on for
another half an hour. The supervisor suggested that the student should have
commented on the clients separation difficulty to wait for his next appointment.
When the supervisor made those feelings known, the supervisee felt relieved, the
clients interests were accordingly protected (since an alliance with the adult/mature
part of his personality was established) and the supervision became a productive
experience for the supervision group.
When clients repeatedly delay in meeting their appointments, they might
unconsciously vent their anger or ambivalence on the services being offered
(transference to the setting). When they wish to depart earlier, they might need to
communicate the practitioners inability to contain their anxiety/problems. During
assessment, a client might resist in arranging an appointment with the social worker.
In case the latter gives in and offers more than one alternative, he/she allies with the
clients resisting part which fears that the practitioner is unable to help him/her solve
problems and as a result undervalues the professional relationship. As those aspects of
the clients emotional world often reflect parts of his/her character and emotional life
that ultimately contribute to his/her current problem situation, it is essential that
those problems are understood and communicated to the client. It is usually the
inexperienced workers fear of being abandoned by the client that withholds the
revelation of such feelings, which can result in client drop-out.
A student gave in to a middle-aged womans request and offered her the option of
a fourth appointment for the second assessment interview. The client declined, because
514 G. Karpetis
she had to . . . help her grandson with his homework. During supervision, the
supervisor commented on the clients ambivalent feelings towards the setting and
the often present inexperienced supervisee fear of being in charge of the situation, along
with his doubt over the supervisors expertise (which is often a projection of ones own
feared professional weakness). The student consequently managed to set limits by
offering the client one time alternative for the next appointment and when the latter
resisted once more, the supervisee talked about the feelings of fear, distrust and
hopelessness that might impede the womans emotional investment in the professional
relationship. As soon as the client felt understood, she accepted the initially offered
appointment and asked for help from the supervisee.
The place of interview is another basic component of the setting during the client
assessment phase. Ideally, the social worker meets the client in private, so as to feel
emotionally secure and to talk about his problems. However, sometimes additional
setting arrangements should be made. A student had difficulty in choosing a place for
the interview in a four-bed hospital room, where patients were unable to move out.
The supervisor suggested she should discuss this difficulty with the client and try to
find out a way of protecting the privacy of their meeting. After the supervisee made
the necessary arrangements, the client felt comfortable enough to provide informa-
tion on her emotionally painful psychosocial history.
Another supervision issue regarding assessment was the clients request for help.
Students sometimes volunteer to offer help without any prior request from the client. A
middle-aged woman in a borough social service department requested assistance on the
aggressive behavior of her 19-year-old son (who had rejected any professional help in the
past) and urged the student to persuade him in order to alter his behavior. The student
attempted an initial assessment of the psychosocial situation of the woman, who could
hardly provide any information on herself because she was projecting all problems on
to her son. The frustrated student asked for the supervisors help, who said that
the son is an adult and is entitled to decide on whether he will receive help or not. The
mother, despite her request for help, could hardly trust (devalued) the supervisee and
gave her practice directions. The mother could be helped through attempting to
understand her own (possibly unwilling) contribution to her sons problems.
After the student followed the supervisors suggestions, the mother (even though
initially rejecting the proposal) reappeared two months later claiming that she needed
help for herself.
It is not uncommon for adult clients with dependent or depressive personality
characteristics to prompt social workers to act on their behalf, even though they are
capable of handling things by themselves. At this point, it might be difficult for a
student to regard his job as constructive rather than palliative. Our job is constructive
when the clients are helped to eventually find ways of dealing with their own difficulties
with progressively less help from others (Casement, 1992). This type of practice
requires a renouncement of the practitioners omnipotence and confrontation of the
clients frustration, anger and acting-out. It requires a developmental understanding of
clients problems and a belief in their ability for emotional growth and independent
functioning. The offer of practical help, therefore, should be constantly reviewed for its
effectiveness, or its inhibition of growth (Waddell, 1989).
In a district social services department, a young unemployed man requested help
from a student social worker in finding a job. The supervisee intended to accompany the
client to the state employment agency, because he would feel safer and more confident
to assert himself . During the supervision session, the supervisor said that emotional
difficulties might impede the client from acting according to his adult role and suggested
that this issue be discussed with the client before any attempt at intervention. A later
client assessment revealed dependent personality characteristics (rooted in his past
relationships with his parents) spread all over his social functioning. The supervisee
subsequently encouraged the client to go to the employment agency by himself, while
offering him a follow-up appointment. The client, although initially resisting (one more
session with the supervisee was needed), managed to go by himself and when he finally
found a part-time (rather underpaid) job, he said that he could only afterwards
appreciate the supervisees insistence to act by himself .
During the client assessment phase, another defensive strategy used by supervisees in
order to avoid dealing with the emotional pain stemming from client problems was the
tendency to obscure client psychopathology. Expressions like insecure, problematic
or suspicious to describe a clients personality problems or even the projection of those
problems only to society, usually denote a defensive tendency. The supervisor, for
example, helped a student (through suggesting bibliography references) to realize the
psychotic symptoms in a formerly characterized suspicious client. A question arises,
though, to what extent the students must be aware of psychopathology symptoms in
clients. Even though students undertake courses in normal human development and
psychopathology, supervision is a unique place to combine learning psychopathology
on the cognitive level with learning from experience. Undergraduate students, though
not expected to be clinicians, should ideally be in a position to identify serious mental
disorder symptoms (as presented in DSM-IV or ICD-10 manuals), in order to at least
refer a client to a proper agency. Otherwise, they are at risk of defensively
understanding and treating mental disorders as social problems against clients
interests. Client psychopathology, from a psychodynamic assessment point of view, is
expressed/understood through conscious/unconscious, overt/covert, passive/active
behaviors, which are displayed in a professional setting with clear and stable
boundaries.
The developmental understanding of a clients problems and the formation of a
professional relationship are central issues during client assessment. From
a psychodynamic point of view though, relationship building entails understanding
and handling the transference. The way transference is used apparently differentiates
social work practice, and thus supervision, from psychotherapy. Transference
interpretations (Malan, 1992) can be used only in a psychotherapy setting. Intense
positive or negative client emotions towards the practitioner, though, are present
throughout the assessment process. In an extended understanding of transference,
516 G. Karpetis
those feelings are called transference to the setting and encompass the clients
expectations of the practitioner (Galdston, 1986) or of the agency. In that way, elements
of transference neurosis are developed, as they are a precondition for the development
of a therapeutic alliance, whereas a full transference relationship is not favoured
(Ornstein, 1986). The recognition and acceptance of such feelings by the supervisor*
especially the negative/aggressive ones (Karpetis, 2008)*strengthen the formation of
the therapeutic alliance between supervisee and the client and prevent client drop-out.
A student, for example, felt undervalued (possibly due to guilt) by the clients
comment that only a parent can understand and help me with my sons handicap;
you look too young to have a child and replied that even though she was not a
parent, she would try to offer any help she could. The supervisor, taking into account
the clients transference to the setting, commented on the clients ambivalence
towards the supervisee and the agency. The client, due to personal reasons (past
experiences/relationships) on the one hand asked for help, but on the other distrusted
the supervisee. When the latter used this comment, the client could share his
psychosocial history and progressively realize that his initial stance was an after-
product of a negative former professional relationship with a female practitioner,
which was probably a result of his growing up with an inconsistent and neglectful
mother figure. This connection, though, was never communicated to the client in the
form of transference interpretation; instead, it was confined to the clients
transference interpretation towards the practitioner and the institution (setting).
Transference issues appear to be the reason why the more emotionally vulnerable
students sometimes find it hard to differentiate personal from professional
relationships. Although all professional relationships have transferential elements
(Gabbard, 1989), when boundaries (in the form of acknowledgment of the
differentiation of roles and experience) are absent, intense emotions are easily acted
out and colleagues might unconsciously become transferential figures from the
students past relationships. This situation preoccupies the students mind and
suspends learning. Owing to their transferential character, these emotions might also
appear in supervision and there is a need for the supervisor to intervene through
setting limits that offer an emotionally safe place for students to explore and learn
about clients and themselves. In fact, limits provide stability and consistency in a
relationship and the boundary on which growth can be achieved (Landreth, 2002).
Also, it is vital that the supervisor is non-defensive to supervisees questions,
disappointments, anger and anxiety, just as the client needs the social worker to
hear his experience without becoming defensive (Gregurek, 2007). Such a stance is
consequently introjected by the supervisee and applied to his relationship with clients.
A student, for example, took the initiative to address his field practice manager with
her first name, concurrently expressing his wish that they should become good friends.
It seemed as though this relationship was of utmost importance for the supervisee, even
when it was compared to his student role. The supervisor commented that it is nice to
have good relationships, for as long as they do not interfere with our professional roles.
The same student, though, had an intrusive stance towards the supervisor and asked
him questions about his personal life. The supervisor replied that the provision of this
type of information presupposes a friendly and not the present strictly professional
relationship. The student, although initially frustrated, could progressively think about
the professional relationships insufficiency to cover all his emotional needs and
subsequently manage to improve his professional relationships. The supervisor,
therefore, needs to be able to manage organizational dynamics and at the same time
make an in-depth analysis of the case material (Stewart, 2004).
Supervisor countertransference, on the other hand, might manifest itself owing to
unconscious feelings of professional inadequacy (in clinical knowledge and experi-
ence), which might lead to formation of non-professional/friendly relationships with
supervisees, possibly as an unconscious excuse for any future supervision mistakes. In
such a case, the supervisee could receive an indirect message that personal rather than
professional relationships could also be contacted with clients, which are to result in
blurred boundaries and practice confusion at the expense of an in-depth assessment of

the clients difficulties.
By the end of the assessment phase, students were expected to share and discuss the
assessment findings with their clients, aiming to reach a both-party agreement. In the
case that the client disagrees, further work is needed up to the point of agreement;
otherwise, any suggested intervention would be at risk of failure. Personal experience
shows that clients usually disagree, because they feel that their needs (mainly
emotional) have not been understood by the practitioner. Finally, an informal
contract between the client and the practitioner, stating the aims and setting of the
intervention, is expected to follow.
A student, for example, attempted to offer supportive counseling to an aged woman,
who said she needed company because she was feeling lonely. The supervisor suggested
a reassessment of the womans request for help. During the following supervision
session, the supervisor realized that the possible reason for the womans negative stance
to counseling was her inability to trust the student, because in an earlier interview the
supervisee introduced herself as Maria (felt young and inexperienced) and answered all
the questions about her personal life, while the interview lasted for two and a half hours.
The supervisor commented that clients do not need a surrogate maternal/paternal
figure for three hours, once a week, but someone who can bear the emotional pain of
their psychosocial problems and is able to help them in understanding the causes of
their problems. Such a practitioner stance, however, entails the students ability to set
boundaries and bear to think about issues of ambivalence, trust, control and
separation. In the elder womans case, even though the student attempted reparation
through admitting her mistake to the client, the aged woman unfortunately denied any
further professional intervention.
Conclusions
The present empirical study is an effort to describe from a psychodynamic point of
view the student supervision setting and to explore some key emotional parameters
518 G. Karpetis
of the client assessment process. By presenting critical supervision incidents, the

discussion is focused on the supervisors understanding of the supervision process
and the rationale behind his interventions. As education is the primary goal of
supervision, all supervisor interventions are directed towards assessing and dealing
with clients needs, as well as towards the impediments imposed by supervisees
actions or omissions, which are treated as an after product of their own emotional
and educational needs.
Field practice is an emotionally intense experience, as it brings students in touch with
clients helplessness, psychic pain and anxiety. The psychodynamic theoretical
background helps the supervisor in understanding and managing the students
negative emotions towards him or the clients and establishing a positive learning
environment that facilitates client assessment. The setting of explicit supervision
boundaries and limits to supervisees actions (either towards clients or the supervisor)
has been proven to be an effective supervision tool in safeguarding the group process,
through early identification and management of indirect/unconscious forms of student
aggression. Whenever students are helped in realizing the way their wishes and fears
have influenced their practice actions and its effectiveness, they are able to trust the
supervisor and feel safe within the suggested boundaries of the supervision setting.
Therefore, they have not felt the need to sabotage either the supervisors role or the
supervision groups climate.
Some argue that the group situation reduces the supervisors potential to adequately
address his point to the supervisee, as well as the supervisees potential to over-identify
with the supervisor, since the transference is diluted (Gregurek, 2007). The group
climate in the current study though, was predominantly affected by the protective
paternal role of the supervisor (the setting of boundaries) and the handling of the
competition evoked in-between the supervisees (brother transferences). It was also
apparent that the students over-identification with the supervisor was mostly
accelerated by the supervisors capacity to think about and contain the clients painful
emotional states (maternal role). This in turn affected the supervisees ability to
introject the supervisors containing function (Stewart, 2004) and strengthened their
relationship with clients.
In the present study, transference has not been used as a parallel process but as its
theoretical extension of transference to the setting, which entails the understanding
and handling of either the clients negative feelings towards the supervisee, or the
supervisees feelings towards the supervisor in the here and now situation. Hence,
the supervisor has interpreted the supervisees feelings towards him as a reflection of
the learning process requirements. This means that only professional role behaviors
have been examined and dealt with and not student personality issues.
On a countertransference level, client assessment places the student in a parental
role position, according to which he is expected to take care of the client, as a parent.
The supervision setting, though, indicates that the supervisor becomes a parental
figure and the student is unconsciously placed in the child position, according to
which he is looked after by the supervisor. If those conflicting roles are to be properly
handled (no acting-out), supervisees must have adequately dealt inside themselves
with the idealization of their own parents, as well as with their own ambivalence.
Finally, during the client assessment phase, the nature of social work identity has
been further articulated through an assessment of a clients social role problems,
problems in his environment and his strengths and assets.
Owing to multiple theoretical parameters of the supervision subject and the need for
a holistic psychodynamic portrait of the supervision process, the present study has been
confined to an apposition of critical supervision incidents during the client assessment
process. More detailed process research studies are needed (e.g. collective case-studies)
from various theoretical viewpoints, to enable the supervisors/researchers to identify
certain assessment and intervention supervision techniques and accordingly evaluate
their effectiveness for students and clients. Those techniques are expected to strengthen
the theoretical scientific base of social work supervision practice and contribute to what
Flexner (1915) considered a necessity for the profession to acquire an exclusive and
independent knowledge base and a transferrable professional technique.
References
Adams, A., Erath, P. & Shardlow, S. (2000) Fundamentals of Social Work in Selected European
Countries: Historical and Political Context, Present Theory, Practice Perspectives, Russell House,
Lyme Regis.
American Board of Examiners in Clinical Social Work (ABECSW) (2004) Clinical Supervision:
A Practice Specialty of Clinical Social Work, [online] Available at: http://www.annapolis
coalition.org/pages/images/ABESUPERVPAPERFINAL_2205_ed_406.pdf, accessed 15 Feb.
2009.
Arkin, N., Freund, A. & Saltman, I. (1999) A group supervision model for broadening multiple-
method skills of social work students, Social Work Education, vol. 18, pp. 4958.
Bennett, S. (2008) Attachment-informed supervision for social work field education, Clinical Social
Work Journal, vol. 36, pp. 97107.
Bowlby, J. (1958) The nature of the childs tie to his mother, International Journal of Psychoanalysis,
vol. 39, pp. 350373.
Brandell, J. (2004) Psychodynamic Social Work, Columbia University Press, New York.
Bruce, E. & Austin, M. (2002) Social work supervision: assessing the past and moping the future,
The Clinical Supervisor, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 85107.
Casement, P. (1992) The setting of limits: a belief in growth, Journal of Social Work Practice, vol. 6,
no. 1, pp. 2530.
Coleman, M. (2003) Supervision and the clinical social worker, Clinical Social Work: Practice
Update, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 14, [online] Available at: http://www.socialworkers.org/practice/
clinical/csw0703b.pdf, accessed 15 Feb. 2009.
Cooper, M. & Lesser, J. (2002) Clinical Social Work Practice, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Cowger, C. & Snively, C. (2002) Assessing client strengths, in Social Workers Desk Reference, eds
A. Roberts & G. Green, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 221225.
Crisp, B., Anderson, M., Orme, J. & Lister, J. (2004) Learning and teaching assessment, Social Work
Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 199215.
Crisp, B., Anderson, M., Orme, J. & Lister, J. (2006) What can we learn about social work
assessment from the textbooks?, Journal of Social Work, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 337359.
Ekstein, R. & Wallerstein, R. (1958) The Teaching and Learning of Psychotherapy, International
University Press, New York.
520 G. Karpetis
Encyclopaedia of Social Work (1997) NASW Press, Washington, DC.

Flexner, A. (1915) Is social work a profession?, in Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities
and Corrections, National Conference on Charities and Corrections, Maryland, 1219 May,
Hildmann, Chicago, IL.
Fogel, S. & Ellison, M. (2005) Integrating the lessons of informed consent through the BSW
curriculum: research and practice, The Journal of Baccalaureate Social Work, vol. 10, no. 2,
pp. 87101.
Fook, J. (2001) Identifying expert social work: qualitative practitioner research, in Qualitative
Research in Social Work, eds I. Shaw & N. Gould, Sage, London, pp. 116131.
Ford, K. & Jones, A. (1987) Student Supervision, Macmillan, London.
Frost, E. (2008) Is there a European social work identity?, European Journal of Social Work, vol. 11,
no. 4, pp. 341354.
Gabbard, G. (1989) Sexual Exploitation in Professional Relationships, American Psychiatric Press,
Washington, DC.
Galdston, F. (1986) Discussion of Anna Ornsteins paper Supportive psychotherapy: a
contemporary view, Clinical Social Work Journal, vol. 1, no. 14, pp. 3138.
Ganzer, C. & Ornstein, E. (2004) Regression, self-disclosure, and the teach or treat dilemma:
implications of a relational approach for social worker supervision, Clinical Social Work
Journal, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 431449.
Giami, A. (2001) Counter-transference in Social Research: Georges Devereux and Beyond, papers in
Social Research Methods, Qualitative Series No. 7, London School of Economics and Political
Science.
Gibbs, A. (2001) The changing nature and context of social work research, British Journal of Social
Work, vol. 31, pp. 687704.
Gregurek, R. (2007) Internal and external boundaries of supervision, Group Analysis, vol. 40, no. 2,
pp. 167177.
Hamilton, G. (1954) Self-awareness in professional education, Social Casework, vol. 35,
pp. 371379.
Hartman, A. (1978) Diagrammatic assessment of family relationships, Social Casework, vol. 59,
pp. 465476.
Hepworth, D., Rooney, R., Dewberry, G., Rooney, K., Strom-Gottfried, J. & Larsen, A. (2005) Direct
Social Work Practice: Theory and Skills, Cengage Learning, New York.
Hollis, F. (1970) The psychosocial approach to the practice of casework, in Theories of Social
Casework, eds R. Roberts & R. Nee, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 3375.
Itzhaky, H. (2000) The secret in supervision, Families in Society, vol. 81, no. 5, pp. 529537.
Itzhaky, H. & Ribner, D. (1998) Resistance as a phenomenon in clinical and student social work
supervision, Australian Social Work, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 2529.
Kadushin, A. (1974) Supervisorsupervisee: a survey, Social Work, vol. 19, pp. 288297.
Kadushin, A. & Harkness, D. (2002) Supervision in Social Work, 4th edn, Columbia University Press,
New York.
Karls, J. & Wandrei, K. (1999) Person-in-Environment System, NASW Press, Washington, DC.
Karpetis, G. (2008) Psychodynamic Clinical Social Work Practice with Parents of Children, Presenting
Predominant Separation Anxiety Disorder Symptoms, PhD Thesis, Democritus University of
Thrace.
Landreth, G. (2002) Therapeutic limit setting in play therapy relationship, Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 529535.
Lane, R., Barber, S. & Gregson, K. (1998) Divergent views in psychodynamic supervision, Journal of
Contemporary Psychotherapy, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 187197.
Lister, P. & Crisp, B. (2007) Critical incident analyses: a practice learning tool for students and
practitioners, Practice, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 4760.
Malan, D. (1992) Individual Psychotherapy and the Science of Psychodynamics, Butterworth-

Heinemann, Cambridge.
McMahon, L. & Farnfield, S. (2004) Too close in, or too far out*learning to hold the role of the
observer: tutors introduction to a social work students reflections on her experience of
learning through child observation, Journal of Social Work Practice, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 239
246.
Meltzer, D. (1967) The Psychoanalytical Process, Clunie Press, London.
Menzies-Lyth, I. (1992) Containing Anxiety in Institutions, Free Association Books, London.
Midgley, N. (2006) The inseparable bond between cure and research: clinical case study as a
method of psychoanalytic inquiry, Journal of Child Psychotherapy, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 122147.
Montigny, G. (2007) Ethnomethodology for social work, Qualitative Social Work, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.
95120.
Munson, C. (2002) Handbook of Clinical Social Work Supervision, 3rd edn, Hawthorn Social Work
Practice, New York.
Ornstein, A. (1986) Supportive psychotherapy: a contemporary view, Clinical Social Work Journal,
vol. 1, no. 14, pp. 1430.
Padgett, D. (2004) The Qualitative Research Experience, Thomson, Belmont, CA.

Page, S. & Wosket, V. (2001) Supervising the Counsellor: A Cyclical Model, 2nd edn, Routledge,
London.
Rich, P. (1993) The form, function and content of clinical supervision: an integrated model, The
Clinical Supervisor, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 137178.
Ruch, G. (2007) Reflective practice in contemporary child-care social work: the role of
containment, British Journal of Social Work, vol. 37, pp. 659680.
Rustin, M. (2003) Learning about emotions: the Tavistock approach, European Journal of
Psychotherapy, Counselling and Health, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 187208.
Salzberger-Wittenberg, I. (1970) Psycho-analytic Insight and Relationships. A Kleinian Approach,
Routledge & Kegan, London.
Schamess, S. (2006a) Transference enactments in clinical supervision, Clinical Social Work Journal,
vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 407425.
Schamess, S. (2006b) Therapeutic processes in clinical supervision, Clinical Social Work Journal,
vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 427445.
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Basic Books,
New York.
Shaw, I. (2005) Practitioner research: evidence or critique?, British Journal of Social Work, vol. 35,
pp. 12311248.
Shulman, L. (1997) Supervision and consultation, in Encyclopaedia of Social Work, ed. NASW,
NASW Press, New York, pp. 23732379.
Spitz, R. (1945) An inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions in early childhood,
Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, vol. 1, pp. 5374.
Stewart, N. (2004) Supervising the primary care counsellor within the psychodynamic frame,
Psychodynamic Practice, vol. 10, pp. 354372.
Trevithick, P. (2003) Effective relationship-based practice: a theoretical exploration, Journal of
Social Work Practice, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 163176.
Trevithick, P. (2007) Revisiting the knowledge base of social work: a framework for practice, British
Journal of Social Work, vol. 1, pp. 126.
Trowell, J. & Milles, G. (1991) The contribution of observation training to professional
development in social work, Journal of Social Work Practice, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 5160.
Tsui, M. (1997) Empirical research on social work supervision: the state of the art, Journal of Social
Service Research, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 3954.
Tsui, M. (2005) Social Work Supervision: Contexts and Concepts, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
522 G. Karpetis
Tsui, M. & Ho, W. (1997) In search of a comprehensive model of social work supervision, The
Clinical Supervisor, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 181205.
Waddell, M. (1989) Living in two worlds: psychodynamic theory and social work practice, Free
Associations, vol. 10, pp. 1135.
White, S. (2001) Auto-ethnography as reflexive inquiry: the research act as self-surveillance, in
Qualitative Research in Social Work, eds I. Shaw & N. Gould, Sage, London, pp. 100115.

EJSW Supervision 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EJSW Supervision 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See

Field practice supervision of social work

Article in European Journal of Social Work December 2010

European Journal of Social Work

Field practice supervision of social work students: a psychodynamic view

First published on: 07 April 2010

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Field practice supervision of social

ISSN 1369-1457 (print)/ISSN 1468-2664 (online) # 2010 Taylor & Francis

Keywords: Supervision; Student; Social Work; Psychodynamic; Assessment

Defining of the key terms

accompanying experiences, the increased caseload and the powerful emotions

evaluating the supervisees progress toward meeting certain requirements for

social work practice and a prerequisite*whether it is consciously applied, or not*for

Finally, it is argued that practitioner research devalues ethical standards, like

The basic characteristics of the current supervision setting (the academic

The supervision setting

bibliographic references on human normal development and psychopathology, as well

a practitioners case or observation of institutional dynamics, as described by

Key emotional parameters of the client assessment phase

practice (Crisp et al., 2006). Insistence on assessment during supervision provides

blurred boundaries and practice confusion at the expense of an in-depth assessment of

of the client assessment process. By presenting critical supervision incidents, the

independent knowledge base and a transferrable professional technique.

Encyclopaedia of Social Work (1997) NASW Press, Washington, DC.

Malan, D. (1992) Individual Psychotherapy and the Science of Psychodynamics, Butterworth-

Padgett, D. (2004) The Qualitative Research Experience, Thomson, Belmont, CA.

You might also like

social work practice and a prerequisitewhether it is consciously applied, or notfor