Perceptions of individual, triadic, and group models of supervision: A pilot study

Clinical Supervisor

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 65-79

  Newgent, Rebecca A ^a   Davis Jr , Harrison ^b   Farley, Roy C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Group supervision; Individual triadic supervision; Supervision; Supervision models

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746692478     PISSN: 07325223     EISSN: 1545231X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J001v23n02_05     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. American Counseling Association. (2003). American Counseling Association. Retrieved March 23, 2003 from http://www.counseling.org/counselors.htm
2. Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (1992). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
3. CACREP. (2001). CACREP accreditation manual: 2001 standards. Alexandria VA: Author.
4. Efstation, J. F., Patton, M. J., & Kardash, C. M. (1990). Measuring the working alliance in counselor supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 322-329.
5. Goodyear, R. K., & Nelson, M. L. (1997). The major formats of psychotherapy supervision. In D. E. Watkins (Ed.). Handbook of Psychotherapy Supervision (pp. 328-344). New York: Wiley.
6. Horvath, A. O. (1984). Working alliance inventory. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.
7. Ladany, N., Ellis, M. V., & Friedlander, M. L. (1999). The supervisory working alliance, trainee self-efficacy, and satisfaction. Journal of Counseling and Development, 77, 447-455.
8. Milne, D., & Oliver, V. Flexible formats of clinical supervision: Description, evaluation and implementation. Journal of Mental Health, 9(3), 291-304.
9. Newgent, R. A. (2002). Supervision of supervision evaluation. Unpublished data survey, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
10. Nguyen, T. V. (2004). A comparison of individual supervision and triadic supervision. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(9-A), 3,204. (UMI No. 3106902)
11. Pearson, Q. M. (2000). Opportunities and challenges in the supervisory relationship: Implications for counselor supervision. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 22(4), 283-294.
12. Ray, D., & Altekruse, M. (2000). Effectiveness of group supervision versus combined group and individual supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40(1), 19-30. Retrieved January 27, 2005 from http://web32.epnet. com/
13. Schlosser, L. Z., & Gelso, C. J. (2001). Measuring the working alliance in advisor-advisee relationships in graduate school. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(2), 157-167.
14. Steward, R. J., Breland, A.,&Neil, D. M. (2001). Novice supervisees' self-evaluations and their perceptions of supervisor style. Counselor Education and Supervision, 41, 131-141.
15. Sumerel, M. B., & Borders, L. D. (1996). Addressing personal issues in supervision: Impact of counselors' experience level on various aspects of the supervisory relationship. Counselor Education and Supervision, 35, 268-285.
16. Wheeler, S., & King, D. (2000). Do counselling supervisors want or need to have their supervision supervised? An exploratory study. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 28(2), 279-290.