Assignment 1 Supervision Practice Assignment

Supervision project

Student: Maucha Loney

Tutor: Jasmine Bryan

Assignment 2:

Course: Infed

Level: 6

Word Count 5300

I confirm that this work has not been copied, plagiarized or duplicated

Informal Education and critical practice
Supervision Project

When I think about supervision what often comes to mind is someone looking over someone else shoulder making sure that things are being done properly, this however only suggest part of a very complex process and role. Through out this project I aim to look at the concept of supervision and the phenomena behind it. To help me with my exploration of supervision I will draw upon the works from Hawkins and Shohet to give a foundation of supervision but will
also look at other ideas from to enable me to gain a better understanding. I will also look at the works of Kadushin and Proctor to explore how they identify the function of supervision with that of Hawkins and Shohet. I will also look into the recommendation from the Munro report that places great emphasis on supervision and the benefit that it has to those that deal with people. I aim to draw upon my own experience throughout the project to citric what supervision should be like with what has actually taken place. I aim to pay close attention to the different role dynamics especially in relation to power, cultural and role difference within the relationship looking at how and what kind of impact that it can have, whilst looking at the . Finally drawing to the conclusion that it is important for staff to have a space where they can reflect and learn from their experience as well as unpick any issue that come with working with people through the process of supervision as long as the relationship is properly managed and power is not abused or manipulated and that balanced between the needs of the organisation and the individual are maintained.
I have done a lot of research on the subject of supervision I found that most of the literature around it derives from the context of social work which may take a slightly different slant due to the nature of the profession however it still provides an insight into the actual nature of supervision. I managed to find some sources which looked at supervision in the capacity of youth work as well as supervision on its own right so based upon this I will use a combination of examples for exploration.
So what is supervision? I have come to the understanding that there are different types, and that it can be used for different purposes.
Hawkins and Shohet draw upon the works of Hess to define a basic concept of supervision that can be identified in the context of helping people. It suggest that it is a
“quintessential interpersonal interaction with the general goal that on person, the supervisor, meets with another, the supervisee in an effort to make the latter more effective in helping people” (Hess 1980 cited 2006)
This to me gives quite a blanket definition of supervision as it does not give any detail on the complex nature relationship or the exchange process, it could be used to describe any kind of interaction between two people, but as the question was built around their theories I felt it was important to uses their view as a starting point.
My first experience in supervision sessions at work was predominantly line management sessions which where very formal and dictated which some what connects to the description provided by Brown& Bourne;
Supervision is the primary means by which an agency-designated supervisor enables staff, individually and collectively; and ensures standards of practice. The aim is to enable the supervisee to carry out their work, as stated in their jobs specification as effectively as possible. (Brown & Bourne 1998)
This method of supervision is very much performance and targeted centred.
It seeks to ensure that workers are doing there job as best and as effectively as possible. An example of is when I meet with my line manager to discus how I was getting on at work and to see if I was meeting the pre set goals of workshops that I had to deliver. In the session we look at whether I had achieved my goals and if I had not we identify ways that would allow me to do so. It was very much about my working performance. This method of supervision did not take in to account me as a person or any external issues that perhaps affected my performance. However since joining YMCA I have been exposed to different kinds of supervision. This supervision is conducted by an external professional with not attachment to neither my work place nor the college there role is to supervise me as a trainee professional. This new encounter brought a different understanding and a new perspective to my world of supervision. No longer was it just about my role at work or my role as a student but it was an environment in which I could explore different aspects of me which are all
interlinked.
Supervision relates to that aspect of the inner life through which supervises acquire insight into their personal existence, which are of enduring worth. It is characterised by refection, the attribution of meaning to experience valuing a non-material dimension to life and intimations of an enduring reality
(adapted from OFSTED 1993 cited in Woods 2000)
This definition best explains the process that I underwent in my external supervision sessions. It suggests that through supervision and the exploration supervisee is able to make links between their existence and reality. In one of my supervision session my supervisor enables me to explore a particular attitude that I had which was impacting on my development. Through discussion I was able to make links that went back to my child hood. I was able to see when I had adopted this attitude and the factor around it. This then enabled me to put it into perspective and into a position to change how it impacted me in the future.
In addition to these examples Hawkins and Shohet (2006) identify other ways in which supervision can be conducted. They make mention to Group/team Or peer- group supervision, these arenas involve more than one person which is contrary to what I previously explored. These methods of supervision can be effective as there is a wider support network as well a variety of learning opportunities. My experience of Team supervision has not been as effective as one-to-one this was because there where to many views opinions feeling and emotion involved, at times it was used as a tool to lecture the staff then in return the staff were able to join forces and challenge the supervisor, which was not necessary a productive encounter so based upon this my preference has always been one-to-one.
As well as there being different types there are also different functions that can inform supervision .Hawkins suggests that supervision has 3 main functions; these are known as developmental, resourcing and qualitative. Proctor and Kadushin also have a similar outlook on the function of supervision. Down below is a chart that shows how they relate. Hawkins & Shohet (2006)
Theorist
Function

Kadushin
Educative
Supportive
Managerial
Hawkins
Developmental
Resourcing
Qualitative
Proctor formative Restorative
Narrative

As you can see each theorist has their own version of how they view the functions of supervision but as Hawkins and Shohet have identified they are virtually the same process but with different names;
Developmental/formative/educational looks at the aspects of supervision that seek or is used to develop of skill understanding and capacity of the worker. This is done through reflection and exploration of the supervisee work. Comparing this with my experience of line management supervision there wasn’t much capacity for me to explore my practice as how Hawkins describe rather it was more geared towards ensuring I was achieving goals not really taking into account of my professionalism, nor was it seeking to enrich my practice.
Resourcing/Restorative/supportive, Looks at how the worker deals with the personal issues of whom they are working with and the impact that this can have on them and their judgements. I think that this type of checking in is impact as it is easy to become clouded my personal circumstances that you can relate to. There was one occasion where a young person had expressed their sadness about the conditions that they were being brought up in how it made them feel left out and unhappy. I felt really touched by this young person’s confession, despite the fact they often give a lot of talking I felt myself softening towards this young person. Within my self I wanted to treat them to something special as I’ve had a similar experience of being the odd one out an understood how excluded you can feel I found my self giving that particular young person special treatment example being if we had done cooking I would give him extras . Through discussing this matter in a supervisory session I was able to identify what I was doing. I was transferring my own issue on to that young person and trying to heal my own emotions from him. This showed me how involved we can be come in issues without even realising it.
Qualitative/Normative/Managerial aspect of supervision, this is aimed at maintaining quality control. Looking at how we work and the way that we work, it also looks at any short falls that may be overlooked, that can result in errors or misconduct of practice seeking to ensure that things are corrected and meets a particular standard. This area of supervision tends to be concerned with the actual worker looking at how they are cooping with the emotional demands and stressed of the job. Frost 2007 discuses the impact of built up emotions can have on the individual and there working performance he suggest that it can often impact on there health Hawkins and Shohet also support this thinking as they identify that this build up of emotions can leave one feeling ‘burnt out’ previously within my settings this area was not properly addressed. The focus was purely around ensuring that goals and targets where being achieved the work went from being quality based ensure that young people received the best care to being quantity based where staff were just trying to get as many young people in as possible. The result of this left me personally feeling unappreciated and unmotivated as I want not able to work in a way that I know I should be plus there was no space for me to vent this frustrations therefore at times I didn’t want to work or engage with the young people
Looking at all the aspects I believe that each has an important part to play as they all seek to ensure that the worker is fully grounded in their role. However there often tend to be an unbalancing where one aspect is more prominent than the others. In my experience the dominate function has been geared towards achieving the outcomes rather than ensuring quality. I believe that this is what Monro was speaking about in her report that looks at the learning aspects and the management thereof. She identifies this error
The few supervision opportunities are dominated by managerial need to focus on performance, for example throughput case closure adhering to timescales and completion of written records Munro (20011a:115.7.33) cited
She suggested that the emphasis of the work should be ensuring the best interest of the child rather than being clogged up with procedures, inspections and regulations which often take time and resources taking away the essential essence of the nature of the work.
Too often questions are asked if rules and procedures have been met but not whether this has helped children. Everyone in the profession can think of meetings and forms that don’t actually make a child safer (www.safeguardingchildrenea)
Although the report was looking at social work I believe that the message that it was conveying could be applied to all those professions that work with vulnerable children and young people. Within youth work there is a lot of emphasis placed on achieving recorded and accredited outcomes which at times have no real impact on the development of the child but is largely based upon the agenda of the government that is imposed on the provision, I believe that this steering away from quality work with young people results in them being misunderstood and under represented as there needs are not truly being met. Too many times have I been in the predicament of trying to meet the needs of the young people with that of the organisation which at times can cause conflict. Focusing on the needs of the young people and understanding how best to achieve this I believe is essential to the development of future young people and having supervision that is geared towards this kind of learning and development can only lead to better practice . In this next part of this project I will be looking at how this kind of reflective learning supervision can be achieved whilst identifying any vulnerabilities
Supervision is both a particular kind of work and a particular kind of working relationship. You can not have one without the other the supervisors job is not to advise or to instruct but to enable the worker to think better about his or her work and therefore to work better (Christian & Kitto 1987:2)
I believe that what this is saying is that not only does the actual nature of the supervision matter but how it is conducted also has an impact on the sessions. Therefore I would conclude that supervision is a transactional process in which through reflection learning can be achieved.
Alonso (1985) describes supervision as a ‘complicated halls of mirrors. What this suggest to me Is that supervision is not always straight forward, it involves personal reflection which can lead to accepting responsibility and accountability, looking to see what’s there. It enables you to examine yourself not only on the outside but explore what going on in the inside which then mirrors and effects actions and behaviours. It is often a relationship between two people where one takes the role of the supervisor (whom more than often is a professional) and the other the supervisee. Hawkins and Shohet see it as a space where the professional can deal with the burdens of working with others, that supervision provides a container that holds the helping relationship in the therapeutic triad (2006)
Belton 2011 somewhat refutes these concepts of supervision he argues that they offer a subjective stance and open up the idea of the ‘supervision church’
‘Where by it has it faithful ready to confirm its ethereal benefits’ (2011:106).
I would agreed with this suggestion had it not been for my experience with non managerial supervision which was a great benefit and helping aid in understand me in my many different roles.
When the term reflections is used it is make suggestion to a process of thinking, going back in time analysing things that have previously take place, and trying to understand or make sense of what or why things happened, from this learning can be established and actions can be take Thompson & Thompson refer to this as being ‘reflective practitioner’ they suggest that is important to make connections between ‘thinking and doing’
(2008)
An example of this would be when a young person was asked to leave the club but refused, the altercation resulted in the young person trying to physically attack a member of staff. After the incident had taken place we had a debrief meeting where we looked at what happened why it happened and what we would do if a situation like this was ever to arise again. We used the process of reflection as a tool to explore behaviours and actions in which we had taken with the hope that it would act as a guide for if we were ever in the same or similar situation again. There are some down falls to this concept during the process of reflection what we actually remember is limited to what the brain is actually able to retain. Belton looks into the reliability of reflection he acknowledges that the brain goes through 3 different stages in memory usage these stages impact on what is retained. He describes it as a
‘Patch work of thoughts shaped by my limited perceptions and a range of recollections and as such will not be the even I am recounting but an event in itself’ (Brian 2011) looking at it in this light could throw a spanner in the effectiveness of supervision however, even if what is remember is selective, learning can still derive if the aim is to explore both subjectively and objectively to become an more effective worker. I believe this is what the Monroe was trying to stress in her Report about.
Looking further into the nature of supervision another important aspect is how it is conducted the relationship that is formed in order to allow the process to take place. The relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee present its difficulties as any relationship. It involves some kind of mutual agreement or understanding that enables each to fulfil their role.
Depending on the type of supervision there should be a set guide line that is followed to ensure that the process is contained within the boundaries and agreement of the relationship failure to establish boundaries could see a blurring of professionalism. These boundaries should cover time confidentially and the shearing of personal information.
These boundaries where presented to me in my college supervision however were not present in my work supervision. Within my college supervision (external) the meetings would start and finish on time lasting for only one hour. For me this helps the session to be more focus on the reason why I was there. In other supervision that I have where boundaries where not establish the direction of the session was not focused. We spent some time speaking about things in general and my supervisor would often speak about their own issues rather than focusing on my practice. I did not realise until after the impact of not having establish boundaries until it was too late. Learning from this experience and embarking on my college supervision I now try to ensure that when I conduct session with my staff that it conducted in a controlled format to ensure that we deal with the matters at hand. Any other discussions are held outside of the session.
One of the key factors of any relationship is trust as this governs the rate and extent that the relationship develops. Perlman looks at relationships of such nature in the following light
Any relationship which seeks to enable a person, child or adult to feel secure and those go forward to risk new learning and new experiences combines a warm acceptance of the person in his specialness and his present being (because he is as he is)with the input of stimulation and expectation of his (becoming) (Perlman 1983)
This quote however makes some assumptions. Firstly it includes a certain amount of acceptance from the supervisee this could be consider as what Rogers refers to as unconditional positive regards, where by the ‘helper’ pays no regards to what the helpee has done what they have said or who they are. Another assumption is that there is a willingness to embark on new learning. My conclusion of an effective relationship would be one that provides a space of exploration, expectation from both parties and a mutual agreement. This would be present in an environment where power is not an issue and exploration can take place in a safe and controlled environment. This then sets a foundation for effective supervisory relationship. However this balance acceptance is not always prevalent. Working with any kind of relationship can present its challenges, as working with people involves their values, cultures, and beliefs that can vary from those that we personally hold and can cause a conflict in understanding.
Hawkins and Shohet suggest that it is important as supervision we understand how these differences can impact on us and that as a professional we should adopt a willingness to explore the impact of these differences both for our self as well as the supervisee.
As a supervisor I try and create an environment that is relaxed in a sense where who ever I am supervising feels free to discus any issues that they present, I adopt a style that enables me to explore situations without letting my own personal views impede.
Taking into consideration I believe that environment that is created within the relationship influences how the process is managed and developed. This for me is about the different dynamics that are present in the relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee looking deeper into the context of relationship I want to now explore how differences in power can have an impact whether it is negative or positive. I’ve explored the different functions and methods but how these are implemented has a lot to do with the relationships that are established. As individuals we all have our own belief practices and understandings to how we do or see the world. It is important to understand that these differences or the things that makes us who we are can become prevalent in our working relationships.
The notion of power can be a very misleading concept as there is an idea that power has some form of authority. In relationships this can create imbalances as one may see themselves more superior over another.
Smith suggests that power is
The capacity, held individually or collectively, to influence either groups of individuals (including oneself in a given social context (2008)
What I gather from this is that the notion of power is based around one’s ability to control or determine a particular outcome.
Being a supervisor I believe carries a certain amount of power by just the idea of the role. There is an assumption that can be made that there is some kind of superiority about the role as people that are supervisor either have extensive knowledge and experience or they are high in authority within the ranking of the organisation. In addition the fact that they are noting and critiquing your practice can be a daunting experience, in its self without the struggles that power introduces.
This was evident in my work place supervision, my line-manage not only worked on sessions but he also conducted my supervision session. This made our session very difficult as I did not feel that I had the space to explore my practice reflectively. The agenda always came from his point of view which at times stifled the things that I wanted to explore. This kind of power could be considered as role power.
It is the legitimacy of power which therefore justifies the threat and or exercise of coercive action in the case of non compliance. The right to make and enforce decision derives from the collective interest of the social system (smith 2012)
It is important to be aware of power within the supervisory relationship reason being that if its purpose is to enable a worker to work more effectively then allowing the supervisee the opportunity to be honest and open about their practice is essential.
I believe that in order to achieve full benefits from supervision the power balance needs to be equal in order to achieve full reflection and learning otherwise if there was ever a mall practice staff may not feel confident in exploration what occurred for fear of repercussions.
Before starting my external supervision I had already been told that it was something to I had to do in order for me to pass the course. Because I had only experience line managerial supervision I was not sure what to expect. I was anxious and curious at the same time all that I knew is that the person that I was going to meet would eventually have to write a report about me and the session. In addition she would be challenging my practice ensuring that I was doing it safely, she had the ability to impact on whether I pass or fail the course. This could be both an element of role power as well as personal power. Fortunately there were no issues with power, boundaries where set and an openness of exploration was established
Personal power refers to that of
Derives both from the authority of their expertise as well as from the presence and impact of their personality (Hawkins & Shohet)
What I understand from this is that supervisors can been seen as having power based upon many different factors relating to how they portray them self within there role as well as then as an individual
In the aspect of gender roles within supervision this can impact immensely on the actual relationship and how well the process is facilitated.
During one of my supervision with my male supervisor issues around child care came up. I was going through a stressful time as I was trying to balance work with my parental responsibilities which at times resulted in me being late for work.
When the matter was addressed in supervision I felt that being a man my supervisor did not understand stand he made remarks like “I’m a parent as well’. He’s comments really irritated me as although he had a child he was also married in which his wife took on the majority of the responsibility. I found his remarks very unsupportive as I felt he didn’t understand what I was going through. He’s blasé attitude
Cultural power is another important factor to consider as it can hinder the relationships
Carroll & Holloway suggest that it’s important to understand your own culture as well as others to enable a sense of openness and appreciation for diversity to avoid frustration and anxiety through lack of knowledge (1991)
Culture difference can have a big impact on the progression of a relationship. Hawkins and Shohet look at the culture of the white western society against those of the ethnic minority, they identity the difference between these cultures. And how these different can alter our perceptions
As part of my role I had to supervise a young white male this relationship was very difficult to manage as the worker did not value anything that I had to say and would often try to undermine my authority and working practice. The worker would change dates and times of events without me knowing. When challenged him on this he said that he did realise that I didn’t know. This situation left me feeling angry and frustrated as I was almost made to feel inadequate. I had to refer the matter to a more senior member of staff as the working relationship between us was not feasible to continue. Looking back now I believe the fact that I was a young black woman played a big role. If I was in that relationship again I would explore the cultural differences with the worker to see if we could have reached to an amicable understanding and relationship.
However I have experienced culture power between myself and someone of the similar culture where I was expected to use it to enable the worker beyond reason. An example of this was when I was supervising a black female, there was an assumption made that because we were from the same kind of background I should be aware of the struggles that she had faced. I found this situation a bit tricky as there was an expectation that because of our similar background that my expectations of her would be less than those that did not shear our similarities. I was expected to be a bit more lenient. During our session I was put into the situation where we had to explore the expectations of our relationship. What was important for me was to let her understand that although I understood her struggles I still had a job to do which was to ensure that the centre and the staff where operating to their fullest potential. Unfortunately for that particular relationship the worker could not see beyond our similarities and because of this a joint decision was made for her to receive supervision from someone else. Instead of brining an understanding to the relationship it acted as a barrier. Reflecting on this situation now knowing what I do I believe that I would have dealt with it slightly differently possibly got the worker to be a bit more reflective on there own belief systems identifying where it stems from and ways to possible over come or manage it.
Conclusion
Looking at the different effects of cultural power role power and personal power in my different encounters with my supervisors and as a supervisor I can see that in my external supervisory session these where not an issues I didn’t think that they impacted on the relationship in any shape or form however what I did identify is that when taking part in my line managerial supervision these difference did present a problem. Looking at it critically it could be argued that I have issue working with a male counter part due to the issue of male dominance. However I would refute that on the basses that me and the line manage now have a very productive relationship both in and out of supervision so my summary of that was that I was not just seen as Maucha the worker but he began to identify the different aspects of me which at times impacted on me professional. Additional my concerns supervising my colleague where based upon the fact that he had worked in that particular centre longer than I did so I feel that my anxiety where not wholly based upon supervision him bather rather based upon entering into a new settings and my acceptance within
This project has enabled me to do much exploration of the concept of supervision and has led me to look at what makes a good supervisory session I think Hunt sums this up nicely in the following quote by suggesting that the approach of the relationship changed.
It seems that whatever approach or method used, in the end it is the quality of the relationship between the supervisor and supervisee that determines whether supervision is effective or not (hunt 1986)
I agree with this statement from Hunt 100 percent looking over my experiences as both a supervisor and a supervisee what was at the centre of these session was the relationship that where exchanged. In the instance of my external supervisor we had a wonderful relationship from the get go no it could be said that it was because there wasn’t any pressure or stress of meeting targets or deadline it could be down to the fact that we sheared very similar personalities or looking it could be the fact that she operated in a very much person centred approach which enable me to feel comfortable which then gave room for great exploration in to what I do how I do it and why I do it. What I will take on bored from all this is that building a good relationship enables you to explore and manage differences in a way that acceptance will be assessable and will not create barriers in the relationship.
I have also been and to look at and consider the notion of power and how this can impact on relationship without even realising it is present. What this has made me now consider is the impact of the power that I hold has on those that I work with and how they are able to manage it
In addition I also think that before embarking on the supervisory role that one needs to identify there own issues in order

Bibliography

Belton,B. Hill, J. Salter,T. and Peaper, J.(2011) Supervision Praxis and Purpose, Russell house publishing :Dorset
Carroll, M.& Holloway ,E.(eds)(2000) Counselling supervision in context, Sage publications: London
Christian & Kitto (1987) cited in Richardson, L D. & Wolfe, M.(2001)(ed) Principles and Practice of Informal Education Learning through life, Routledge Falmer: London
Frost, P. (2007) Toxic Emotions at work, Boston: Harvard business press
Hawkins, P. & Shohet, R.(2006) Supervision in the helping professions (3rd ed) Open university press: Maidenhead
Hunt, P.(1986) supervision marriage and guidence
Munro, E. 2011a cited Belton, B. Hill, J. Salter, T . & Peaper, J.(2011) Supervision Praxis and Purpose, Russell house publishing :Dorset
Perlman, HH.(1979) Relationship the heart of helping people, The University of Chicago Press: London
Smith, R.(2008) Social work and Power, Palgrave Macmillan: Hampshire
Thompson, S. Thompson, N. (2008) The Critically Reflective practitioner, Palgrave Macmillan: New York
http://www.safeguardingchildrenea.co.uk/summary_and_download_of_final_munro_report