[acb-hsp] Clinical Supervision for Prelicensed Counselors: Article

[J.Rayl]

Clinical Supervision of Prelicensed Counselors: Recommendations for Consideration

and Practice.

by Sandy Magnuson , Ken Norem , Allen Wilcoxon

Evidence of significant advances in expectations, theory, and practice of counselor

supervision is multifarious and replete (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998; Borders, Cashwell,

& Rotter, 1995; Magnuson & Wilcoxon, 1998a, 1998b). Whereas authors in the mid-1980s

asserted that the existing pool of knowledge related to counselor supervision processes

was deficient (Carifio & Hess, 1987; Goodyear & Bradley, 1983), contemporary supervisors

have an abundance of texts, in addition to journals such as Counselor Education and

Supervision and The Clinical Supervisor to guide their work. Refinement of supervision

theory and practice has been catalyzed by credentialing bodies. For example, the

National Board for Certified Counselors has authorized the Approved Clinical Supervisor

credential (Bernard, 1998) and state counseling licensure boards have specified requirements

for supervision of provisionally endorsed counselors.

Postacademic supervised experience is a requirement for counselor licensure in 45

states (Counselor licensure, 1999); however, the specification of guidelines for

skillfully providing the supervision is beyond the scope and purposes of such regulatory

boards. Instruction, models, and recommendations for supervising prelicensed counselors,

a discrete domain of practice, are sparse (Magnuson & Wilcoxon, 1998a). Consequently,

supervisors often proceed without knowledge of regulatory expectations and appropriate

procedures for supervising entry-level counselors (Hillman, McPherson, Swank, & Watkins,

1998; Nelson, Johnson, & Thorngren, in press). This article provides suggestions

for structuring and enacting clinical supervision of postacademic, prelicensed counselors.

Although the article is directed primarily to supervisors and prospective supervisors,

it may also help counselors-in-training become more astute consumers of supervision.

SUPERVISION: COUNSELORS-IN TRAINING VS. PRELICENSED COUNSELORS

Guidelines and strategies for supervision of master's- and doctoral-level students

are prevalent. However, supervision of prelicensed counselors differs from university-based

supervision of counselors-in-training in noteworthy ways. For example, students are

typically supervised by a team of university-based and field-based supervisors. In

contrast, supervisors of prelicensed counselors often assume sole responsibility

for overseeing supervisees' work without previous supervisors' assessments of supervisees'

skills and knowledge and without the clarity of evaluation criteria provided by course

syllabi and accreditation standards. General structures and proximity enable academic-based

supervisors to closely monitor the clinical work of counselors-in-training. Conversely,

supervisors of prelicensed counselors often have limited contact and opportunities

to directly observe clinical performance. These factors may become more salient when

supervisees apply for licensure, and the supervisors must independently ascertain

that the applicants have achieved appropriate levels of competency.

A significant contrast also emerges from the fee-for-service nature of post-academic

supervision. Although counselors-in-training pay tuition, there is no direct business

relationship between supervisors and supervisees. Another element of the postacademic

business relationship is that supervisees are free to select their supervisors. These

differences between supervision of counselors-in-training and supervision of prelicensed

counselors have implications for each phase of supervision practice, beginning with

preliminary preparation.

SUPERVISION OF PRELICENSED COUNSELORS: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Similar to supervision in academic settings, effective supervision of prelicensed

counselors is predicated upon preparation and consideration of pragmatic and theoretical

factors (Hillman et al., 1998). Skillful supervision requires specialized preparation

(Association for Counselor Education and Supervision [ACES], 1993; Bernard & Goodyear,

1998; Borders et al., 1991; Guest & Dooley, 1999; Hillman et al., 1998; Liddle, 1988;

Supervision Interest Network, 1990; Watkins, 1997). Endorsing the importance of such

preparation, professional associations have established minimum standards for training

and supervised experience for counseling supervisors (Borders et al., 1991). Professional

associations, university-based counselor education programs, certification agencies,

and supervisors in private practice provide a variety of training and supervision-of-supervision

opportunities for counselors who wish to become supervisors.

A few regulatory and certifying boards require applicants to be supervised by counselors

who hold specific credentials related to supervision. Thus, potential supervisors

should examine requirements and procedures for becoming credentialed for the jurisdictions

in which they wish to supervise prelicensed counselors (Todd, 1997).

Regulatory boards may ask supervisor credential applicants to provide written statements

of their fundamental beliefs about and orientation to supervision. These documents

typically include delineation of the following:

* The supervision model that informs the supervisor's practice

* Roles assumed by the supervisor

* General goals and objectives of supervision

* Modalities typically employed

* Beliefs and practices related to evaluation

Essentially, the process results in a "supervisor's epistemological declaration"

that becomes the "underlying rationale for a supervisor's every action" (Liddle,

1988, p. 157). This evolving, dynamic enterprise contributes to a supervisor's professional

identity and clarifies his or her fundamental beliefs about counseling and supervision.

(For additional information see Storm, 1997a.)

Statements of orientation to supervision segue to preparation of professional disclosure

statements, which communicate supervisors':

* Degrees, training specific to supervision, professional credentials, and licenses

* Areas of professional competence

* A general overview of the models and theories of supervision that inform their

practices of supervision

* Procedures for evaluation

* Expectations, parameters, and limits of confidentiality and privileged communication

* Procedures for documenting supervision activities and maintenance of records

* Fee arrangements

* Provisions for emergencies

* Ethical guidelines that govern their practice (Atkinson, 1997; McCarthy et al.,

1995; NBCC, 1998).

Professional disclosure statements communicate organizational and structural elements

within the supervision context. Thus, these documents provide a measure of accountability

for supervisors (Keel & Brown, 1999), and demonstrate "managerial competence" (Bernard

& Goodyear, 1998, p. 199). Self-disclosure statements also reflect deliberate attention

to pertinent ethical and legal factors.

ATTENDING TO RISK MANAGEMENT: ETHICAL AND LEGAL CONCERNS

An adequate discussion of ethical practice of supervision, implications of legislation

and court decisions, and strategies for risk management exceeds the scope of this

manuscript. However, we call attention to supervisory concerns of (a) vicarious liability,

(b) confidentiality, (c) dual relationships, and (d) the power differential that

is inherent within supervisory relationships.

Vicarious responsibility, or respondent superior, is a legal notion that assigns

ultimate responsibility for actions or nonactions of subordinates to the persons

in authority or control over others (Disney & Stephens, 1994; Tanenbaum & Barman,

1990). Thus, when supervisees inflict injury by negligence or malpractice, supervisors

may be legally liable, particularly when such actions are found to be within the

parameters of the supervision contract (Knapp & VandeCreek, 1997; Tanenbaum & Barman,

1990).

At another level, supervisors' negligence in providing adequate supervision can also

lead to litigation (Guest & Dooley, 1999); thus, supervisors are legally responsible

both for their own behavior and that of their supervisees. Indeed, responsibilities

attributed to supervisors for (a) the care and treatment of clients and (b) the professional

development of the supervisee are multiple and complex. Sagacious supervisors judiciously

examine and adhere to The Ethical Guidelines for Counseling Supervisors (ACES, 1993)

and Standards for Counseling Supervisors (Supervision Interest Network, 1990). Furthermore,

they assure that supervisees understand and follow appropriate codes of ethics and

standards of practice (ACES, 1993).

The principles of confidentiality and privileged communication pose additional complexities

within the context of supervision. Supervisors and supervisees share the responsibility

for protecting confidentiality of client material (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998; Disney

& Stephens, 1994). Supervisors further assume responsibility for assuring that clients

are fully informed and cognizant of the supervisory relationship, and the parameters

of confidentiality and privileged communication (ACES, 1993).

The importance of a viable working alliance within the supervisory relationship is

generally accepted and endorsed. However, when supervision is received in fulfillment

of credentialing and regulatory board requirements, an array of curious tensions

is inherent. For example, trust is believed to be an essential factor in supervisory

relationships (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). Yet, supervisees function within the gatekeeper

responsibilities assigned to supervisors. To ignore the differential of power that

is intensified by a supervisor's having final and sole responsibility for recommending

licensure or certification would seem to be professionally inappropriate and ethically

unsound. Thus, we encourage supervisors to examine their own reactions to such diverse

roles, thereby preparing to facilitate dialogue about responsibilities for evaluation

and gatekeeping with supervisees.

Recognizing and maintaining appropriate boundaries within the context of a strong

working relationship warrants supervisors' scrupulous attention. Although sexual

relationships between supervisors and supervisees are clearly forbidden ([Sec. 2.10]

ACES, 1993), guidelines for other supervisory boundaries are sometimes ambiguous.

For example, supervisors are encouraged to mentor supervisees' participation in professional

associations ([VII.C] International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors,

1993); however, joint participation may result in blurred boundaries that obscure

objectivity, contribute to confusion, and lead to exploitation. As another example,

supervisors often invite supervisees to examine personal issues that may interfere

with their work with clients; yet, engaging supervisees in activities that approximate

personal counseling may be regarded as an unprofessional dual relationship. These

areas of ambiguity may be exacerbated when supervisors assume dual responsibilities

for administrative and clinical supervision. Thus, conscientious supervisors continuously

monitor the potential for (a) abusing the power that is inherent within supervisory

relationships, (b) exploiting supervisees, and (c) inflicting harm (ACES, 1993; Bernard

& Goodyear, 1998; Magnuson, 1999; Tanenbaum & Berman, 1990). They further model clarity

in articulating expectations and engage supervisees in discussions about issues of

power and boundaries.

This meager discussion of legal and ethical cautions underscores the importance of

formal training in supervision and risk-management practices. Such endeavors may

include maintaining consultative relationships with other supervisors, seeking legal

advice as appropriate, participating in risk-management continuing-education programs,

reading related professional literature, carrying liability insurance, and assuring

that supervisees adopt the same practices. Supervisors are also encouraged to monitor

their practices by reviewing videotapes of supervision sessions and sharing documentation

responsibilities with supervisees.

INITIATING SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIPS: CONSIDERATIONS AND PROCESSES

Collaborative relationships characterized by mutual respect, authenticity, and trust

are as important for supervisory relationships as they are for counseling relationships

(Bordin, 1983; Emerson, 1999; Ladany & Friedlander, 1995; Lee, 1999). Although supervisory

relationships develop and evolve over time, the initial meeting to discuss possibilities

of engaging in a supervisory relationship is critically important (Prest & Schindler-Zimmerman,

1997; Prest, Schindler-Zimmerman, & Sporakowski, 1992). During this initial encounter,

lasting impressions develop that influence decisions to proceed with supervision,

dynamics of interpersonal relationships, and the nature of supervisory processes.

Preliminary encounters also provide a template for openly communicating about potential

ethical dilemmas mentioned in the previous section. Thus, astute supervisors remain

sensitive to implications and influences of culture (Fong & Lease, 1997; Kostelnik,

1999), gender (Carolan, 1999), sexual orientation (Waskerwitz, 1999), and other factors

that may affect the relationship (Brownell, Kloosterman, Kochka, & VanderWal, 1999).

Initial meetings between prospective supervisors and supervisees may be viewed as

reciprocal interviews, during which both parties examine the potential for a productive

working relationship to develop. Thus, supervisors should be prepared to discuss

the various topics included in their self-disclosure brochures. Business aspects,

such as fee arrangement, must be addressed as well.

Supervisors may ask supervisees to authorize consultation with former supervisors.

It is equally appropriate for supervisees to request supervisors' permission to contact

former and current supervisees. In this context, both parties have an opportunity

to further examine the potential for interpersonal and professional compatibility,

as well as the correspondence between supervisors' areas of expertise and supervisees'

primary professional needs and interests.

FORMALIZING THE SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIP

Decisions to proceed with supervision should be based on mutual confidence in the

potential for a productive working relationship to evolve (Osborn & Davis, 1996).

Written agreements are generally recommended to assure explicit understanding of

the various facets of the supervisory relationship (Liddle, 1988; Storm, 1997b; Todd,

1997). However, effective contracts include mechanisms for modification and renegotiation

as needs of supervisees and their clientele change (Storm, 1997b).

Typical supervision contracts include:

* Supervisors' requirements

* Supervisees' initial goals

* Schedules to be followed

* Projected duration

* Modalities and interventions to be employed

* Mechanisms for documentation and maintenance of records

* Methods and purposes of evaluation

* Procedures for appropriately informing recipients of supervisees' services about

supervisory relationships and related limits of confidentiality

* Guidelines for responding to emergencies

* Provisions related to due process and filing complaints (Guest & Dooley, 1999;

Osborn & Davis, 1996; Storm, 1997b; Tanenbaum & Berman, 1990; Todd, 1997).

When supervisees are working toward certification or licensure, contracts should

also address those external requirements. As mentioned previously, business arrangements

should be clarified and included in the contract. Finally, consideration should be

given to supervisors' roles vis-a-vis responsibilities attributed to supervisees'

employing agencies.

More complex contractual agreements are required when supervisors' practices are

independent from the organization within which supervisees practice. In these situations,

policies and procedures of the organization warrant attention. Areas of administrative

and clinical supervision should be clearly delineated in the contract.

Unique complexities also emerge when supervisees engage in practice within supervisors'

agencies. Again, clarity in expectations and responsibilities of all parties are

recommended when such business relationships are superimposed over supervisory relationships.

ASSESSING PROFESSIONAL NEEDS AND FACILITATING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Supervisors employ a variety of strategies for assessing supervisees' professional

skills and needs (Magnuson & Wilcoxon, 1998a). In addition to inviting supervisees'

self-appraisal, supervisors may consult with previous supervisors, review tapes of

counseling sessions, and observe supervisees as they conduct sessions. Supervisors

may also employ assessment instruments and consider professional statements of competencies

(e.g., Association for Specialists in Group Work, 1991; Gladding & Pedersen, 1997;

Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992).

Identification of supervisees' professional goals and needs enables supervisors to

determine appropriate modalities and supervisory interventions (Nelson et al., in

press). Nichols and Lee (1999) identified live supervision, tape review, and case

consultation as major supervision modalities. Other formats include group supervision

(Borders, 1991; Keith, Connell, & Whitaker, 1992; Newman & Lovell, 1933), co-counseling

(Reynolds & McWhirter, 1984), and various modalities in combination. Within these

contexts a variety of supervisory approaches and interventions is appropriate for

working with prelicensed counselors.

While each supervee's level of professional development related to knowledge and

skills is unique, counseling supervisors have identified general areas that warrant

attention when supervising prelicensed counselors (Magnuson & Wilcoxon, 1998a). Entry-level

counselors may benefit from additional instruction in areas such as pharmacology,

diagnostic skills, ethical practices, therapeutic goals, and treatment planning.

They may also need guidance in case conceptualization strategies that are informed

by solid understanding of counseling theories.

A transcending purpose in supervising prelicensed counselors is to facilitate their

achieving appropriate levels of skill, knowledge, and acumen to practice autonomously.

Thus, continuous evaluation and feedback are integral and inherent elements of supervision

(Bernard & Goodyear, 1998; Borders, 1991; Fine & Turner, 1997; Freeman, 1985; Watkins,

1997). Ongoing, formative assessment mechanisms contribute to final or summative

appraisal of supervisees' professional development.

EVALUATION

A variety of assessment protocols are available to augment appraisal procedures (e.g.,

Baird, 1999; Bernard & Goodyear, 1998; Boylan, Malley, & Scott, 1995; Nelson & Johnson;

1999; Storm & Todd, 1997). Although these instruments are not standardized, they

offer a structure for documenting supervisees' progress. They also provide a framework

that can be adapted to reflect supervisors' style and expectations, as well as supervisees'

unique needs.

Competencies indicating that prelicensed counselors are appropriate recipients of

licenses to practice autonomously as professional counselors have not been clarified

(Magnuson & Wilcoxon, 1998b). Thus, supervisors and supervisees must rely on individually

defined criteria and procedures for formally and finally assessing progress and professional

development. Goals identified at the onset of supervision and modified through the

subsequent phases of supervision provide essential mechanisms for measuring progress

(Fox, 1983). Additionally, periodic formal assessments of supervisees' competency

levels provide indications of progress necessary for successful completion of the

supervisory experiences. However, summative evaluation may also include feedback

related to areas of growth that were observed, but not initially targeted.

CONCLUDING A SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIP

Supervisory relationships often reflect progression through phases characterized

by diminishing levels of supervisor-directed leadership correlated with increasing

degrees of supervisees' autonomy. Final stages, which may comprise relationship completion

or redefinition, often evoke ambivalence for both supervisors and supervisees. Essentially,

supervisors of prelicensed counselors guide, instruct, monitor, and evaluate with

an ultimate goal of preparing a colleague (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). Attention to

a variety of tasks contributes to successful conclusions of supervisory relationships

and may assuage tension resulting from ambivalence.

Completion of supervisory contracts invites participants to reflect on various experiences

and processes encountered (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). Although the effectiveness

of supervision should be discussed and examined throughout the relationship, summative

evaluation includes retrospective consideration of the activities that were helpful,

as well as activities that were less effective (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). Supervisees

and supervisors should jointly appraise their shared and individual experiences in

the context of the relationship. They should also formally assess supervisees' progress,

needs for continued professional development, and options for lifelong professional

growth (Littrell, Lee-Borden, & Lorenz, 1979; Nelson et al., in press). Finally supervisors

should endorse supervisees' progress toward professional autonomy (Liddle, 1988).

The multiple factors involved in clinical supervision of prelicensed counselors beckon

supervisors' continuous individual self-evaluation. Intentional, retrospective examination

of the supervision processes subsequent to the concluding session offer a unique

catalyst for enhanced effectiveness as a supervisor. This individualized endeavor

may be facilitated with formal instruments (e.g., Williams, 1994) or informal examination

of one's performance in comparison with effective supervision criteria (e.g., Supervision

Interest Network, 1990; White & Russell, 1995).

CLOSING COMMENTS

Many opportunities await supervisors of prelicensed counselors and researchers. Models

for supervising counselors during this crucial phase of professional development

are vacuous, as are systematic endeavors to evaluate the strategies that are employed.

Single-subject case studies and outcome-based inquiries can enhance our collective

knowledge of effective supervisory approaches, practices, and interventions for promoting

professional growth of prelicensed counselors. Additionally, documentation of successful

approaches and interventions for supervising prelicensed counselors can strengthen

designs for effectively and efficiently preparing their supervisors. Empirical support

for outcome measures to determine that licensure applicants have achieved levels

of professional maturity to competently practice autonomously can assist the regulatory

bodies who render critical decisions regarding licensure.

The magnitude of responsibilities attributed to supervisors of prelicensed counselors

is daunting. The information provided in this discussion is a preliminary step toward

fashioning models for supervising prelicensed counselors. The article is not intended

to serve as a substitute for didactic preparation and supervision-of-supervision;

nor is it intended to discourage persons from becoming supervisors. In fact, we hope

capable professional counselors will become supervisors, thereby contributing to

a professional legacy. In this regard, supervisors of prelicensed counselors have

unique opportunities to influence the evolution of the counseling profession as they

nurture the development of future clinicians, scholars, and leaders.

REFERENCES

Association for Counselor Education and Supervision. (1993). Ethical guidelines for

counseling supervisors. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Association for Specialists in Group Work. (1991). Ethical guidelines for group counselors

and professional standards for training group workers. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Atkinson, B. J. (1997). Informed consent form. In C. L. Storm & T. C. Todd (Eds.),

The reasonably complete systemic supervisor resource guide (pp. 11-15). Boston, MA:

Allyn & Bacon.

Baird, B. N. (1999). The internship, practicum, and field placement handbook: A guide

for the helping professions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bernard, J. M. (1998). Approved clinical supervisor credential. NBCC NewsNotes, 14(4),

1-2.

Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (1998). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (2nd

ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Borders, L. D. (1991). A systematic approach to peer group supervision. Journal of

Counseling and Development, 69, 248-252.

Borders, L. D., Bernard, J. M., Dye, H. A., Fong, M. L., Henderson, P., & Nance,

D. W. (1991). Curriculum guide for training counseling supervisors: Rationale, development,

and implementation. Counselor Education and Supervision, 31, 58-80.

Borders, L. D., Cashwell, C. S., & Rotter, J. C. (1995). Supervision of counselor

licensure applicants: A comparative study. Counselor Education and Supervision, 35,

54-69.

Bordin, E. S. (1983). A working alliance based model of supervision. The Counseling

Psychologist, 11, 35-42.

Boylan, J. C., Malley, P. B., & Scott, J. (1995). Practicum & internship: Textbook

for counseling and psychotherapy (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Accelerated Development.

Brownell, J., Kloosterman, D., Kochka, P. B., & VanderWal, J. (1999). Training in

context: An ecosystemic model. In R. E. Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic trainer

(pp. 197-205). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Carifio, M. S., & Hess, A. K. (1987). Who is the ideal supervisor? Professional Psychology:

Research and Practice, 18, 244-250.

Carolan, M. T. (1999). Integrating gender into the practice of supervising marriage

and family therapists. In R. E. Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic trainer (pp.

164-176). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Disney, M. J., & Stephens, A. J. (1994). Legal issues in clinical supervision. The

A CA legal series: Vol. 10. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Emerson, S. (1999). Creating a safe place for growth in supervision. In R. E. Lee

& S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic trainer (pp. 3-12). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Counselor licensure/certification requirements. (1999, July 14). Alexandria, VA:

American Counselor Association. Retrieved July 20, 1999 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.counseling.org/members/lincensureintro.cfm.

Fine, M., & Turner, J. (1997). Collaborative supervision: Minding the power. In T.

C. Todd & C. L. Storm (Eds.), The complete systemic supervisor: Context, philosophy,

and pragmatics (pp. 229-240). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Fong, M. L., & Lease, S. H. (1997). Cross-cultural supervision: Issues for the White

supervisor. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.), Cultural counseling competencies:

Assessment, education and training, and supervision (pp. 387-405). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Fox, R. (1983). Contracting in supervision: A goal oriented process. The Clinical

Supervisor, 1(1), 37-49.

Freeman, E. M. (1985). The importance of feedback in clinical supervision: Implications

for direct practice. The Clinical Supervisor, 3(1), 5-26.

Gladding, S. T, & Pedersen, P. (1997, Winter). Cultural counseling competencies:

A self-examination. ACES Spectrum, 58, 4-5.

Goodyear, R. K., & Bradley, F. O. (1983). Theories of counselor supervision: Points

of convergence and divergence. The Counseling Psychologist, 11, 59-67.

Guest, C. L., & Dooley, K. (1999). Supervisor malpractice: Liability to the supervisee

in clinical supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39, 269-279.

Hillman, S. L., McPherson, R. H., Swank, P. R., & Watkins, C. E. (1998). Further

validation of the psychotherapy supervisor development scale. The Clinical Supervisor,

17(1), 17-32.

International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors. (1993). Ethical code

for the International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors. Denver, CO:

Author.

Keel, L. P., & Brown, S. P. (1999, July). Professional disclosure statements. Counseling

Today, 42, 14, 33.

Keith, D. V., Connell, G., & Whitaker, C. A. (1992). Group supervision in symbolic

experiential family therapy. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 31(1), 93-109.

Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (1997). Ethical and legal aspects of clinical supervision.

In C. E. Watkins (Ed.), Handbook of psychotherapy supervision (pp. 589-602). New

York: John Wiley.

Kostelnik, M. J. (1999). Everyone has a culture. In R. E. Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.),

The eclectic trainer (pp. 147-163). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Ladany, N., & Friedlander, M. L. (1995). The relationship between the supervisory

working alliance and trainees' experience of role conflict and role ambiguity. Counselor

Education and Supervision, 34, 220-231.

Lee, R. E. (1999). Getting started. In R. E. Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic

trainer (pp. 33-44). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Liddle, H. A. (1988). Systemic supervision: Conceptual overlays and pragmatic guidelines.

In H. A. Liddle, D. C. Breunlin, & R. C. Schwartz (Eds.), Handbook of family therapy

training and supervision (pp. 153-171). New York: Guilford.

Littrell, J. M., Lee-Borden, N., & Lorenz, J. (1979). A developmental framework for

counseling supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 19,129-136.

Magnuson, S. (1999). Lest we abuse our personal power in counseling and supervision:

An interview with Dr. Glenda Elliott. Alabama Counseling Association Journal, 24(2),

54-64.

Magnuson, S., & Wilcoxon, S. A. (1998a). Clinical supervision of prelicensed counselors:

A qualitative inquiry. The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, 24(1), 54-68.

Magnuson, S., & Wilcoxon, S. A. (1998b). Successful clinical supervision of prelicensed

counselors: How will we recognize it? The Clinical Supervisor, 17(1), 33-47.

McCarthy, P., Sugden, S., Koker, M., Lamendola, F., Maurer, S., & Renninger, S. (1995).

A practical guide to informed consent in clinical supervision. Counselor Education

and Supervision, 35, 130-138.

National Board for Certified Counselors. (1998). NBCC approved clinical supervisor

[Application form]. Greensboro, NC: Author.

Nelson, M. D., Johnson, P., & Thorngren, J. M. (2000). Journal of Mental Health Counseling,

22, 45-58.

Nelson, T. S., & Johnson, L. N. (1999). The basic skills evaluation device. Journal

of Marital and Family Therapy, 25, 15-30.

Newman, J. A., & Lovell, M. (1993). A description of a supervisory group for group

counselors. Counselor Education and Supervision, 33, 22-31.

Nichols, W. C., & Lee, R. E. (1999). Mirrors, cameras, and blackboards. In R. E.

Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic trainer (pp. 45--61). Iowa City: IA: Geist

& Russell.

Osborn, C. J., & Davis, T. E. (1996). The supervision contract: Making it perfectly

clear. The Clinical Supervisor, 14(2), 121-134.

Prest, L., & Schindler-Zimmerman, T. (1997). A guide: The initial supervision session

checklist. In C. L. Storm & T. C. Todd (Eds.), The reasonably complete systemic supervisor

resource guide (pp. 158-160). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Prest, L. A., Schindler-Zimmerman, T. & Sporakowski, M. (1992). The initial supervision

session checklist (ISSC): A guide for the MFT supervision process. The Clinical Supervisor,

10(2), 117-133.

Reynolds, E., & McWhirter, J. J. (1984). Cotherapy from the trainee's standpoint:

Suggestions for supervisors. Counselor Education and Supervision, 23, 205-213.

Storm, C. L. (1997a). Teaching therapists to become supervisors. In T. C. Todd &

C. L. Storm (Eds.), The complete systemic supervisor: Context, philosophy, and pragmatics

(pp. 363-372). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Storm, C. L. (1997b). The blueprint for supervision relationships: Contracts. In

T. C. Todd & C. L. Storm (Eds.), The complete systemic supervisor: Context, philosophy,

and pragmatics (pp. 272-282). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Storm, C. L., & Todd, T. C. (Eds.). (1997). The reasonably complete systematic supervisor

resource guide. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Cultural counseling competencies

and standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70,

477-486.

Supervision Interest Network, Association for Counselor Education and Supervision.

(1990). Standards for counseling supervisors. Journal of Counseling and Development,

69, 30-32.

Tanenbaum, R. L., & Berman, M. A. (1990). Ethical and legal issues in psychotherapy

supervision. Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 8(1), 65-77.

Todd, T. C. (1997). Privately contracted supervision. In T. C. Todd & C. L. Storm

(Eds.), The complete systemic supervisor: Context, philosophy, and pragmatics (pp.

125-134). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Waskerwitz, T. R. (1999). Supervision and sexual orientation: Supervisors, supervisees,

and clients can sure fill a closet fast. In R. E. Lee & S. Emerson (Eds.), The eclectic

trainer (pp. 177-186). Iowa City: IA: Geist & Russell.

Watkins, C. E. (Ed.). (1997). Handbook of psychotherapy supervision. New York: John

Wiley.

White, M. B., & Russell, C. S. (1995). The essential elements of supervisory systems:

A modified Delphi study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21, 33-53.

Williams, L. (1994). A tool for training supervisors: Using the supervision feedback

form (SSF). Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 20, 311-315.

Sandy Magnuson, Ed. D., is an assistant professor of Counselor Education and coordinator

of the School Counseling Program at Texas Tech University in Lubbock. Ken Norem,

Ph.D., is a visiting associate professor and coordinator of Counselor Education Programs

at Texas Tech University. Allen Wilcoxon, Ed.D., is a professor and chair of the

Counselor Education Programs at The University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa.

Correspondence concerning this article may be sent to Sandy Magnuson, Texas Tech

University, College of Education, Box 41071, Lubbock, TX 79409-1071. Email sandy,

magnuson at ttu, edu.

-1-

Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com

Publication Information:

Article Title: Clinical Supervision of Prelicensed Counselors: Recommendations for

Consideration and Practice. Contributors: Sandy Magnuson - author, Ken Norem - author,

Allen Wilcoxon - author. Journal Title: Journal of Mental Health Counseling. Volume:

22. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 2000. Page Number: 176. COPYRIGHT 2000 American Mental

Health Counselors Association; COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group

Next Page

Jessie Rayl
EM: thedogmom63 at frontier.com
PH:304.671.9780
www.facebook.com/eaglewings10

"But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall
mount up with wings as eagles. They shall run, and not be weary"--Isaiah 40.31
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.acb.org/pipermail/acb-hsp/attachments/20110624/d519a675/attachment-0001.html>