Evaluating social work supervision
| Dublin Core | PKP Metadata Items | Metadata for this Document | |
| 1. | Title | Title of document | Evaluating social work supervision |
| 2. | Creator | Author's name, affiliation, country | Allyson Mary Davys; University of Auckland private practice; New Zealand |
| 2. | Creator | Author's name, affiliation, country | Janet May; Waikato Institute of Technology; New Zealand |
| 2. | Creator | Author's name, affiliation, country | Beverly Burns; Private consultancy; New Zealand |
| 2. | Creator | Author's name, affiliation, country | Michael O’Connell; Lakes District Health Board; New Zealand |
| 3. | Subject | Discipline(s) | |
| 3. | Subject | Keyword(s) | supervision, evaluation, social work, safety, ideal practice, Aotearoa New Zealand. |
| 4. | Description | Abstract | INTRODUCTION: The question of whether the practice of professional supervision is effective, and how its effectiveness can be measured, has been debated by both social work and other professions. This study explored how practitioners, supervisors and managers in Aotearoa New Zealand currently evaluate the supervision they receive, provide and/or resource. The study was interprofessional involving counsellors, mental health nurses, psychologists and social workers. This article focuses on the findings from the social work cohort. METHODS: Through an on-line Qualtrics survey participants were asked: 1) how they currently evaluated professional/clinical supervision; and 2) how they thought professional/clinical supervision could be evaluated. Data were extracted through the Qualtrics reporting functions and thematic analysis was used to identify themes. A total of 329 participants completed the survey of which 145 (44%) were social workers. FINDINGS: A majority of the social work participants reported that they evaluated supervision in some form. No culture or policy emerged regarding supervision evaluation, but social workers expressed interest in training and resources to assist evaluation and some saw a supportive and endorsement role for the professional or regulatory bodies. An unexpected finding was reports of unsatisfactory and harmful supervision. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of supervision is an activity with which social workers engage, but further research is needed to explore how evaluation can be embedded in supervision practice. More critically, a broader audit is required to reconsider the definition and model of social work supervision in Aotearoa New Zealand and the environments within which supervision occurs. |
| 5. | Publisher | Organizing agency, location | ANZASW |
| 6. | Contributor | Sponsor(s) | Waikato Institute of Technology (WINTEC) |
| 7. | Date | (YYYY-MM-DD) | 2017-09-25 |
| 8. | Type | Status & genre | Peer-reviewed Article |
| 8. | Type | Type | Qualitative research |
| 9. | Format | File format | |
| 10. | Identifier | Uniform Resource Identifier | https://anzswjournal.nz/anzsw/article/view/314 |
| 10. | Identifier | Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | http://dx.doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol29iss3id314 |
| 11. | Source | Title; vol., no. (year) | Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work; Vol 29, No 3 (2017) |
| 12. | Language | English=en | en |
| 13. | Relation | Supp. Files | |
| 14. | Coverage | Geo-spatial location, chronological period, research sample (gender, age, etc.) | |
| 15. | Rights | Copyright and permissions |
Copyright (c) 2017 Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |