Direct Observation of Psychology Supervisees' Clinical Work: A Snapshot of Current Practice

Abstract

Supervisory methods that allow for direct observation of supervisee performance have been noted to contribute to supervisee satisfaction with supervision, and contribute to supervisors’ ability to perform their supervisory responsibilities thoroughly and ethically. However, there is little data available on how frequently observational methods are employed in clinical supervisory practice. In this study, surveys completed by 150 professional psychology supervisees at all levels of training (from beginning practicum through postdoctoral training) and from all regions of the country provided data on supervisory practices during a two-week snapshot period as well as from their longer supervisory relationships. Results demonstrated that methods permitting direct observation of supervisee work were used very infrequently, that the most frequent methods involved supervisee-initiated case presentations, that supervisees believed that their supervisors were very knowledgeable about supervisees’ clinical functioning, and that there was little variability associated with supervisee experience or level of training. Results are discussed in terms of how these supervisory practices limit supervisors’ ability to fulfill key elements of their professional responsibilities and may increase their ethical vulnerability.