Publications from ODSW Social Work Supervsion | Seite 18

Day 1 Keynote 2: Research and Knowledge Building on Social Work Supervision

an educational perspective and emphasised the role supervision had in the professional
development of practitioners. She also provided the first clear unified conceptualisation of
social casework supervision, which consisted of administration, teaching and helping
components, together with a theory of learning. The unified conceptualisation of social
casework supervision enabled a consolidation to occur across all three components of
supervision.
The administrative component was strengthened through improvements in the
performance evaluation process, which included innovations such as job descriptions and
performance standards (Burns, 1958). The teaching of casework within supervision was
furthered by the recognition of the role anxiety played in the supervisee’s readiness for
learning. This in turn played a part in the helping component through providing a stronger
endorsement to the role that supervisors had in helping workers identify and address their
resistance and reluctance to learn within supervision (Zetzel, 1953). The developments of
this period cemented supervision as a mainstay of ca sework practice and thereby made it
inseparable from the casework method regardless of the theoretical approach taken
(Rabinowitz, 1987).
Over time there were changes to social work’s connection with psychoanalytic theory
(Munson, 2002). These mirrored those occurring in counselling psychology, which were due
to the rise of other psychodynamic schools, as well as behaviourist and humanist
approaches. Munson (2002) notes that in the 1950s there was a backlash against
psychoanalysis within social work, which contributed to social workers turning to a social
science theory base to conceptualise their practice rather than a psychological one. During
this time, systems theory and social psychological theories (e.g. functional theory, role
theory and communication theory) entered social work. The social science theories helped
restore a social emphasis within social work in contrast to the psychological emphasis that
had been prevalent since the 1920s (Munson, 2002). This in turn contributed towards a
more balanced psychosocial approach to social work and supervision. Examples of this
were found in models that integrated social science theories such as Perlman’s (1957)
problem solving approach and Hollis’ (1966) psychosocial therapy. Changes in practice
theory were also reflected in supervision, which continued to mirror practice theory
(Munson, 1979). The resulting theoretical pluralism in practice theory was also reflected in
the supervision literature, which incorporated ideas from transactional analysis, taskcentred practice and role theory perspectives (Kadushin, 1968, 1976; Munson, 1979;
Pettes, 1979). Moving forward to the 21st Century, this situation continues with
O’Donoghue (2010) finding that participants in his study reported using ideas drawn from
strength-based (Cohen, 1999) and task-centred approaches (Caspi and Reid, 2002) in
supervision whilst also appearing to eclectic in their use of a range of ideas from several
supervision approaches.
Empirical Research And The Development Of Supervision Specific Models And
Approaches
Prior to the 1970s, the social work supervision literature mostly consisted of reflections on
practice, literature reviews and theoretical ideas posited by experienced practitioners and
social work educators, with the theories and models used being derived from casework
and organisational function (Munson, 1979). The turning point was Kadushin’s (1974)
national survey on social work supervision in the United States of America. This study
involved a random sample of 1500 subjects (750 supervisors and 750 supervisees) and
provided a description of social work supervision in the United States of America, plus an
empirical foundation for defining supervision in terms of administrative, educational, and
16