Türkiye’de Çalışan Sosyal Hizmet Uzmanlarının Süpervizyon İhtiyaçlarının Değerlendirilmesi: Keşfedici Nitel Bir Çalışma

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma, Türkiye'deki çeşitli sosyal hizmet kurumlarında çalışan sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının süpervizyon ihtiyaçlarını, süpervizyonun üç işlevi (idari, eğitici ve destekleyici) temelinde değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yöntem: Çalışmada fenomenolojik bir yaklaşım kullanılmıştır. İki odak grup görüşmesi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Her grup farklı sosyal hizmet alanlarından altı sosyal hizmet uzmanından oluşmaktadır. Veri toplama araçları “Kişisel Bilgi Formu” ve “Yarı Yapılandırılmış Görüşme Formu”ndan oluşmaktadır. Veriler, MAXQDA 2020 programı kullanılarak tematik analiz yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular ve Sonuç: Araştırmanın analizi, sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının süpervizyona ilişkin görüşlerine ve süpervizyonun idari, eğitimsel ve destekleyici işlevlerine ilişkin deneyimlerine dayanmaktadır. Sonuçlar sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının kurumsal düzeyde süpervizyona ihtiyaç duyduğu fikrini desteklemektedir. Bu bulgular, sosyal hizmet uzmanlarının süpervizyonu nasıl tanımladıkları ve kurumsal süpervizyona hangi işlevler aracılığıyla ihtiyaç duydukları konusunda fikir vermesi açısından önemlidir. Sonuç olarak işveren kurum ve kuruluşların sosyal hizmet uzmanlarına yönelik resmi, yapılandırılmış, kurumsal ve sistematik bir süpervizyon sistemi kurmaları önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal hizmet süpervizyonu
• sosyal hizmet uygulaması
• süpervizyon işlevleri
• odak grup
• sosyal hizmet uzmanı

SUPERVISION NEEDS OF SOCIAL WORKERS WORKING IN TURKIYE: AN EXPLORATORY QUALITATIVE STUDY

Öz

Objective: This study aims to assess the supervision needs of social workers in various social work institutions in Türkiye based on three functions of supervision (administrative, educational and supportive). Material and Methods: The study used a phenomenological approach. Two focus group interviews were conducted. Each group consisted of six social workers from different social work fields. Data collection tools consisted of a “Personal Information Form” and a “Semi-structured Interview Form”. Data were analyzed with thematic analysis method using the MAXQDA 2020 program. Results and Conclusion: The analysis of the study were based on social workers’ opinions on supervision and their experiences about administrative, educational and supportive functions of supervision. The results supported the notion that there is a need for supervision at the institutional level for social workers. These findings are important in terms of providing some insight on how social workers define supervision and through which functions they need institutional supervision. As a result, the employer institutions and organizations are recommended to establish a formal, structured, institutional and systematic supervision system for social workers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social work supervision
• social work practice
• supervision functions
• focus group
• social worker

Kaynakça

1. Artan, T., Özkan, A. O., & Açıkgöz, N. (2018a). Evaluation of supervision needs of social workers working in different professional fields. Turkish Journal of Applied Social Work, 1(1), 75-84.
2. Artan, T., Özkan, A. O., Açıkgöz, N., & Salduz, Ç. (2018b). Evaluation of perspectives of social workers working with immigrants about needs of supervision. Atlas International Refereed Journal on Social Sciences, 4(13), 1099-1109.
3. Atamtürk, E. (2021). A model proposal for social work supervision in child welfare field in the light of social work practices in the USA. PhD Thesis, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University Institute of Health Sciences.
4. Atamtürk, E. (2022). Supervision in social work – a model proposal for supervision system in child welfare (Sosyal hizmette süpervizyon - çocuk refahı süpervizyon sistemi için bir model önerisi), Scala Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
5. Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW). (2014). Supervision standards. Canberra, ACT: Australian Association of Social Workers.
6. Bride, B. E. (2007). Prevalence of secondary traumatic stress among social workers. Social work, 52(1), 63-70.
7. Busse, S. (2009). Supervision between critical reflection and practical action. Journal of Social Work Practice, 23, 159-173.
8. Cunningham, M. (2004). Teaching social workers about trauma: Reducing the risks of vicarious traumatization in the classroom. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(2), 305-317.

9. Çokluk, Ö., Yılmaz, K., & Oğuz, E. (2011). A qualitative interview method: Focus group interview. Theoretical Educational Science, 4(1), 95-107.
10. Demirbaş, E. (2021). Determination of secondary traumatic stress levels and coping strategies of experts providing psychosocial support to children under the child protection law. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa Institute Gradute Education.
11. Erera, I. P., & Lazar, A. (1994). The administrative and educational functions in supervision: Indications of ıncompatibility. The Clinical Supervisor, 12(2), 39-56. doi:10.1300/J001v12n02_04 Hawkins, P., & Shohet, R. (2012). Supervision in the helping professions (4th ed.). London: Open University Press.
12. Istanbul University - Cerrahpasa Faculty of Health Sciences. (2021). Supervision and guidance trainer training course in the field of refugees, Retrieved from https://sabif.istanbulc. edu.tr/tr/haber/multeciler-alaninda-supervizyon-ve-rehberlik-egiticiegitimi- 7400670071005A00300039004A004E0030002D005F0039007900700046006200610041 004F003200370077003200 Accessed 08 September 2021
13. Kadushin, A. (1992). Supervision in social work (3rd edn.). New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Kadushin, A. (1993). Social work supervision: An updated survey. The Clinical Supervisor, 10(2), 9-27.
15. Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2002). Supervision in social work (4th edn). New York: Columbia University Press.
16. Karabenk, D. (2018). Burnout levels of social workers and the importance of supervision: The case of Istanbul province. Master’s Thesis, Kocaeli University Social Sciences Institute, Kocaeli.
17. Ketner, M., Cooper-Bolinskey, D., & VanCleave, D. (2017). The meaning and value of supervision in social work field education. Field Educator, 7(2).
18. Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 299-302. Krueger, R. (1994). Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research. London: SAGE.
19. Magnussen, J. (2018). “Supervision in Denmark-an empirical account of experiences and practices”, European Journal of Social Work, 21(3), 359-373. Doi: 10.1080/13691457.2018.1451827.
20. Mo, K. Y., O’Donoghue, K., Wong, P. Y., & Tsui, M. S. (2020). The historical development of knowledge in social work supervision: Finding new directions from the past. International Social Work, 1-14.
21. Munson, C. (1978). The concepts of effectiveness and efficiency applied to the social work profession: An historical perspective. Journal of Education for Social Work, 14(2), 90-97.
22. Özkan, A. O. (2020). Evaluation of the supervision needs of social workers working in Ministry of Family, Labor and Social Services: The case of Istanbul province. Master’s Thesis, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa Graduate Education Institute, İstanbul.
23. Özkan, S. (2016). The difficulties faced by social workers in their practice and the need for supervision. Master’s Thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.
24. Poertner, J., & Rapp, C. A. (1983). What is social work supervision?. The Clinical Supervisor, 1(2), 53- 65. doi:10.1300/J001v01n02_07
25. Rankine, M. (2019). The internal/external debate: The tensions within social work supervision. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 31(3), 32–45.
26. Rose, S., & Palattiyil, G. (2020). Surviving or thriving? Enhancing the emotional resilience of social workers in their organisational settings. Journal of Social Work, 20(1), 23-42.
27. Taşğın, N. Ş. (2019). Social work supervision and recommendations for Türkiye. Community and Social Work, 30(3), 1005-1032.
28. Tsui, M. S. (1997). The roots of social work supervision: An historical review. The Clinical Supervisor, 15(2), 191-198.
29. Tsui, M. S. (2005). Functions of social work supervision in Hong Kong. International Social Work, 48(4), 485-493. doi:10.1177/0020872805053471
30. Tsui, M. S. (2021). The comprehensive model of social work supervision. In: O’Donoghue, K., & Engelbrecht, L. (Eds), Routledge international handbook of social work supervision. Routledge.
31. Tsui, M.S., O’Donoghue, K., Boddy, J., & Pak, C. M. (2017). From supervision to organisational learning: A typology to integrate supervision, mentorship, consultation and coaching. British Journal of Social Work, 1-15.
32. Weld, N. (2012). A practical guide to transformative supervision for the helping professions. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
33. Wonnacott, J. (2012). Mastering social work supervision. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.