EVALUATION OF SUPERVISION NEEDS OF SOCIAL WORKERS WORKING IN DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL FIELDS

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 75 - 84, 19.12.2018

Taner Artan , Aydın Olcay Özkan , Nur Açıkgöz

Öz

The aim of the research is to assess the supervision
needs of social work specialists. Within the scope of the research, 10
different areas where social work specialists work; medical social work,
forensic social work, social work in local governments, disability and social
work, old age and social work, addiction and social work, social work with
families, women and social work, children and social work and social work
centers (generalist social work practice) have been determined. Interviews were
conducted with a total of 20 social work specialists, being two people of each
area- one experienced and one relatively inexperienced- by using a
semi-structured interview technique. Open-ended interview questions have been
addressed to participants and asked to share their thoughts about supervision,
their experience in the areas of occupational competence and ethical dilemma,
case management process and evaluations of anxiety dimension and their sharings
have been assessed in accordance with the supervision need of social work
specialists. In the light of obtained data, it was seen that social work
specialists need supervision support in the fields such as perception of
professional competence, problems occurring in case management, difficulty in
determining appropriate method of intervention, feeling anxiety, producing solutions
for ethical dilemmas and need of someone whose advice they can ask regularly,
especially in the period when they first entered the profession. The importance
of this study lies on the fact that it reveals the supervision need of the
professionals who are working as social workers in Turkey.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Social Work, Supervision

Kaynakça

• REFERENCESArmstrong, J., Gordon, M., & Hobbs, K. (1991). Who supervises the supervisor? A groupwork model for supervision in health care settings. Australian Social Work , 44 (1), 37-43.
• Barretta-Herman, A. (1994). On the development of a model of supervision for licensed social work practitioners . The Clinical Supervisor , 11 (2), 55-64.
• Beddoe, L. (2012). External supervision in social work: Power, space, risk, and the search for safety. Australian Social Work , 65 (2), 197-213.
• Beddoe, L. (2010). Surveillance or reflection: Professional supervision in ‘the risk society’. British Journal of Social Work , 40, 1279–1296.
• Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Fundamentals of Clinical Supervision (5. Edition b.). England: Pearson Education Limited.
• Bogo, M., & McKnight, K. (2006). Clinical supervision in social work. The Clinical Supervisor , 24 (1-2), 49-67.
• Bradley, G., & Höjer, S. (2009). Supervision reviewed: Reflections on two different social work models in England and Sweden . European Journal of Social Work , 12 (1), 71-85.
• Bradley, L. J., & Boyd, J. D. (1989). Counselor Supervision Principles, Process, and Practice. Indiana: Accelerated Development Inc.Christensen, T. M., & Kline, W. B. (2001). The qualitative exploration of process-sensitive peer group supervision. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work , 26 (1), 81-99.
• DSD & SACSSP (2012). Supervısıon Framework for The Socıal Work Professıon in South Afrıca. https://www.westerncape.gov.za/assets/departments/social-development/supervision_framework_for_the_social_work_profession_in_south_africa_2012.pdf accessed on June 15, 2018
• Ellis, G. (2001). Looking at ourselves-self-assessment and peer assessment: Practice examples from New Zealand. Reflective Practice , 2 (3), 289-302.
• Field, J. (2009). Rethinking supervision and shaping future practice. Social Work Now , 18 (1), 70-88.
• Gillig, P. M., & Barr, A. (1999). A model for multidisciplinary peer review and supervision of behavioral health clinicians. Community Mental Health Journal , 35 (4), 361-365.
• H.Hair, & O'Donoghue, K. (2009). Culturally relevant, socially just social work supervision: Becoming visible through a social constructionist lens. Journal of Ethnic And Cultural Diversity in Social Work , 18 (1), 70-88.
• Hardcastle, D. A. (1992). Toward a model for supervision: A peer supervision pilot project . The Clinical Supervisor , 9 (2), 63-76.
• Hawkins, P., & Shohet, R. (2006). Supervision in the helping professions (3.Edition b.). New York: Open University Press.
• Hughes, J. M. (2010 ). The role of supervision in social work: A critical analysis. Critical Social Thinking: Policy and Practice , 2nd, 59-77.
• J.Turner, F. (2005 ). Encyclopedia of Canadian Social Work . Canada : Wilfrid Laurier University Press .
• Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2002). Supervision in Social Work (4. Edition b.). New York: Columbia University Press .
• Liz, B. (2012). External supervision in social work: Power, space, risk, and the search for safety. Australian Social Work , 65 (2), 197-213.
• Marc, C., Makai-Dimeny, J., & Oşvat, C. (2014). The social work supervisor: Skills, roles, responsibilities. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov , 7 (56), 221-230.
• Munson, C. E. (2002). Handbook of Clinical Social Work Supervision (3. Edition b.). New York: The Haworth Social Work Practice Press.NASW & ASWB. (2013). Best Practice Standards in Social Work Supervision . Washington: NASW.
• Proctor, B. (2000). Group Supervision. London: SAGE Publications .
• Sandu, A., & Unguru, E. (2013). Supervision of social work practice in north-eastern romanian rural areas. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 82, 386-391.
• Sulman, J., Savage, D., Vrooman, P., & McGillivray, M. (2005). Social group work. Social Work in Health Care , 39 (3-4), 287-307.SWAAB. (2017). Social Work Supervision Guidelines. Singapore: SWAAB.