Clinical Supervision Handbook - CAMH Knowledge Exchange ...

Clinical Supervision Handbook
In another study, Constantine, Warren and Miville (2005) present and discuss the use
of the multicultural case conceptualization ability exercise, a tool and coding system
used to determine the extent to which clinicians are able to integrate salient cultural
issues into two different conceptualizations of a client case.
Finally, Pope-Davis and colleagues (2000) describe the development and validation
of the Multicultural Environmental Inventory—an instrument designed to measure
the degree to which graduate counselling programs address multicultural issues in
their curricula, clinical supervision, climate and research. The instrument was condensed
from 53 to 27 items based on the results of factor analyses, and showed promise
in its ability to assess change over time, as well as good validity and reliability. Although
designed for academic settings, it may be useful to test either the instrument as a whole,
or the supervision subscale, as a way to evaluate clinical supervisors’ effectiveness in
addressing and promoting cultural competence in clinical supervision groups.
Cultural and diversity competence is now being addressed in a more rigorous fashion
in clinical supervision settings. This reflects a growing awareness of their importance,
and of the need for ways to assess and identify gaps in knowledge and skills (both in
clinical supervisors and in front-line clinicians).
CLINICAL SUPERVISOR EVALUATION
Providing and accepting clear and concrete feedback, identifying strengths and areas
for improvement, and specific concerns with respect to good clinical care can be
difficult for both clinical supervisor and clinician. Yet “when supervisees reflect on
their supervision, what comes to mind most often is the quality and quantity of
feedback they received” (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). Therefore, clinical supervisors
need to evaluate the extent to which they are providing constructive and salient
feedback to clinicians.
Heckman-Stone (2003) carried out a pilot study with 40 graduate students from
three training programs (counselling psychology, clinical psychology and masters
degree in counselling). She used a scale of 10 items rated on a seven-point, Likert-type
scale, where 1= strongly disagree, 4 = neutral, and 7 = strongly agree. In addition,
the author included four open-ended items designed to elicit examples of positive
and negative feedback in clinical supervision, and the characteristics of good
and poor use of feedback and evaluation by clinical supervisors. An example of
the instrument, adapted for use with more experienced clinicians—as opposed to
92