The primary objectives of the training seminar are as follows:
To assist the trainee in developing a content knowledge base of counseling theory, research and practice from a multicultural point-of-view.
To assist the trainee in defining their professional identity and knowlegde and adherence to ehtical practice.
For the trainee to receive monitoring of their strengths and weaknesses as a counselor.
To acquire new skills in counseling.
To be able to identify personal issues involved with being a counselor.
To learn to develop and write case studies in a professional manner.
To be able to have a comfortable and supportive environment wherein sharing information, reactions and concerns can take place.
Knowing that individual, group, and seminar situations are important in providing a student optimal training it is also important to be able to recommend new situations wherein counselor training can be brought about. To this end, an area that has been overlooked in the past is using doctoral students to perform supervisory duties with respect to lower academic (masters) level counselor trainess. In order to shed light on this particular issue the following research investigative plan is being proposed:
How often should faculty meet with doctoral students who are engaged in master's level supervision?
How are doctoral to students to be monitored when supervising master's level students? What are the most effective monitoring strategies?
What are the most prevalent and required doctoral courses and experiences required before they can be effective supervisors?
Does there exist a difference in using doctoral students to perform supervisory duties between accredited and non-accredited CACREP academic programs?
50 accredited CACREP doctoral programs and 50 non-accredited CACREP programs liaison for each of the 100 accredited programs wherein each liaison will respond to a questionnaire.
The Doctoral Students Supervision/Facilitation Survey will be used to obtain descriptive information about the use of doctoral students in the supervision of master's level students. For those doctoral students who do supervise master's students, the liaison will be asked in what capacity the doctoral student provides supervision and indicate what courses and experiences are required of the doctoral student before embarking upon a supervisory role. The survey also inquires of the liaison the monitoring practices used by faculty.
The survey questionnaire along with a cover letter and return stamped-envelop will be mailed to each of the 50 selected program liaisons. Each liaison will be asked to complete and return the Doctoral Students Supervision / Facilitation Survey. A second mailing will sent to non-respondents six weeks later.
Data Analysis Procedure
The results of the questionnaire will be presented by employing descriptive statistics for each of the accredited and non-accredited groups. Comparisons between the two groups will be subjected to a Student "t" statistical analysis to determine if statistically significant differences exist between the two academic training programs.
The results anticipated will be that both programs use doctoral students to supervise master's level counseling students. However, differences, visa via questionnaire results are expected to show that CACREP programs are much more stringent in course and experience requirements of the doctoral students who perform supervisory duties. Hopefully, the results will also provide evidence that making use of doctoral students in supervisory roles is an effective manner in which to supervise master's level counseling students.
Graf, Noreen M. And Stebnicki, Mark a. (2002). Using e-mail for clinical supervision in practicum: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Rehabilitation. July-Sept.
Herbert, J.T., Ward, T.J., & Hemlick, L.M. (1995). Confirmatory factor analysis of the supervisory style inventory and the Revised Supervision Questionnaire [Special Issue].
Hillerband, E. (1989). Cognitive differences between experts and novices: Implications for group supervision. Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 293-296.
Janoff, D.S., and Schoenholtz-Read, J. (1999). Group supervision meets technology: A model of computer-mediated group training at a distance. International Journal of Group
Psychotherapy, 49(2), 225-272.
Kaderavek, J.N., Laux, J.M. And Mills, N. (2004). A counseling training module for students in speech-language pathology training. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science & Disorders, 31, 153-161.
Shanklin, J.E. (2002). Supervision and increasing self-efficacy in the therapist-trainee. Doctoral Paper, Biola University, La Mirada, CA.
Smith, R.C., Mead, D.E. And Kinsella, J.A. (1998). Direct supervision: Adding computer- assisted feedback and data capture to live supervision. Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy, 24, 113-125.
Werstlein, P.O. (1994). A naturalistic study of process variables in…