8/9/2019 Supervision Clc

1/4

"Supervision" as a Gollaborative Learning CommunityHarleneAnderson

At the heart of my philosophy and practice of "super-vision"* as a collaborative learning community are threeCs- connect, collaborateand construct: Superviseesandsupervisorsdevelopingrelationships hat nvite jointlycreatingknowledge (Anderson, 1998;Anderson, 1997Anderson & Goolishian, 1990; Anderson & Swim, 1997).By knowledge I mean that which is new and unique toeach participant. This view is based in the premise thatknowledge is not imparted by another or a knower whobestows on a not-knower. Rather, knowledge is fluid andcommunal, yet personalized. When we share our knowl-edge with one another, we cannot know what each bringsto the sharing; determine how each will interact with thesharedknowledge; nor predict what each will create withit. Whatever the outcome, it will be something differentthan either started with, something socially constructed.

I place my philosophy and practice under apostrnodern umbrella (Anderson, 1997). Briefly, bypostrnodem refer to an ideological critique ofthetradition of meta-narratives that represent universaloverarching truths and the inherent risks in this certaintytradition. Postnodemism includes itself in this critiqueand owns the same risks. A notion of postrnodemism islanguageand knowledge asrelational and generative.Central to this notion is dialogue as a dynamic creativeconversationwith room for all voices, with eachpersonunconditionally presentand with a fi.rll senseof belonging.Dialogue also entails two-way exchangesand crisscross-ing of ideas, houghts, opinions, and feelings. What is putforth in dialogue is interacted with and inteqpretedby theother. New meanings, understandings, and knowledge areinherent in dynamic dialogue.

Conceptualizing language and knowledge asgenerativeinvite collaborative earningcommunitiesthat maximizenew and ndividually tailored learning. I will brieflydescribeand higirlight selectedaspectsofone collabora-tive learning community- a seminar for supervisors. (SeePetersand Armstrong, 1998 for an excellent discussionof collaborative earningcommunities.)Connecting,Collaboratingand Constructing n aSupervisors eminarParticipants

Diversity amongparticipantsenhances he quality andquantily oflearning that is produced.Eachpersonbrings

differences n terms of age and life stage,personalandprofessionalexperience,degreeand discipline, theoreticalorientation, work and educational setting, learning styleand agenda, or any of the diversity "isms." Varieties ofvoices provide a richness ofperspectives and realities. Aseminarmight include experiencedand rookie supervisorssupervising in various clinical and educational settingswith sundry degrees,each coming for distinct reasons.Often half the participants have completed the "requiredseminar" and continue in the next seminar becausethevvalue the experience.Relationships and Conversations are Inseparableand Inflaence Each Other

To nviteandmaximizeollaborativeearnins mustact and talk consistent with myphilosophy. I must live it, beinggenuinely and natr:rally collabora-tive. This includes respecting,inviting and valuing eachvoice,being flexible and responsive,andcreativelydoing what the occasioncalls for on the spot. Foremost, thisincludestrusting the other and our process.

I want to createand facilitate learning relationshipsand processeswhere participants can identifu, access,elaborate,and producetheir own ruriquecompetencies,cultivating their seedsof newness n their personalandprofessional ives outsideour organized context. I want totalk and act to invite and encourageparticipantsto takeresponsibility for and to be the architectsoftheir learning.I also want each participant to experienceour task andrelationshipdifferently from the familiar hierarchicalanddualisticteacher-studentelationshipsand learningprocesseshey may have experienced.

Being collaborativedoesnot mean hat I deny orignore my wealth of ideasand experiences,but that I toomust be a leamer, believing that I can learn as much asthe participants. mportantly, collaborativeteaching andlearningchallengeparticipantsand me to reconstructhowwe think about teachingand learning.

Nor as critics and skepticsof postmodernism ftenbelievedoes he perspective iscountpreviousknowledgeandexperience. articipants ind that this is not the case.The difference s the intentionwith which that knowledee

S u P E R V t s t o N B U L L E T I N . 7

8/9/2019 Supervision Clc

2/4

and experiences usedTowards heseendscollaborative eaming beginswith

the first conversation have with eachparticipantwhether n personor by telephone. show a keen nterestin leamingabout he personand previewmy expectationsand agenda or the seminar,being forthrightaboutmyprejudice or learningandknowledge rom a postmodemperspective re also mportant.Inviting Collsboration by Doing

Collaborative elationships ndprocessespontane-ously emergeout of theexperiencetself, leamingbydoing rather than through lecturing about or instructingparticipantson how to be collaborative.At the firstseminarI say that I havemany ideas and experiences osharebut that I need heir help in selectingwhat to share.I do not want to unilaterally select.To leam about themandallow them to leam abouteachother, I invite partici-pants o form small conversational lusters. might posebeginning questionssuch as: What areyour expectationsof supervisionand of me? What is your learning agenda?How do you leam? What do you think is important for us(I tend o usecollective anguage)o know aboutyou andyour everydaycontexts hat would help us best meetyour leamingneeds? do not expectanswers; hequestions erveas starters.Clustersmight respond o allquestions, ddress nly one,or talk aboutsomethingdifferent. I ask each to record the generated-ihdterialon alarge ablet a small pragmaticaction hat enhancesengagement ndconveysmy serious nterest n theirvoices.The clusters econveneand share he highlights oftheir conversations. post heir tablet sheetson the wall.We might ask questionso makesure hat we understandtheir thoughtsor participantsmight clarifu with eachother.Throughthis process, nd at eachmeeting hereatter,participantsadd o our agendaandprioritizeagendaitemsand ways to addresshem.Selecting and Addressing Content

Collaborativeeamingoccurswithin a broadcontextof expectations,ncludingcredentialingand icensingbodies,professionalassociations,work settingsand thediscourseof top-downknowledge. keep n mind thatmultiple investorshold distinctassumptions bout heleamingpurpose ndhow earningwill be accomplished.I also ealize hat my rolebestows owerandauthorifyon me asa teacher ndsupervisor, lacingme in hierar-chicalposition. hold thepersonal reedom, owever,o8 . FALL 2OOO

choosehow to exercise hat powerand authority.What Iam most nterestedn is how can I positionmyself withintheseconfextsand assumptionso best offer what I haveto offer, and for the leamer o summoncontrol over hisor her own leaming.

I give participants eminarsyllabi that ncludeavarietyoftopics requiredby external nstitutionsandthosedeemed mportantby me. Participants ave a voiceregardingagendaand forum. One may volunteer,or Imight invite someoneo sharea supervisionexperiencerelated o a contentareaand to choose he way toaddresshe experienceand content.For instance,shemay seeka consultation,or requestanotherparticipantinterviewher, followed by a generaldiscussion,a reflect-ing processn which the participantsisten"as if' theywerea part ofthe castofcharacters n the supervisorydilemma(Anderson,1997;Anderson& Rambo, 1987).Participantsmay bring their superviseeso a session.Thesupervisorand supervisee irect us in how we might behelpful to them- whetherperforming heir supervisionasusual with us as reflectors,or being nterviewedbyanotherparticipant.They might simply want a freshperspectiveor they might have a specificquestion. fthere s no preferencewe might offer suggestions ndthey tailor a choice o suit their needs.

A primary vehiclefor content s dialogue,sometirhesoccurring n relation o a reading,videotape, xperientialexercise, onsultation,or shared nformationby facilitatoror participants.Content s seldomentirelycovered n adiscrete ime frame or as a discreteentif. Instead,avariety ofcontent weaves hroughouteachsessionandthroughout he seminar n variousways.The contentagendas alwaysso full that participantsdo workinglunches,clustering aroundcontent opics.As oneparticipant ut t, "Agendabuilding s a great ool... rostatewhat s important, uzzling,exciting...so hateveryone'sneedsare stated,even hough heremay betoo many tems o address!"ReJlecting Promotes Self- and Other Dialogue

An important artof learnings reflectingwith oneselfand others,putting silent thoughts nto spokenor writtenwords. I incorporate eflections n a variefy of ways.Throughouteachsession openly reflect on our processand elate t to my postmodem iasand heir eaming.havedesigned arious xperiential ndconsultationexercises ith reflectingcomponents.

I give participants reflection heet t the endofeachsession, sking hem o share heir after houghts t the

8/9/2019 Supervision Clc

3/4

next session.Reflectionsmight focuson their experienceof the lastsession,how theyused heir leaming, newthoughtsor questions,new agenda tems, or recommen-dations or my role as facilitator.Participantssay hereflectionsheets rea valuable earning ool. Writing thereflectionsprovidesa way to keepthe seminarprocessalive and a forum for self-dialogue.The reflectionprocess urthers several nterrelatedpurposes. t consis-tently builds n continuousself,other,seminar,andteacherevaluation. t encouragesearners o be active andpurposeful n their learningand n determining ts direc-tion. It encourageseflectionas part ofeveryday practiceamongsupervisorand supervisee, nd among herapistand client.

I silentlyread heir reflectionsat the beginningofeachsessionand incorporate what I learn. Importantly, thereflection processhelpsme continually earn he partici-pants' changingneeds.Their reflectionsprovideanopportunity for me to improve my teaching/facilitatingandadjustmy style to bestserve heir individual andcombined needs- to accommodate o what each group,occasion,circumstance, nd relationshipcalls for at anyone ime.Mat We Have Learned About ColluborativeLearning

Althoughcollaborativeearning s oftenmistakenasunstructuredeaming,participants ind it is simplyanotherkind of structure.Participantsoverwhelminglyreportthat ttre earning processs more imporfant hanthe content.Participants onsistently eport amazement tthe richnessand meaningfulness f the process.Theycommenton the generativityof the conversations,heemergence fnew learning,and the surprisingchangesntheir thoughtsand practices.They expressgratefulnessfor the opporhrniry,althoughat first unfamiliar andchallenging,o be thoughtfulactive earners.Theyappreciate nddevelop he richnessofpossibilities as heymove from a need or certaintyand closure o a senseofbeingcomfortablewith uncertainfyand the yet-to_come.In oneparticipant's ords,giving..a new sense f self_confidence." s a leamer n groupsupervision ut t,"The atmosphere eckoned o me, .Takea chance'."Participantseport hat the new learning s useful ntheireverydaywork. They learn o appreciatewhat theirsuperviseesringto the table- listeningandhearing tdifferently.As one participantsaid, .respectfor tnesupervisor-superviseeelationship s well as or eachoftheirpositions- hatno oneposition s of greater mpor_

tance han another."One said shevalued eaming to talkaboutsupervisees ndclients with "critical thinking andcompassion"ather han with a pejorativeand udgmentalattitude.Anothersaid,"l am constantlyamazed t howmy superviseeshange,as hey are willing to leam morpabout heir client's lives, heir struggles,heir histories.Their negativiryusually educes n proportion o theiropenness. amazemyselfwhen I am willing to be moreopen-minded s well." And another eported, Mysuperviseesave reported hat my non-hierarchical ndcollaborativemodelof supervision s refreshingcomparedto previoussupervisionn which the superviseeeltintimidatedand udged." Theseexperiences ith supervi-sion asa collaborative eamingcommunify eportedbysupervision eminarparticipantsand heir supervisees reconsistentwith otheraccountsof supervision rom apostrnodem erspectiveCaldwell,Becvar,Bertolino&Diamond"1997;Anderson,London & Punsky,2000).Also noteworthy s that participantsexpresspride ofownership n the seminarand accountability or theirlearning.They alsodescribea new sense fresponsibilityto eachother,congruentwith McNamee and Gergen's(1999)notionofrelational responsibility.That is, as onepositionsoneselfdifferentlywith another-as I positionmyselfdifferently with learners-we boldly experiencethat no oneholdssole esponsibility.Whenresponsibilityis shared-asparticipantsconnect" ollaborate,andconstructwith eachother- the leamingrelationshipandprocessare moremutually gratirying and rewarding.*I preferto use"consultingwith" or "having aconversation bout" in my daily practice, ather han thewords "supervision"or "therapy".Harlene Anderson,PhD, is an AAMFT ApprovedSupervisorand a ounding memberandfaculty of theHouston Galveston nstitute and Taos nstitute. Shehaspublishedseveralarticleson supervisionfromapostmodernperspectiveand is doing research n this area.Along with Saliha Bava,she will bepresenting heses on "'Supervison' A Co laborativeLanguageSystems pproach" at AAMFT'sAnnual Conference.

ReferencesAnderson,. (1998). ollaborativeearningommunities.nMcNamee, . & Gergen, .J. (Eds.),Relational esponsibil-ity: Sourcesor susrainableialogue. pp.65-i0). Thou-sandOaks,CA: Sage.Anderson, . (1997).Conversation,anguage,ndpos.sibili-ties: A poslmodernpproacho theropy.New york: BasicBooks.S U P E R V I S I O N B U L L E T I N . 9

8/9/2019 Supervision Clc

4/4

Anderson, H. & Goolishian, H. (1990). Supervisionascollaborative conversation: Questionsand reflections. InH- Brandau (Ed,.), Von der Supervision zur Systemischenhsion, $tp.69-78). Salzburg: Ofro Muler Verlag.Anderson, H., London, S. & Punsky, N. (2000). PostrnodemSupervision in Two Countries. Presentation at the TexasAssociation for Marriage and Family Therapy annualconference, lan. 27-30, 2000, Houston, TX.Anderson" H. & Rambo, A. (1987). An experiment in systemicfamily therapy training: A trainer and trainee perspective.Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies. 7, 54-70-

Anderson, L & Swim, S. (1995). Supervisionas collaborativeconversation:Connecting the voices of supervisor an{supervisee.Journal of Systemic Therapies. 14 Q), l-13.Caldwell,K., Becvar,D.S., Bertolino, R & Diamon4 D. (1997).A postrnodemanalysisof a course on clinical supervision.ContemporaryFamily Therapy.19 (2),269-287Peters, .M. & Armstrong, J.L. (1998). Collaborative eaming: ,People laboring together to construct knowledge. ln NewDirections for Adult and Continuing Education (pp. 75-85). No 79,Fall I 998. New York: Jossey-Bass.