Professional learning in clinical supervision: highlighting knowledge work

Gottschalk, B; Hopwood, N

Professional learning in clinical supervision: highlighting knowledge work

Gottschalk, B Hopwood, N

Permalink

Publisher:: Emerald
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Workplace Learning, 2022, 34, (5), pp. 405-417
Issue Date:: 2022-05-31

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted versionAdobe PDF (185.35 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Gottschalk, B
dc.contributor.author	Hopwood, N https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2149-5834
dc.date.accessioned	2022-11-23T04:42:24Z
dc.date.available	2022-11-23T04:42:24Z
dc.date.issued	2022-05-31
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Workplace Learning, 2022, 34, (5), pp. 405-417
dc.identifier.issn	1366-5626
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/163683
dc.description.abstract	Purpose: Clinical supervision is a crucial workplace practice for professional learning and development. Research is needed to investigate in detail what happens in supervision to understand how this practice contributes to learning. This paper aims to examine how professionals work with knowledge and navigate epistemic challenges in working with problems of practice. Design/methodology/approach: Three pairs of psychologists audio-recorded five consecutive supervision sessions and were interviewed twice during that time. Analysis considered supervision as a site of emergent learning, focusing on what was discussed and how problems were worked on, whether as epistemic objects (open-ended, aimed at generating new insights) or by using an approach to knowledge objects that focused more directly on what to do next. Findings: One pair consistently adopted an epistemic object approach, while another was consistently more action-oriented, focused on knowledge objects. The third pair used both approaches, sometimes expanding the object with a view to gaining insight and understanding, while at other times focusing on next steps and future action. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to study clinical supervision in terms of how knowledge work is done. Foregrounding the epistemic dimensions of supervision, it reveals previously unexplored but consequential differences in how knowledge is worked with and produced as supervisory pairs discuss complex issues of practice.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Emerald
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Workplace Learning
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1108/JWL-09-2021-0114
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights	‘This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear here (https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JWL-09-2021- 0114/full/html). Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
dc.subject	1301 Education Systems, 1503 Business and Management
dc.subject.classification	Business & Management
dc.title	Professional learning in clinical supervision: highlighting knowledge work
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	34
utslib.for	1301 Education Systems
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2022-11-23T04:42:23Z
pubs.issue	5
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	34
utslib.citation.issue	5

Abstract:

Purpose: Clinical supervision is a crucial workplace practice for professional learning and development. Research is needed to investigate in detail what happens in supervision to understand how this practice contributes to learning. This paper aims to examine how professionals work with knowledge and navigate epistemic challenges in working with problems of practice. Design/methodology/approach: Three pairs of psychologists audio-recorded five consecutive supervision sessions and were interviewed twice during that time. Analysis considered supervision as a site of emergent learning, focusing on what was discussed and how problems were worked on, whether as epistemic objects (open-ended, aimed at generating new insights) or by using an approach to knowledge objects that focused more directly on what to do next. Findings: One pair consistently adopted an epistemic object approach, while another was consistently more action-oriented, focused on knowledge objects. The third pair used both approaches, sometimes expanding the object with a view to gaining insight and understanding, while at other times focusing on next steps and future action. Originality/value: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to study clinical supervision in terms of how knowledge work is done. Foregrounding the epistemic dimensions of supervision, it reveals previously unexplored but consequential differences in how knowledge is worked with and produced as supervisory pairs discuss complex issues of practice.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/163683