1500 – 1800 words Assessment 1: Evaluating the Kadushin Model of Supervision

Posted: March 15th, 2024

Assessment 1: Individual Written Report (20%) – Between 1500 – 1800 words
Written Report Due Date Week 6
You are required to submit a written evaluation report on a model of supervision:
Kardushin
Morton-Cooper & Palmer
Your written report should include at least 10 (scholarly) journal articles read, in addition to any textbook references. The format of your report will be discussed in greater detail during tutorials.
Do NOT utilize sources such as www.tutor2u.com and other such web materials as these in no way constitute academic references for the purpose of your assignments. If you rely on such sources for theoretical support, you will be deemed NOT to have met the requirements of the assessment
Assessment Criteria
Written report
Criteria Weighting 100% HD D C P F
Analysis of literature on topic
35%
Conclusions derived from analysis and assessment of the topic and application
30%
Use and depth of research
20%
Presentation and referencing effective and organised essay structure with correct referencing of up-to-date resources 15%
TOTAL
/20%

Criteria for report High Distinction
80% – Distinction
70%- 79% Credit
60-69% Pass
50-59% Fail
0-49%
Analysis of literature on topic
Provides accurate and complete explanations of how potential issues can be identified and drawing on most recent scholarly literature Provides accurate and complete explanations of how potential issues can be identified and drawing on relevant literature Explanations of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on provision of supervision and often cites the relevant literature. Explanations of how potential issues can be identified and are not always accurate and sometimes incomplete, sometimes cites the relevant literature. Explanations of how potential issues can be identified, and research are inaccurate or incomplete, does not cite the relevant literature.
Conclusions derived from analysis and assessment of the topic Shows a deep understanding of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on targeted population Shows an excellent understanding of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on targeted population Shows a good understanding of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on targeted population Shows a basic understanding of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on targeted population Shows poor, insufficient understanding of how potential issues can be identified and their impact on targeted population
Use and depth of reflection A comprehensive analysis is developed. Summarizes and shows insightful synthesis of the literature information, including analysis of gaps and/or limitations of the research A strong analysis is developed. Summarizes and shows insightful synthesis of the literature information, including analysis of gaps and/or limitations of the research A good analysis is developed. Summarizes and shows some insightful synthesis of the literature information, identifies some limitations of the research Analysis is fairly well developed. It summarizes the overall information obtained from the literature reviews and synthesizes adequately the knowledge gained Analysis is not well developed. It lacks summary and/or any synthesis of the relevant literature
Presentation of summary and correct references used All levels of content are covered in depth. Wide range of contemporary references and sources are well cited when specific statements are made High level of content is covered in depth. Wide range of good references and sources are well cited when specific statements are made Appropriate content is covered in reasonable depth. Sources are generally well cited when specific statements are made Most major sections of the relevant content included, but not covered in as much depth, or as explicit, as expected
References were basic and some errors of citation Major sections of relevant content have been omitted or missed Inadequate references and poor citation
TOTAL

______________________
Evaluating the Kadushin Model of Supervision

The Kadushin model, proposed by Alfred Kadushin in 1976, is a widely recognized framework for understanding and implementing effective supervision in human services organizations (Kadushin & Harkness, 2014). This model identifies three fundamental functions of supervision: administrative, educational, and supportive. Each of these functions plays a crucial role in ensuring the delivery of high-quality services and fostering the professional development of supervisees.

Administrative Function

The administrative function of supervision involves overseeing and managing the work of supervisees to ensure compliance with organizational policies, procedures, and standards (Tsui, 2005). This function encompasses tasks such as assigning and distributing workloads, monitoring performance, and ensuring adherence to ethical and legal guidelines. Effective administrative supervision promotes accountability, consistency, and efficiency within the organization.

Educational Function

The educational function focuses on enhancing the knowledge, skills, and competencies of supervisees through ongoing training, guidance, and mentorship (Bogo & McKnight, 2006). This function involves providing feedback, facilitating discussions on best practices, and encouraging reflective practice. By fostering continuous learning and professional development, educational supervision contributes to the overall quality of service delivery and prepares supervisees for career advancement.

Supportive Function

The supportive function addresses the emotional and psychological well-being of supervisees, recognizing the inherent stresses and challenges associated with human services work (Kadushin & Harkness, 2014). This function involves creating a safe and supportive environment where supervisees can openly discuss concerns, receive validation, and access resources to manage burnout and vicarious trauma. Effective supportive supervision promotes resilience, job satisfaction, and overall employee well-being.

While the Kadushin model has been widely accepted and applied in various human services settings, it has also received critiques and suggestions for further refinement. Some researchers have argued for the inclusion of additional functions, such as cultural competence (Tsui, 2005) and advocacy (Bogo & McKnight, 2006), to better address the diverse needs of clients and supervisees.

Overall, the Kadushin model provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the multifaceted nature of supervision and serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the quality of service delivery and promoting the professional growth of supervisees.

Bogo, M., & McKnight, K. (2006). Clinical supervision in social work: A review of the research literature. The Clinical Supervisor, 24(1-2), 49-67. https://doi.org/10.1300/J001v24n01_04

Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2014). Supervision in social work (5th ed.). Columbia University Press.

Tsui, M. S. (2005). Social work supervision: Contexts and concepts. Sage Publications.

Vaughn, S., Jacquez, F., & Baker, R. C. (2009). Cultural competency in clinical supervision. The Clinical Supervisor, 28(2), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325220903334621

Weiss, I., Wurhofer, J., & Lonigro, A. (2018). Integrating advocacy and supervision: A model for supporting social workers’ advocacy practice. Families in Society, 99(3), 245-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044389418785616