Key Readings and Reflective Journal

Module 2 — Page 7 of 7

What You Will Learn

Key Readings and Academic References

The following readings provide the theoretical and research foundations for the concepts explored in Module 2. They are organised by theme to support further study.

Foundational Supervision Models

  • Inskipp, F. & Proctor, B. (1993). The Art, Craft and Tasks of Counselling Supervision. A seminal text introducing the Three Functions of Supervision: Formative, Normative, and Restorative. This framework forms the theoretical foundation of the Tripod Model and remains central to modern supervision practice.
  • Hawkins, P. & Shohet, R. (2012). Supervision in the Helping Professions (4th ed.). Open University Press. Explores relational supervision through the Seven-Eyed Model, framing supervision as a collaborative partnership rather than a hierarchical relationship. Particularly useful for understanding how the supervisor and supervisee co-create the supervision space.

Learning Through Reflection and Experience

  • Schon, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books. Introduces the concept of reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action, showing how reflective practice supports professional growth and competence development. Essential reading for understanding how supervision facilitates reflection in the supervision relationship.
  • Carroll, M. (2010). Supervision: Critical Reflection for Transformational Learning. The Clinical Supervisor, 29(1), 1-19. Discusses supervision as a dedicated space for safe, critical reflection that fosters psychological safety and enables transformational learning. Connects reflection to changes in practice and professional identity.

Culturally Responsive Supervision

  • Tervalon, M. & Murray-Garcia, J. (1998). Cultural Humility Versus Cultural Competence. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2), 117-125. Distinguishes cultural humility as an ongoing, humble reflective stance rather than a fixed competence. Foundational for understanding how supervisors approach cultural difference with openness and a commitment to lifelong learning.
  • Hook, J.N., Davis, D.E., Owen, J., Worthington, E.L. & Utsey, S.O. (2013). Cultural Humility: Measuring Openness to Culturally Diverse Clients. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(3), 353-366. Examines how supervisors model and foster cultural humility in cross-cultural dynamics within the supervision relationship. Includes measurement scales for assessing openness to diversity.
  • Williams, R. (1999). Cultural Safety — What Does It Mean for Our Work Practice? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 23(2), 213-214. Introduces the Cultural Safety Framework, emphasising the supervisee's experience of safety rather than the supervisor's intention. Particularly relevant to the Australian and New Zealand context of FDR practice.

Ethical Dimensions of the Supervision Relationship

  • Brown, A. & Bourne, I. (1996). The Social Work Supervisor. Open University Press. Analyses how power dynamics and inequality shape supervision relationships. Provides frameworks for recognising and managing power imbalances ethically and transparently.
  • Edmondson, A. (2019). The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Wiley. Explores psychological safety as a foundational element of effective learning environments. Highly applicable to supervision settings, showing how psychological safety enables supervisees to raise concerns, ask questions, and learn from mistakes.
  • Bennett-Levy, J. & Lee, N.K. (2014). Self-Practice and Self-Reflection in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Training. Australian Psychologist, 49(3), 194-202. Presents reflective frameworks that deepen relational connection between supervisor and supervisee. Demonstrates how self-practice and personal reflection strengthen the learning alliance and model the reflective stance the supervisor expects from supervisees.

Supervision in Family Dispute Resolution

  • Field, R. (2019). Family Dispute Resolution and Family Law. In Contemporary Perspectives on Family Dispute Resolution. Pearson. Connects reflective supervision to the specific practice of Family Dispute Resolution, emphasising the role of supervision in supporting emotional regulation, neutrality, and professional integrity in high-stress mediation contexts.
  • Family Law (Family Dispute Resolution Practitioners) Regulations 2025 — Regulations 18–20, 26. Establishes the legal and professional framework for FDR supervision in Australia. Specifies professional standards, record-keeping requirements, and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) expectations. Essential reading for understanding the compliance dimension of supervision (the Normative function).

Module 2 Reflective Journal Entry

This reflection activity supports your development as a supervisor. Reflective supervision relies on the quality of the supervision relationship, including trust, safety, clarity of expectations, and respect for cultural and professional boundaries.

This is a private reflection activity. Your journal entries are not submitted and are for your own professional development. You may use your supervision journal, the headings below as a guide, or the Reflective Supervision Journal Entry Template provided in module resources.

1. What factors do you believe are most important in creating safe and trusting supervision relationships? Draw on your own experiences as both supervisor and supervisee.

2. Why do clear supervision agreements and boundaries matter in reflective supervision? How would you approach developing an agreement with a new supervisee?

3. How might power dynamics or dual roles influence supervision relationships? What strategies would you use to manage these ethically?

4. What steps would you take to establish psychological safety and cultural respect in a new supervision relationship? How would you know if these were present?

Try to write at least 300-500 words across your journal entry. Use specific examples from your practice where possible — concrete reflection is more powerful than abstract generalisation.