Research on assessing supervisees' professional development (PD) has been primarily focused on either exploring subjective experiences or refining objective aspects of professional competence. As a complement, this study takes a situated...
moreResearch on assessing supervisees' professional development (PD) has been primarily focused on either exploring subjective experiences or refining objective aspects of professional competence. As a complement, this study takes a situated /dialogical approach to explore how PD assessments are transacted and conversationally accomplished in actual supervision practice (i.e., how supervisory dyads bring about shared understandings vis-à-vis the supervisee's PD through supervisory talk). Informed by Practice Theory and Ethnomethodology, I explore episodes of supervisory talk that four supervisory dyads regarded as significant to the supervisees' PD (i.e., significant episodes). My focal discursive analysis of six significant episodes examines how participant supervisory dyads express, recognize, account for, negotiate and eventually agree upon relevant aspects of supervisees' PD. I describe five "big" Practices/Outcomes, and three clusters of "small" conversational practices, through which participants negotiated their understandings of supervisees' PD. I further suggest that PD assessments are ubiquitous, negotiated, and reflexive in the supervisory process. Finally, I discuss implications for supervision theory, research, and practice. iii Acknowledgements I wish to gratefully acknowledge the many people who have contributed to this work and supported me along the way: My wife Inés for being my safe haven, and the super hero who rescued me from madness and boredom. What I wrote here would not be the same without her unending support, help, understanding, and patience. Camila, for giving me hope, and teaching me there was light at the end of the tunnel. My supervisor Tom Strong who guided me from day one, whom I admire simply for his devotion to his mentoring activities, always open to give the extra mile to a supervisee who has English as an additional language. He knew how to push me in those times when I thought I had nothing else to give. I owe to him this dissertation big time. The committee members and mentors who generously shared their time, support, and good counsel: Drs. Jon K. Amundson, Jerry Gale, and Richard Heyman. My parents for their unconditional love, support and interest in something so far from their interest. My brothers Alfredo and Cristián, for all the exciting philosophical discussions informing this dissertation. My sister Josefina, for reminding me there's life outside of academic writing. My friends and colleagues who proofread my work more times than I can count, provided me with reassurance while telling me what others would not. In particular, my colleagues from the discourse-interest group. Karl Tomm and all the wonderful staff and students at the Calgary Family Therapy Centre, who supported and contributed to my research for almost three years. In particular, to the seven participants, supervisors and supervisees, who generously and courageously opened the door for this work to be possible. Jorge Sanhueza, for his trust, his engagement, and his admirable spirit. John Shotter, for his wisdom and advice, and for introducing me to Tom Strong. Dora Fried Schnitman, for her encouragement. Dr. David Jardine for his inspiring lectures. Dr. Roberto Arístegui, Dr. Jeff Chang, and Dr. Shari Couture for inspiring me with their work as clinical supervisors. I am also incredibly thankful for the financial support provided by the Government of Chile, through the Becas Chile para estudios de postgrados en el extranjero, and the financial support provided by the Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez.