“Sandtray Supervision”: Integrating Supervision Models and Sandtray Therapy

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyse M. Anekstein ◽  
Wendy J. Hoskins ◽  
Randall L. Astramovich ◽  
Douglas Garner ◽  
Joel Terry
Keyword(s):  
Sandtray Therapy ◽  
Supervision Models

scholarly journals Doctoral Dissertation Supervision: Identification and Evaluation of Models

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ngozi Agu ◽  
Christy O. Odimegwu
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Interactive Model ◽  
Doctoral Research ◽  
Descriptive Research ◽  
Research Supervision ◽  
Supervision Models ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Students Satisfaction

Doctoral research supervision is one of the major avenues for sustaining students’ satisfaction with the programme, preparing students to be independent researchers and effectively initiating students into the academic community. This work reports doctoral students’ evaluation of their various supervision models, their satisfaction with these supervision models, and development of research-related skills. The study used a descriptive research design and was guided by three research questions and two hypotheses. A sample of 310 Ph.D. candidates drawn from a federal university in Eastern part of Nigeria was used for this study. The data generated through the questionnaire was analyzed using descriptive statistics andt-tests. Results show that face-to-face interactive model was not only the most frequently used, but also the most widely adopted in doctoral thesis supervision while ICT-based models were rarely used. Students supervised under face-to-face interactive model reported being more satisfied with dissertation supervision than those operating under face-to-face noninteractive model. However, students supervised under these two models did not differ significantly in their perceived development in research-related skills.

Humanistic Sandtray Therapy With Children and Adults

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Armstrong ◽  
Ryan D. Foster ◽  
Tim Brown ◽  
Joan Davis
Keyword(s):  
Sandtray Therapy

Developmental Supervision Models

2019 ◽  
pp. 103-114
Author(s):  
Lori A. Russell-Chapin ◽  
Theodore J. Chapin
Keyword(s):  
Supervision Models ◽  
Developmental Supervision

Promoting Program Fidelity through Peer-Assisted Supervision and Support

2017 ◽  
pp. 405-416
Author(s):  
Kerri E. McPherson ◽  
Birgit Schroeter
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Parenting Program ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Parenting Interventions ◽  
Peer Supervision ◽  
Program Fidelity ◽  
Supervision Models ◽  
Quality Assurance Mechanism ◽  
Support Model

This chapter makes the case for the adoption of practitioner supervision as a quality assurance mechanism for the implementation of parenting interventions. This chapter addresses the need for effective and efficient supervision and posttraining support for the evidence-based program workforce to ensure the sustainability of delivery and the ongoing maintenance of program fidelity. Alongside other fidelity mechanisms, supervision can help develop practitioners’ confidence and competence in delivery and promote adherence to intervention protocols. Peer supervision has the potential to be both efficient and effective and may be more acceptable to stakeholders than traditional hierarchical supervision models. The Peer-Assisted Supervision and Support model is described, and findings describing its acceptability and feasibility to parenting program practitioners are presented.

A cross-national analysis of PhD models

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-245
Author(s):  
Yasmine Dominguez-Whitehead ◽  
Felix Maringe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Supervision Models ◽  
Phd Supervision ◽  
National Analysis ◽  
Cross National

PurposeThis paper provides a cross-national analysis of PhD supervision models, milestones and examination procedures in order to compare PhD programs and their practices.Design/methodology/approachA comparative approach is employed, which systematically interrogates PhD supervision models, milestones and examination procedures in the United Kingdom, South Africa and the United States via a comprehensive review of the practices and literature.FindingsThe findings indicate the ramifications of the different approaches and highlight the benefits and drawbacks associated with the different models.Originality/valueBy making explicit the dominant supervision models, milestones and examination procedures that exist in the United Kingdom, South Africa and the United States, the authors shed light on the somewhat obscure path to earning a PhD degree.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document