Supervision as a Kind of Qualitative Evaluation

Authors

  • Maria Grazia Riva University of Milan-Bicocca
  • Nikoleta Ratsika Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Crete

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2015vol4.493

Keywords:

Supervision, Evaluation, Education, Training, Quality

Abstract

The contribution presents a reflection on supervision as one of the possible forms of qualitative evaluation, in the field of work with adult educators. Supervision structures a context where theory and practice, emotions and cognitions, values, representations and fears, anxieties and conflicts can be made to dialogue in continuation. The supervisor continuously offers feedback and interpretations to the educators, thanks to attentive listening and decodes what they express. The constructivist approach to Evaluation, on the one hand, gives full value to the subjectivity of the actors involved in the evaluation process and aims to interpret and understand. So, we can call it hermeneutic evaluation (Perla, 2004). Hermeneutic evaluation sets the problem of finding the meaning of the points of view of the participants. This is where the meeting point with the supervision activity, which consists precisely of a practice guided by a leader who helps the educators to better understand their theoretical frameworks of reference and their basic educational models, lies. Supervision and Evaluation therefore represent two important tools for developing the professionalism of the operators, as shown by the case-study analyzed. The practice of supervision is part of a path of  lifelong learning and education (Oggionni, 2013; Zannini, 2005), which passes through experimentation, evaluation and redesigning, in the face of constant monitoring of the needs and learning of the individual and of the team.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Maria Grazia Riva, University of Milan-Bicocca
    Full ProfessorDepartment of Human Sciences for Education 'Riccardo Massa'
  • Nikoleta Ratsika, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Crete
    Lecturer

References

Aichorn, A. (1978). Gioventù disadattata: la psicoanalisi nell’educazione curata dagli enti assistenziali. Roma: Città Nuova.

Balint, M. (1964). The Doctor, his Patient and the Illness, London: Pitman.

Barone, R., Bruschetta, S., Giunta, S. (2010). Gruppoanalisi e comunità terapeutica. Uno strumento di lavoro basato su supervisione, valutazione e ricerca. Milano: Angeli.

Belardi, N., Wallnofer, G. (2007). La supervisione nelle professioni educative. Trento: Erickson.

Bernard, J.M., Goodyear, R.G. (1998). Fundamentals of Clinical Supervision. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bernfeld, S. (1971). Sisifo, ovvero i limiti dell’educazione. Firenze: Guaraldi.

Bion, W.R. (1970). Attention and interpretation. London: Tavistock Publications.

Bisio, C. (a cura di) (2002). Valutare in formazione. Azioni, significati e valori, Milano: Angeli.

Bruzzone, D. (2010). L’operatore sociale come professionista riflessivo. Milano: Angeli.

Burton, J., Launer, J. (eds.) (2003). Supervision and Support in Primary Care. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press.

Castellucci, A., Saiani, L., Sarchielli, G., Marletta, L. (Eds.) (2007). Viaggi guidati. Il tirocinio e il processo tutoriale nelle professioni sociali e sanitarie. Milano: Angeli.

Cellentani, O. (2004). Manuale di metodologia per il servizio sociale. Milano: Angeli.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & Education. New York: Kappa Delta Pi.

Dewey, J. (1984). The Later Works of John Dewey . Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press

Dewey, J. (1939). Theory of Valuation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Dozza, L., Setting e dinamiche anti-gruppo nei gruppi di formazione. In Contini, M. (a cura di) (2000). Il gruppo educativo: luogo di scontri e di apprendimento. Roma: Carocci.

Frabboni, F., Wallnofer, G., Belardi, N., Wiater, W. (Eds.). (2007). Le parole della pedagogia. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.

Guasti L. (1996). Valutazione e innovazione. Novara: De Agostini.

Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hadji, C. (1995). La valutazione delle azioni educative. Brescia: La Scuola.

Horder, J. (2001). The First Balint Group. Brit. J. Gen. Practice 51, 1038-9.

Lichtner, M. (2008). Esperienze vissute e costruzione del sapere. Le storie di vita nella ricerca sociale. Milano: Angeli.. Lichtner, M. (2002). La qualità delle azioni formative. Criteri di valutazione tra esigenze di funzionalità e costruzione del significato. Milano: Angeli.

Merlini, F., Filippini, S. (2006). La supervisione al servizio della valutazione. In Prospettive sociali e sanitarie, 19, 2006, pp. 7-11.

Oggionni, F. (2013). La supervisione pedagogica. Milano: Angeli.

Otten, H. (1998). Balint work in Germany. In Journal of the Balint Society. 26, 16-19.

Palmieri, C., Pozzoli, B., Rossetti, S.A., Tognetti, S. (2009). Pensare e fare tirocinio. Manuale di Tirocinio per l’educatore professionale. Milano: Angeli.

Palumbo, M. (2001). Il processo di valutazione. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Pandolfi L. (2012). Valutare servizi educativi. Un’introduzione. Lecce: Pensa.

Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Perla, L. (2004). Valutazione e qualità in università. Roma: Carocci.

Pinder, R., McKee, A., Sackin, P., Salinsky, J., Samuel, O., Suckling, H. (2006). Talking about my patient: the Balint approach in GP education. Occasional Paper No. 87, London: RoyalCollege of General Practitioners.

Ranieri, M.L. (2003). Il tirocinio di servizio sociale. Milano: Angeli.

Regoliosi, L., Scaratti, G. (a cura di). (2002). Il consulente del lavoro socio educativo. Roma: Carocci.

Richmond, M. (1917). Social diagnosis. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

Salinsky, J., Sackin, P., Southgate, L. (Eds.) (2000). Foreword to What are You feeling Doctor: identifying and avoiding defensive patterns in the consultation. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press.

Schön, D. (1993). Il professionista riflessivo. Bari: Dedalo.

Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Stake, R.E. (1988). La valutazione “responsiva”. In Giovannini, M.L. (Ed.) (1988). La valutazione delle innovazioni nella scuola. Bologna: Cappelli.

Stufflebeam, D. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In Stufflebeam, D., Kellaghan, T. (Eds.), The international handbook of educational evaluation. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Stufflebeam D., Shinkfield A.J. (1985). Systematic Evaluation, Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff.

Widdershoven, G. (2001). Dialogue in Evaluation: A Hermeneutic Perspective. In Id. (2001). Evaluation. London: Sage, 7, (2): 253–263.

Widdershoven, G., Sohl, C. (1999). Interpretation, Action, and Communication: Four Stories about a Supported Employment Program’, in Abma, T.A. (Ed.) (1999). Telling Tales, on Narrative and Evaluation, Advances in Program Evaluation. 6, pp. 109–30. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

Zannini, L. (2005). La tutorship nella formazione degli adulti. Uno sguardo pedagogico. Milano: Guerini.

Downloads

Published

2015-05-18

How to Cite

Riva, M. G., & Ratsika, N. (2015). Supervision as a Kind of Qualitative Evaluation. SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 4, 178-189. https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2015vol4.493