Level 2 - Supervision should be seen as a learning process at the start with evidence that the student takes more responsibility for sharing in the process of supervision as the practice learning period progresses. One might expect a Level 2 student to require more guidance from the practice teacher regarding their learning and development though the student should be taking more responsibility for this as their practice learning period progresses. Level 3 - One would expect to see the student share in the responsibility for the supervision process from the outset and clearly demonstrate their ability to prepare for supervision. The student should be able to articulate their learning needs from the outset, drawing on feedback from their 1st Practice Learning Opportunity and objectives cited in their Individual Learning Plan. One would also expect to see the student critically analyse and reflect on their practice and learning. A more pro-active approach to learning and development should be evident. The student at level 3 should require less direction and be able to work more autonomously as the practice learning period progresses though still making use of supports and supervision as appropriate to the decisions they are making. In relation to knowledge, skills, values and AOP, it may be useful to consider research undertaken by Jenny Secker (1993) and findings which suggest that we might expect a more ‘fragmented’ approach at Level 2 and a more ‘integrated’ approach at Level 3. Alongside this we already have some useful documents as enclosed, i.e., “Statements of Differential for Levels of Practice Learning” and “Guidelines for Tuning In for Level 2 and Level 3 Students”. Therefore information here should be read in conjunction with these two documents. Positive and Negative Indicators of Progression to Competence
Uses critical reflection feedback to improve knowledge and practice whilst also recognising impact on others Is professionally competent to represent the agency to members of the public, other professionals and public bodies etc. Is able and willing to contribute to team / agency working on policy, resources, effectiveness etc. Contribute to monitoring the outcomes, quality and cost effectiveness in meeting need, including acknowledgement of self as a resource Is able to identify unmet need and take appropriate action as per agency requirements Shares records with service users, carers, professionals and others as appropriate Written communications are and appropriate Is able to work within and agency mandates with regards to access to records, reports and the protection of data Works co-operatively with colleagues, other professionals, networks and systems within a multi-disciplinary and multi-organisational context Shows developing knowledge and understanding of the roles and responsibilities of those within the multi-disciplinary team Develops and maintains effective working relationships decisions that are not within his/her role and level of competence Is unable to demonstrate how their practice has been informed by theory and knowledge Tends to be descriptive when critically reflecting and has limited insight into the impact that their practice has on others Does not present as competent to represent the agency to members of the public or to other professionals Is unwilling or shows limited evidence of contribution to team working on policy, resources and effectiveness Is unable to understand the concept of monitoring outcomes and thus unable to contribute effectively to quality and cost effectiveness of services Is unable to identify unmet need and follow agency procedures regarding unmet need Shows little understanding of the use of self as a resource Is careless with information storage and demonstrates little understanding of the importance of following agency policy and procedure