An Exploration of Experiences and Preferences

in Clinical Supervision With Play Therapists

Tim S. VanderGast
William Paterson University

John R. Culbreth and Claudia Flowers

University of North Carolina at Charlotte
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Clinical supervision plays a significant role in the counseling profession. Understand-

ing and refining the supervisory process can foster development in the training of
therapists in general and play therapists in particular, ultimately resulting in better
mental health services for children. This study was designed to explore the experi-
ences and preferences of play therapists in clinical supervision. Participants (N ⫽
559) completed a Web-hosted survey that included items related to their current and
preferred supervision experiences as well as a demographic questionnaire. A subset
of the respondents (N ⫽ 238) completed questions related to their current supervision
experiences. Findings suggest that: (a) a substantial number of participants were not
receiving supervision for their work in play therapy, (b) supervisees prefer a com-
bination of group and individual supervision, (c) supervisor professional identity as
a play therapist and credential are salient supervisee preferences, and (d) compared
to current supervision experiences, supervisee preferences had a noteworthy impact
on practical significance demonstrated through large, moderate, and small effect
sizes. Results from the study offer an opportunity for professionals to consider
changes in how supervision is provided to therapists who work with children in play
settings.
Keywords: play therapy, clinical supervision, professional counseling, counselor preparation, child
therapy

Future demand for professional services in the areas of mental health, school,
marriage and family, and behavioral counseling is substantial (Bureau of Labor &
Statistics, 2009). These projections include the need for mental health services for
children. However, models of counseling have not adequately addressed the needs
of this population of young clients. There is evidence of growth in play therapy
training programs for helping professionals, the research base, and professional
associations to address the needs of this special population (Association for Play
Therapy [APT], 2007; Landreth, Baggerly, & Tyndall-Lind, 1999; Ray, Bratton,

Tim S. VanderGast, Department of Psychology, William Paterson University; John R. Culbreth,

Department of Counseling, University of North Carolina at Charlotte; Claudia Flowers, Department of
Educational Leadership, University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tim S. VanderGast, Department of
Psychology, Science Hall 266, William Paterson University, 300 Pompton Road, Wayne, NJ 07470-2103.
E-mail: vandergastt@wpunj.edu

174
International Journal of Play Therapy © 2010 Association for Play Therapy
2010, Vol. 19, No. 3, 174 –185 1555-6824/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0018882
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 175

Rhine, & Jones, 2001). A specific by-product of this growth includes the need for
an increase in professional supervision.
Clinical supervision plays a significant role in the counseling and general mental
health profession. Experienced counselors and educators utilize supervision to
teach and guide individuals with less professional experience. The process provides
professional development for future counselors as well as a quality control aimed at
the welfare and protection of clients (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004). Supervision
supports trainees and supervisees while simultaneously challenging them at an
appropriate level to facilitate their growth in clinical work (Stoltenberg, McNeill, &
Delworth, 1998).
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

PLAY THERAPY

Play therapy has emerged as a distinct therapeutic modality and been widely
accepted in the mental health field as a viable treatment for children between the
ages of 3 and 10 (Knell, 1998; Kottman, 2003; Landreth, 2002; Oaklander, 2001; Ray
et al., 2001; Reddy, Files-Hall, & Schaefer, 2005). Helping professionals work with
children who are experiencing social, physical, emotional, and behavioral difficul-
ties. This model of therapy is founded in the belief that play is the natural form of
communication and expression of children. Axline (1974) compared children’s
ability to “play out” problems with adults’ ability to “talk out” problems in therapy.
Play therapy is critical for a population not only chronologically younger, but
developmentally different than adults in how they communicate and receive infor-
mation.
Play therapy effectiveness is supported by substantial empirical research (Bag-
gerly & Jenkins, 2009; Baggerly, 2004; Jones & Landreth, 2002; Reddy et al., 2005).
This effectiveness has been examined across numerous variables such as age,
gender, setting, and theoretical orientation in two separate meta-analyses (Bratton,
Ray, Rhine, & Jones, 2005; LeBlanc & Ritchie, 2001). This research further
demonstrates the viability of play therapy as a therapeutic modality for children.

Supervision

Clinical supervision has been considered a cornerstone in counselor training

programs and has been identified as a specialty area and distinct intervention in its
own right (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004; Borders & Brown, 2005). Substantial
research supports the need for a greater understanding of the supervisory process
in all specialty areas. Examples of supervision research in specific specialty areas in
the mental health and counseling field include: (a) the field of substance abuse
(Culbreth, 1999), (b) school counseling and counselors in training (Murphy &
Kaffenburger, 2007), (c) marriage and family therapy (Roberts, Winek, & Mulgrew,
1999), (d) vocational rehabilitation (Herbert & Trusty, 2006), and (e) play therapy
(Giordano, 2000; Metcalf, 2003).
A key research focus which has emerged from the professional literature is the
examination of supervisee experiences and preferences for supervision. These
 176 VanderGast, Culbreth, and Flowers

studies have explored various settings and supervisee developmental levels ranging
from counselors in training (Hart & Nance, 2003; Ladany, Marotta, & Muse-Burke,
2001) to experienced therapists. Examples of research from specialty areas include
Nationally Certified Counselors (NCC) in school, community and independent
practice settings (Borders & Usher, 1992; Usher & Borders, 1993), school counsel-
ing (Schechtman & Wirzberger, 1999), community college counseling (Coll, 1995),
marriage and family therapy (Brock & Sibbald, 1988), substance abuse counseling
(Culbreth, Woodford, Levitt, & May, 2004), and play therapy (Fall, Drew, Chute,
& Moore, 2007).
Supervisee experiences and preferences for supervision are important to ex-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

amine if we wish to enhance the supervision process. Borders and Usher (1992)
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

indicated when preferences fail to reflect supervisee’s current reality, opportunity

for professional development and awareness may be lost. Examples of supervisee
preferences include supervisor credentials, professional identity, supervision for-
mat, and frequency of supervision. These aspects of the supervision environment,
in addition to theoretical approaches and models of supervision, have been exam-
ined in research (Borders & Usher, 1992; Coll, 1995), and documented in supervi-
sion literature (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004; Borders & Brown, 2005). Results from
these studies indicated a lack of supervision as well as supervisee preference for
increased supervision, no supervision, a credentialed supervisor, and similarity in
supervisor/supervisee professional identity.

PLAY THERAPY SUPERVISION

Although the need for increased examination and understanding of supervision

for play therapists was documented nearly 15 years ago (Bratton, Landreth, &
Homemeyer, 1993; Kranz & Lund, 1994), empirical studies of play therapy super-
vision are sparse in the literature. However, this appears to be shifting. Recently
published studies have examined factors such as counter transference (Metcalf,
2003), perceived training needs of supervisors (Fall et al., 2007), analysis and
effectiveness of a supervision intervention (Giordano, 2000), and overall percep-
tions of the supervisory process (Bergeron, 2004).
However, research has yet to explore clinical supervision of play therapists
based on supervisee experiences. This need has been recognized by major contrib-
utors in the supervision and play therapy fields (Borders & Brown, 2005; Landreth,
2002). The specialty area of play therapy requires a unique set of skills and as a
result, may require specific considerations and approaches within the supervisory
context.
Therefore, the more that can be understood about the supervision experiences
and preferences for this group of practitioners, the more guidance will be made
available for future supervision efforts and initiatives. An examination of play
therapist experiences and preferences is warranted to address the following re-
search questions. What are the current supervision experiences of play therapists?
What are the preferred supervision experiences of play therapists? What differ-
ences exist between play therapy supervisees’ clinical supervision experiences and
preferences?
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 177

METHODOLOGY

Participants

In the summer of 2008, 2000 members of the Association for Play Therapy
(APT) were invited to participate in this study. Respondent inclusion criteria were:
(a) not hold a Registered Play Therapist (RPT) or Registered Play Therapist
Supervsior (RPT-S) credential and (b) currently or within the past 12 months
worked with children in a play therapy setting. A total of 559 invitees responded to
the survey, resulting in a 27.95% response rate.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Participant ages were grouped and ranged from 22 to 70 years old, with a mean
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

age of M ⫽ 43, SD ⫽ 12. An examination of the categories revealed that partici-

pants were fairly evenly distributed between the ages of 26 to 60 years old. Gender
distribution indicated 92.1% of respondents were women. The distribution for Race
indicated participants were predominantly Caucasian (89.6%). Participants indi-
cated they work primarily in independent practice (43.6%), agency settings
(39.7%), and school settings (20.4%). Respondents identified primarily as Play
Therapists (41.1%) and Professional Counselors (37.7%). Most participants held a
minimum of a Master’s degree (89.3%) in their respective fields. Years of experi-
ence ranged from less than one year to 44 years (M ⫽ 6.98) in the field of play
therapy.

Instrumentation

The play therapy supervision questionnaire used in this study was adapted
previous from research (Coll, 1995; Culbreth, 1999; Culbreth et al., 2004; Usher &
Borders, 1992). Respondents were asked about their current and preferred expe-
riences in supervision. The adapted survey was evaluated and modified by three
professionals in the fields of supervision, play therapy, and survey research design.
The first part of the survey contained 14 questions in the supervision experience
of respondents and focused on type of supervision received (i.e., group, individual,
peer group), frequency of supervision sessions, characteristics of the supervisor, and
approaches to supervision (i.e., self report, video tape, or live supervision). Types
of questions included forced-choice, choose all that apply, and frequency questions
that were rated on a 5-point scale (1 ⫽ never and 5 ⫽ always). Part two of the survey
addressed preferred supervision and included nine questions similar to those in
section one. The final section of the survey included eight demographic questions
to obtain background information on participants. Demographic questions in-
cluded: (a) age, (b) gender (c) race, (d) work setting, (e) professional identity, (f)
certifications, (g) years of experience as a play therapist, and (h) level of education.

Procedure

Prior to initiating the study, the researcher pilot tested the survey in an online
environment to peers who utilize play therapy. After obtaining institutional review
 178 VanderGast, Culbreth, and Flowers

board (IRB) approval, the researcher contacted APT to request a random list of
2,000 e-mail addresses of members from the association. This request specified a list
of APT members who did not hold the RPT or RPT-S credential.
Once the list of potential participants was obtained, a multiple contact strategy
(Dillman, 2007) was employed to encourage participants to complete the survey
and promote an optimum response rate. Prospective participants were initially
contacted with a prenotice e-mail and four days later, were sent an e-mail which
served as a letter of invitation to join the study and access the Web-hosted survey.
A week later, a follow-up e-mail was sent to participants thanking those who had
responded and encouraged others to access the survey. The fourth and final e-mail
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

notification was sent a week later thanking those who had responded and encour-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

aged others to access the survey. Data collection was conducted over a 3-week
period. Shortly after the data collection period, the researcher arranged a random
drawing from participant e-mails and contacted each of the four winning partici-
pants to arrange delivery of $50 gift cards.

RESULTS

Survey respondents (N ⫽ 559) were asked about their preference for the type
of clinical supervision they receive for play therapy clients. Participants indicated
that they preferred to receive a combination of group and individual supervision
(60.1%) more than any other type. In terms of frequency of supervision, partici-
pants reported a preference for receiving supervision once every two weeks
(34.0%) or once a week (32.0%). Participants indicated no preference (89.6%) for
supervisor gender.
Participants indicated a preference for their supervisors’ professional identity
as Play Therapist (82.8%) and Professional Counselor (41.3%). For credential,
participants prefer to be supervised by an RPT-S (87.8%), followed by a Licensed
Professional Counselor (28.8%). Preference results for supervision format, which
were based on a 5-point rating scale, revealed self report (M ⫽ 4.48) and videotape
review (M ⫽ 3.31) formats of interest for play therapist surveyed. In terms of
participants’ preferences for goals in supervision, improvement of skills and tech-
niques (M ⫽ 4.59), professional support (M ⫽ 4.51), and an increase in self
awareness (M ⫽ 4.44) were revealed as salient goals. Preferences for topics dis-
cussed in play therapy supervision included identifying play themes (M ⫽ 4.23) and
case conceptualization (M ⫽ 4.18).

Current Supervision Experiences

Participants were asked, “Are you currently being supervised for your play
therapy practice?” Of the 559 respondents, 238 (43%) reported they were currently
receiving supervision. In terms of frequency of supervision, participants reported
receiving supervision once a week (39.4%) or once a month (30%). Participants
reported their supervisors’ professional identities as Play Therapist (51%) and
Professional Counselor (36%). For credential, RPT-S (48%) was most common
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 179

credential, followed by Licensed Social Worker (30%) and Licensed Professional

Counselor (29%). Participants indicated credentialing or certification requirement
(44%) and professional development (30.7%) as primary reasons for seeking
supervision. The following item scores for frequency were based on a 5-point rating
scale (1 ⫽ never and 5 ⫽ always). Self report (M ⫽ 4.63) and videotape review
(M ⫽ 1.97) were revealed as the most frequently used formats for supervision. For
goals evident in supervision, professional support (M ⫽ 4.43) and improvement of
skills and techniques (M ⫽ 4.26) emerged as the most frequent responses. Partic-
ipants revealed working with parents (M ⫽ 3.92) and case conceptualization (M ⫽
3.79) as the most frequent topics discussed. Enlarging meaning (M ⫽ 3.26) and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

diversity/multicultural issues (M ⫽ 3.03) were reported as the least frequent topics

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

discussed. Participants were asked for background information on their supervisors’

role, play therapy caseload, gender, and race. Results revealed participants’ viewed
their supervisors’ role as primarily directive (58%) compared with nondirective
(31%), that their supervisors do carry an active caseload (69%), are female (81%),
and Caucasian (93%).

Differences Between Current and Preferred Supervision Experiences

Differences between the current and preferred supervisor professional identity,

supervisor credentials, and type of supervision are reported in Table 1. For super-
visor professional identity, the largest difference was found for the identity of Play

Table 1. Percentage, Rank, and Differences Between Preferred and Current Supervisor Professional
Identity, Supervisor Credentials, and Type of Supervision
Current Preferred
Differences
Items % Rank % Rank (P ⫺ C)a
Professional identity
Play therapist 51 1 86 1 35
Marriage/family therapist 16 5 29 4 13
Administrator 6 6 0 8 ⫺6
School counselor 2 8 8 6 6
Prof counselor 36 2 42 2 6
Clinical psychologist 18 4 23 5 5
School psychologist 3 7 4 7 1
Social worker 32 3 33 3 1
Supervisor credential
RPT-S 48 1 90 1 42
RPT 15 5 28 3 13
Social worker 30 2.5 24 4 ⫺6
Licensed psychologist 16 4 18 5 2
ACS 4 6 5 6 1
LPC 30 2.5 30 2 0
Type of supervision
Group/individual 32 2 66 1 34
Phone 11 4 5 4 ⫺6
Individual 61 1 53 2 ⫺8
Peer group 13 3 20 3 7
Online 3 5 4 5 1
Note. RPT ⫽ registered play therapist; RPT-S ⫽ registered play therapist supervisor; ACS ⫽ approved
clinical supervisor; LPC ⫽ licensed professional counselor. N ⫽ 238.
a
P ⫺ C ⫽ percentage of preferred minus the percentage of current.
 180 VanderGast, Culbreth, and Flowers

Therapist; most respondents (86%) preferred the professional identify of Play

Therapist whereas only 51% of respondents currently identified their supervisor as
Play Therapist. Most respondents (90%) preferred the credential of RPT-S whereas
only 48% of respondents currently identified their supervisor as RPT-S. Two-thirds
of respondents (66%) preferred a combination of group and individual supervision
whereas only 32% of respondents identified this as their current type of supervision.
Differences between the current and preferred supervision format, goals, and
topic discussion are reported in Table 2. Means and SDs are based on a 5-point
rating scale. Effect sizes were calculated for comparison with d of .20 as a small
effect, d of .50 as a moderate effect, and d of .80 as a large effect (Cohen, 1988).
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Differences between four of the five items for current and preferred supervision
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

format revealed a large effect. For supervision goals, differences for avoiding
burnout, developing conceptual skills, and developing greater self awareness skills
produced a moderate effect. For topic discussion, enlarging meaning revealed a
large effect while diversity/multicultural issues and identifying themes produced a
moderate effect.

DISCUSSION

The main purpose of this study was to explore experiences and preferences of
play therapists in clinical supervision. Results indicated that 57% of the research
participants were not currently receiving supervision for their work with children in

Table 2. Means, SDs, and Effect Sizes (ESs) for Differences Between Preferred and Current
Supervision Format, Goals, and Topic Discussion
Current Preferred
M SD M SD ES
Supervision format
Live observation 1.44 1.11 2.91 .96 1.42
Video review 1.97 1.46 3.31 1.00 1.09
Audio review 1.16 .83 2.42 1.04 1.35
Live supervision 1.27 1.01 2.30 1.12 .97
Self-report 4.63 .88 4.48 .70 ⫺.19
Goals
Avoid burn 3.36 1.23 4.00 .99 .58
Conceptual skills 3.89 1.00 4.37 .68 .57
Self-awareness 3.98 1.06 4.44 .68 .53
Improve skills 4.26 .81 4.59 .59 .47
Particular client 3.95 .89 4.20 .76 .30
Professional support 4.34 .86 4.51 .63 ⫺.22
Topic discussion
Enlarging mean 3.26 1.11 4.07 .75 .87
Diversity 3.03 .94 3.67 .83 .72
Identifying themes 3.71 .96 4.23 .66 .64
Esteem building 3.47 .91 3.86 .81 .45
Case concept 3.79 .92 4.18 .73 .47
Responding effort 3.37 1.03 3.71 .85 .36
Limit setting 3.46 .86 3.71 .84 .29
Work with parents 3.92 .85 4.18 .67 .34
Reflection content 3.43 1.08 3.72 .88 .30
Reflection feelings 3.72 .91 3.88 .79 .19
Connecting with child 3.77 1.06 3.89 .91 .12
Note. N ⫽ 238.
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 181

play therapy settings. These findings are consistent with previous research in
specialty areas within the counseling field including 53% of community college
counselors (Coll, 1995) and 32.1% of NCC’s (Borders & Usher, 1992) who were not
receiving supervision. Although an in-depth examination regarding reasons for not
receiving supervision is beyond the scope of the current study, participants were
asked to provide a primary reason. Respondents indicated they utilize informal
consultation with colleagues and supervision was not provided by their work
setting. Responses also included a lack of availability and accessibility to an RPT-S,
lack of affordability, and participant’s indicating they had “finished” or “com-
pleted” supervision as part of the RPT application process. Further research is
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

warranted to investigate reasons why play therapists are not receiving supervision.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

These findings are noteworthy. The lack of receiving or providing supervi-

sion raises a concern for the field of play therapy. To address these deficiencies,
professionals who work in the field of play therapy may consider organizing
community or regional supervision groups for support for professional devel-
opment and cost reduction. Additionally, with advances in technology, phone
and Internet supervision with an RPT-S or credentialed supervisor may be a
viable option. Finally, APT may consider emphasizing both the ethical imper-
ative (Association for Counselor Education & Supervision, 1993) and the
necessity of supervision (Fall et al., 2007). This may be achieved through state
and national conferences as well as media (i.e., Web site, newsletter, or journal)
publications.
Statistical analyses revealed that the majority of participants indicated a pref-
erence for a combination of group and individual supervision. This finding is
valuable because it informs administrators and supervisors in professional settings
who may or may not currently provide supervision. Results may encourage a shift
from a single method in play therapy supervision toward a more rounded super-
vision experience for supervisees. A second finding for preferences revealed the
salience of supervisor professional identity and credential. Specifically, more than
80% of respondents indicated a preference for a supervisor with a professional
identity of Play Therapist as well as the RPT-S credential. These findings support
previous research (Borders & Usher, 1992; Coll, 1995) which reported a supervisee
preference for an experienced and credentialed supervisor with advanced and
specific supervisory training.
While the RPT-S credential offered by APT requires both play therapy expe-
rience and supervision training, previous research (Fall et al., 2007) has identified
deficiencies in RPT-S training and understanding of clinical supervision. Although
recent changes in standards for the RPT-S credential have emerged (APT, 2008),
advanced and specific supervisory training appears to be needed in the field of play
therapy. The inclusion of a supervision course in Master’s level counselor training
programs, a deficit which has been identified in supervision literature (McMahon &
Simons, 2004) represents one example of specific training. Advanced training may
include obtaining the Approved Clinical Supervisor (ACS) credential offered by
the National Board for Certified Counselors (NBCC).
This study sought to analyze the differences between participant’s current and
preferred supervision experiences. Effect sizes indicated practical significance re-
garding supervision format, goals, and topic discussion. The supervision formats of
live supervision, live observation, audio, and videotape review were shown to have
 182 VanderGast, Culbreth, and Flowers

a substantial impact demonstrated through a large effect size (Cohen, 1988).

Results of the data analysis suggest respondents’ desire an increase in supervision
as well as an openness to format variations. Effect sizes for supervision goals ranged
from small to moderate. The results imply that participants desire an increase in
discussion of supervision goals (or formation) such as avoiding burnout, developing
conceptual skills, and increasing self awareness. Effects sizes for topics discussed in
supervision ranged from small to large. Findings suggest that participants have a
desire to focus on specific play therapy topics including enlarging meaning, diver-
sity, and identifying themes within supervision sessions. Enlarging meaning repre-
sents one such example. Supervisors and counselor educators may benefit from this
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

finding by improving methods of teaching, providing examples, and focusing on this

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

topic in supervision. The salience of diversity and multicultural issues within a play
therapy context may reflect current trends in the general counseling, mental health,
and supervision fields (American Counseling Association, 2005; Bernard & Good-
year, 2004).
Overall findings from APT members’ current experiences may be inter-
preted as one dimensional. In contrast, results from the current study indicate
a supervisee preference and interest in a multidimensional supervision experi-
ence. This discrepancy demonstrates what Borders and Usher (1992) referred to
as lost opportunities for professional development and awareness. Additionally,
findings may indicate that supervisees have different needs based on age or
years of play therapy experience. This interpretation is supported in supervision
literature. Stoltenberg et al.’s (1998) Integrated Developmental Model (IDM)
proposed that professional development occurs through four stages which help
supervisors assess growth. This model provides one example for play therapy
supervisors to conceptualize sessions, particularly in the areas of topic discus-
sion and supervision goals.

Limitations and Counseling Implications

Several limitations for this study must be addressed. Generalizability of the

findings could be influenced by several factors. Data obtained from self report is
limited. The data represents only the answers of the participants who completed the
survey (i.e., there may be a difference between the respondent group and the
nonrespondent group). Despite a 28% response rate, caution is warranted to
generalize findings to the population of more than 4000 (non RPT and RPT-S)
members of APT or other play professionals outside of the association.
This study contributes to the overall understanding of what is occurring in the
specialty area of play therapy supervision. Additionally, it contributes to the extant
knowledge base of play therapy and supervision literature. The implications of the
study inform various aspects of the counseling field including play therapy practice,
professional supervision, and counselor education and training. Both supervisors
and supervisees are afforded a view of what is occurring within the specialty area
of play therapy and APT. Results from the study offer an opportunity for profes-
sionals to make changes in how supervision is provided to therapists who work with
children in play settings.
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 183

An examination of the findings may be of interest to the field of clinical

supervision to demonstrate how the play therapy specialty area approaches or
utilizes supervision. The design of this study contained specific factors directly from
the field of clinical supervision (e.g., self report and videotape formats, goals of case
conceptualization, and increased self awareness). Moreover, the study followed and
added to a research line from other specialty areas in the counseling field (Borders
& Usher, 1992; Brock & Sibbald, 1988; Coll, 1995; Hart & Nance, 2003; Ladany et
al., 2001; Schechtman & Wirzberger, 1999; Usher & Borders, 1993). Supervision
specialists may be interested in the experiences of play therapists post completion
of their degree.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

The current study serves as a baseline for supervisee experiences and prefer-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

ences. Future research is recommended to further explore play therapist experi-

ences and examine related factors in the specialty area of play therapy supervision.
Examples may include a detailed analysis of why members of APT do not receive
supervision and an investigation of developmental levels and needs based on
therapist age and years of experience. Research which examines the salience of the
supervisory relationship and working alliance is also recommended. In order to gain
a more complete picture of supervision perceptions or experiences, matched or
paired supervisor and supervisee dyads could reveal specific information that would
inform the counseling profession. Finally, a replication of the current study with
members of APT who hold the RPT and RPT-S credential is recommended.

CONCLUSION

This study adds to the existing literature by contributing new information about
play therapist experiences and preferences. Results from these findings offer pro-
fessionals both a view of what is occurring in the field and an opportunity to
consider changes in their play therapy supervision practice. There is a need for
standards, monitoring, and assurance that young clients and their families are
receiving quality counseling and professional services. Therefore, the task of the
growing play therapy community is to recognize the need for continued and
improved supervision standards and services. This may be achieved with a more
concerted and intentional effort to train play therapists in supervision and ensure
that practicing play therapists have access to quality supervision.

REFERENCES

American Counseling Association. (2005). ACA code of ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Association for Counselor Education and Supervision. (1993). Ethical guidelines for counseling super-
visors. Retrieved from http://www.acesonline.net/documents.asp
Association for Play Therapy. (2007). About APT overview. Retrieved from http://www.a4pt.org/
Association for Play Therapy. (2008). Guide RPT/S credentialing program. Retrieved from http://
www.a4pt.org/
Axline, V. M. (1974). Play therapy. New York: Random House Publishing Group.
Baggerly, J., & Jenkins, W. W. (2009). The effectiveness child-centered group play therapy on devel-
opmental and diagnostic factors in children who are homeless. International Journal of Play
Therapy, 18(1), 45–55.
 184 VanderGast, Culbreth, and Flowers

Baggerly, J. N. (2004). The effects of child-centered group play therapy on self-concept, depression, and
anxiety of children who are homeless. International Journal of Play Therapy, 13, 31–51.
Bergeron, K. (2004). Supervisors’ perceptions of the process of supervision with counselors who utilize
play therapy. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(04), 1259. (AAT No. 3127767)
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2004). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. Boston: Pearson.
Borders, L. D., & Brown, L. L. (2005). The new handbook of counseling supervision. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Borders, L. D., & Usher, C. H. (1992). Post-degree supervision: Existing and preferred practices. Journal
of Counseling & Development, 70, 594.
Bratton, S., Landreth, G., & Homemeyer, L. (1993). An intensive three day play therapy supervision/
training model. International Journal of Play Therapy, 2, 61–79.
Bratton, S., Ray, D., Rhine, T., & Jones, L. (2005). The efficacy of play therapy with children: A
meta-analytic review of the outcome research, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

376 –390.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Brock, G. W., & Sibbald, S. (1988). Supervision in AAMFT accredited programs: Supervisee percep-
tions and preferences. American Journal of Family Therapy, 16, 256 –261.
Bureau of Labor and Statistics. (2009). Occupational outlook handbook, 2010 –2011 edition. Retrieved June
18, 2009, from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos067.html
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coll, K. M. (1995). Clinical supervision of community college counselors: Current and preferred
practices. Counselor Education & Supervision, 35, 111.
Culbreth, J. R. (1999). Clinical supervision of substance abuse counselors: Current and preferred
practices. Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling, 20, 15.
Culbreth, J. R., Woodford, M. S., Levitt, D. H., & May, K. M. (2004). Current and preferred clinical
supervision experiences of home-based treatment providers. The Clinical Supervisor, 23, 83–99.
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Fall, M., Drew, D., Chute, A., & Moore, A. (2007). The voices of registered play therapists as
supervisors. International Journal of Play Therapy, 16, 133–146.
Giordano, M. A. (2000). Effectiveness of a child-centered self-reflective play therapy supervision model.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 3114. (AAT No. 3064391)
Hart, G. M., & Nance, D. (2003). Styles of counselor supervision as perceived by supervisors and
supervisees. Counselor Education and Supervision, 43, 146 –158.
Herbert, J. T., & Trusty, J. (2006). Clinical supervision practices and satisfaction within the public
vocational rehabilitation program. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 49, 66 – 80.
Jones, E. M., & Landreth, G. (2002). The efficacy of intensive individual play therapy for chronically ill
children. International Journal of Play Therapy, 11, 117–140.
Knell, S. K. (1998). Cognitive-behavioral play therapy. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 28.
Kottman, T. (2003). Partners in play: An Adlerian approach to play therapy (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA:
American Counseling Association.
Kranz, P. L., & Lund, N. L. (1994). Recommendations for supervising play therapists. International
Journal of Play Therapy, 3, 45–52.
Ladany, N., Marotta, S., & Muse-Burke, J. L. (2001). Counselor experience related to complexity of case
conceptualization and supervision preference. Counselor Education and Supervision, 40, 203–219.
Landreth, G. L. (2002). Play therapy: The art of the relationship (2nd ed.). New York: Brunner-
Routledge.
Landreth, G. L., Baggerly, J. N., & Tyndall-Lind, A. (1999). Beyond adapting adult counseling skills for
use with children: The paradigm shift to child-centered play therapy. The Journal of Individual
Psychology, 55, 272–288.
LeBlanc, M., & Ritchie, M. (2001). A meta-analysis of play therapy outcomes. Counselling Psychology
Quarterly, 14, 149 –163.
McMahon, M., & Simons, R. (2004). Supervision training for professional counselors: An exploratory
study. Counselor Education and Supervision, 43, 301–309.
Metcalf, L. M. (2003). Countertransferance among play therapists: Implications for therapist develop-
ment and supervision. International Journal of Play Therapy, 12, 31– 48.
Murphy, S., & Kaffenberger, C. (2007). ASCA national model: The foundation for supervision of
practicum and internship students. Professional School Counseling, 10, 289 –296.
Oaklander, V. (2001). Gestalt play therapy. International Journal of Play Therapy, 10, 45–55.
Ray, D., Bratton, S., Rhine, T., & Jones, L. (2001). The effectiveness of play therapy: Responding to the
critics. International Journal of Play Therapy, 10, 85–108.
Reddy, L. A., Files-Hall, T. M., & Schaefer, C. E. (2005). Empirically based play interventions for
children. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Roberts, T. W., Winek, J., & Mulgrew, J. (1999). A systems/dialectical model of supervision: A symbolic
process. Contemporary Family Therapy, 21, 291–302.
 Experiences and Preferences With Play Therapists 185

Schechtman, Z., & Wirzberger, A. (1999). Needs and preferred style of supervision among Israeli school
counselors at different stages of professional development. Journal of Counseling & Development,
77, 456 – 464.
Stoltenberg, C. D., McNeill, B., & Delworth, U. (1998). An overview of IDM. In IDM supervision: An
integrated developmental model. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Usher, C. H., & Borders, L. D. (1993). Practicing counselors’ preferences for supervisory style and
supervisory emphasis. Counselor Education & Supervision, 33, 66.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.