Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic,
Triadic, and Group Supervision
Agus Taufiq and Herdi Herdi
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229, Bandung, Indonesia
Keywords: Multicultural counselor, counselor education and supervision, wisdom.
Abstract: Wisdom is one of the crucial requirements of personality competence for multicultural counselor. It
determines the success of relationships, processes, and outcomes of counselling. Wisdom is also considered
as one of the goals of education in higher education level. Supervision is an essential component. It plays a
fundamental role and becomes an integral part of counselor education program to develop and ensure personal
and professional competence, including wisdom. Dyadic, triadic, and group supervisions are strategies of
creative supervision that are predicted to be able to influence wisdom development of multicultural counselor
candidates effectively. This article discusses the conceptual framework and praxis of wisdom development
through dyadic, triadic, and group supervisions in 21st century counselor education and supervision.
1 INTRODUCTION
The issue of the importance of developing the
wisdom of multicultural counselor candidates in
counselor education program is getting stronger.
This condition is due to the influence of 21
st
century life and a future that are characterized by
multicultural and pluralistic societies. They
constantly confront the paradox between
opportunities vs. threats, harmony vs. conflict, and
certainty vs. uncertainty. Faced with these
conditions, the vision of counselling and
multicultural counsellors of the 21
st
century and the
future is intended to all counsellors and their
cultural background. It is include
RESPECTFUL“(D'Andrea and Daniels, 2001). They
are completed with the density of needs and
problems they face. A counselor has a strong and
important position to develop academic and
affective competencies of the 21
st
century that can
help him/her achieve future success (Dahir, 2009)
and act as a cultural mediator that can facilitate
development and advocacy of counselees
(Portman, 2009).
In multicultural counselling, wisdom is a
fundamental quality of personality, the culmination
of an effective multicultural counsellor’s
competence, and the character of a master
counselor (Hanna, et al, 1999). Empirical studies
reveal that 14% of the competencies (expertise) of
multicultural counselling is influenced by wisdom
of counselor (Phan et al, 2009).
Although wisdom occupies a vital role in
multicultural life and counselling, it tends to be
neglected in education. Therefore, it is necessary to
reform education, especially with regard to vision
and purpose for the 21
st
century. Indeed, the main
vision and goals of education (including teacher
and counselor education) are to develop wisdom of
learners (including wisdom of prospective teachers
and multicultural counsellors) (Jones, 2015;
Ozolins, 2015; Sternberg, 2013; Lunenberg and
Korthagen, 2009; Hanna, et al, 1999).
Wisdom can develop dynamically through
experience and education (Frantz, 2014; Brown,
2004). In counselor education programs, wisdom
of aspiring multicultural counsellors can flourish if
they are given the opportunity to question, reflect,
internalize, and integrate their experiences (Hanna,
et al, 1999) in both personal and professional
experiences. This activity can be facilitated by
counselor educators through supervision activities.
In counselor education programs, supervision is
a vital component, fundamental intervention, and
instrumental pedagogy for the education (Bernard
and Goodyear, 2014). It also occupies a central role
in personal and professional development of
counsellors (Walter and Young, 1999; Corey, et al,
2011; Page and Wosket, 2003). Counselor
education programs need to reflect on standards
446
Taufiq, A. and Herdi, H.
Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic, Triadic, and Group Supervision.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 1, pages 446-453
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

that emphasize the importance of supervising the
development of counselor candidate competencies
through relevant individual, triadic, and group
(Council for Accreditation of Counselling and
Related Educational Programs, 2015; Association
for Counselor Education and Supervision, 2011).
The experience of getting good supervision in the
internship program has a significant impact on the
performance of counselor (Hunt and Gilmore,
2011).
Although, theoretically and empirically,
(individual/dyadic, triadic, or group) supervision
becomes a crucial component in counselor
education program, supervision has not been
implemented optimally. Other facts show that there
has not been a full review and consistent agreement
among experts about the specific format used to
supervise personal and professional development,
including the wisdom of multicultural counselor
candidates. This article is a response to the void by
reviewing the concept and praxis of dyadic, triadic,
and group supervision in developing the wisdom of
multicultural counselor candidates in counselor
education programs.
2 MULTICULTURAL
COUNSELOR WISDOM
The concept and characteristics of wisdom are
multidimensional constructs. There is no
consensus among experts and researchers about the
construct of wisdom despite the continued efforts.
In the Balance Theory of Wisdom, wisdom is
defined as “mediated knowledge of the healing of
values to achieve the common good (Sternberg,
2005). The Berlin Wisdom Paradigm group defines
wisdom as ”expert knowledge in basic life
pragmatics, including: planning, management and
understanding of life “(Baltes, et al, 2005). Other
experts define wisdom as a construct that can only
be manifested in the context of real-life processes
(Yang, 2008). The definitions show that wisdom,
as a form of tacit knowledge, can only be observed
when it is displayed in a behavior in which the
purpose is to achieve the common good in life.
Other experts define wisdom as a combination, or
integration, of personality characteristics,
including cognitive, reflective, and affective
dimensions (Ardelt, 2011).
Wise multicultural counsellors have a set of
cognitive and affective traits. Cognitive
dimensions include dialectical reasoning, efficient
coping skills, tolerance of ambiguity, point of
view, discovery and problem-solving, and
metacognition. Affective dimension and
consciousness include empathy, caring, feeling
recognition, deotomatization, and ingenuity
(Hanna and Ottens, 1995; Hanna, et al, 1999).
The results of the literature study found five
components of wisdom. They are (a) cognitive, i.e.
logical thinking and reasoning; (b) ownership, i.e.
the ability to understand problems by clearly seeing
and capturing their essence; (c) reflective attitude
that is to think deeply about something, people, and
themselves, and thinking before acting or speaking;
(d) caring for others is the ability to understand the
perspectives and feelings of others; and (e) the
skills to overcome real life problems, i.e. the ability
to apply all components of wisdom in real life
(Bluck and Gluck, 2005). The study found six
characteristics of the counsellor’s wisdom. They
are reflective attitudes, possessions, emotional
skills, cognitive abilities, real-world skills, and
concern for others (Osterlund, 2014).
Wisdom emphasizes depth, subtlety, and
richness of understanding as an important part of
multicultural counselling (Hanna, et al, 1999). The
integration of wealth and breadth of experience can
help counselor to recognize the essence of
humanity in a universal etic and emic unique
cultural heritage within each counselee he/she
serves. Effective multicultural counsellors need
wisdom that includes and penetrates the core of
personality quality condition that is necessary to
foster effective multicultural counselling
relationships.
A wise multicultural counselor will be able to
appreciate different view and culture of counselee.
A wise counselor will be free of thoughts, feelings,
and behaviors oriented only on two opposite poles
– good vs. bad and true vs. wrong in establishing
counselling and multicultural interaction with
counselee and others.
A study found that the key factors influencing
the development of wisdom are professional
experience (Baltes, et al, 2005). Other studies have
found that effective learning to develop wisdom is
a reflection through supervision activities in
counselor education program (Phan et al, 2009).
Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic, Triadic, and Group Supervision
447

3 MULTICULTURAL
COUNSELOR SUPERVISION
FORMAT IN COUNSELOR
EDUCATION
ACES (2011) and CACREP (2015) recommend
the application of supervision, in relevant
individual/dyadic, triadic, and group for personal
and professional development. The personal and
professional development referred to in this article
is the wisdom as the fundamental quality of
personality and the culmination of the competence
of effective multicultural counsellors. The
following provides a description of the definitions,
advantages and disadvantages, procedures, and
practical guidance of the three supervisory formats.
3.1 Dyadic Supervision
The dyadic/individual supervision can be defined
as a supervisory activity involving a supervisor and
a supervisee.
Strength and weakness. The results of the study
show that the advantages of individual supervision
lie in (a) more focus on individual attention; (b)
more focus on providing direction and
encouragement in the face of specific cases, (c)
supervisee can be the initiators of their own
learning process, (d) developing self-clinical
ability, (e) gain a better understanding of the case
materials and clinical processes of the supervisor,
and (f) increase understanding of the power of
relationships to achieve positive change (Walter
and Young, 1999).
Empirical studies find that supervisee perceives
the superiority of dyadic supervision, namely
individualized, deeper and more secure,
developing self-awareness, and getting feedback
from supervisor fully. Supervisor perceives dyadic
supervision more deeply, more challenging,
individualized, and more qualified supervisory
relationships. Meanwhile, dyadic supervision
weaknesses, according to the supervisor’s
perception, cover a narrow perspective, too long
time, and resource differences. Supervisee
perceives the weakness of dyadic supervision in the
form of idiosyncratic supervisor behavior and
evaluation sessions unhelpful and rarely performed
(Borders, et al., 2012).
Best practice guidelines. The best practice
guidelines for using dyadic supervision include (a)
establishing effective supervisor-supervisee
relationships; (b) establishing a structured
approach with specific content and competencies;
(c) evaluating the effect of supervision; (d)
integrating ethics and professional development
into supervision; and (e) continuing the post-
certified professional relationship (Sellers, et al.,
2016).
3.2 Triadic Supervision
Triadic Supervision is a “tutorial and mentoring
relationship” between a supervisor and two
supervisees in one meeting simultaneously”
(Council for Accreditation of Counselling and
Related Educational Programs, 2015). The results
show that triadic supervision may complement
individual and group supervision as it provides
unique learning opportunities not found in both
supervisory formats (Borders, et al, 2015).
Triadic supervision was first introduced by
Spice (1976). It is motivated by three main points.
The first is the importance of helping supervisors
to change negative thoughts and attitudes toward
supervision and evaluation to be more positive.
Second, whenever supervision brings many
benefits as a professional development process,
then more effective peer supervision is required.
Third, supervision methods should be developed
and made possible for use in various scenes.
The theoretical assumptions underlying triadic
supervision are that (a) supervision is not a single,
but complex and combined process of several
significant interplaying elements; and (b) good
supervision provides an opportunity for supervisor
to become more skilled in the critical evaluation
process and develop a positive attitude toward the
supervision and supervisor process.
The triadic supervisory structure involves two
supervisees and a supervisor at each supervision
session. These three men play a particular role –as
a supervisor, commentator, or facilitator–
alternately during each supervision session (Spice,
1976; Spice and Spice, 1976).
The processes involved in the triadic
supervision model include (a) presentation of the
results of the counselling practice via video tape,
audio-tape, or case report; (b) art provides good
critical comments; (c) enhance dialogue; and (d)
deepen communication here and now between
supervisees and commentators.
Empirical studies show that triadic supervision
models can facilitate the exchange of feedback in
five key areas: counselling performance skills,
cognitive counselling skills, and self-awareness,
self-reflection, and professional behaviors (Avent,
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
448

et al., 2015). In addition, triadic supervision can
also be applied in a counselling practice,
developing a supervisory positive attitude toward
supervision, increasing competence, developing
critical thinking skills, and being able to adapt to
various educational and vocational scenes (Spice,
1976). Other studies have shown triadic
supervision to be more creative and effective
(Hein, et al., 2011; Lawson, et al., 2009; Lawson,
et al., 2010) and are used extensively in counselor
education programs.
Borders et al (2012) found that supervisors
perceive triadic supervisory greed, i.e.: limited
time, potentially incompatible fellow supervisors,
and preference for supervisor feedback.
Supervisors perceive the weakness of triadic
supervision, i.e.: limited time, group dynamics as
static or too dynamic, excessive supervisory role,
and how to manage group involvement, and
incompatibility among fellow supervisors.
Best practice guidelines cover (a) the Focus on
the preparation of supervision sessions; (b) inform
the supervisor's theoretical orientation to the
supervisee; (c) provide the necessary information
related to the supervision process and practices; (d)
to consider the needs of supervisors who are in
conflict with the group; (e) to consider differences
of supervisors’ development; (f) to manage time
effectively; (g) to address emerging sensitive
issues; (h) to pay attention to patterns evolving in
supervisory relationships; (i) to seek feedback on
the merits and limitations of triadic supervision; (j)
to help oversee the structure objectives and targets
that are conducive to the supervision process; (k)
to recognize that the supervisee’s self-defense can
influence the dynamics of supervision; (l) to
anticipate schedule changes and to have procedures
to address them; (m) to recognize that the
evaluation process can be a challenge in itself; and
(n) to anticipate ethical issues that may arise
(Gillam and Baltimore, 2010).
3.3 Group Supervision
Group supervision is “regular meeting of a group
of supervisee and a supervisor to monitor the
quality of performance and progress of self-
understanding and professional identity” (Bernard
and Goodyear, 2009). Supervisee is assisted by
supervisor and through feedback from the
interaction with other supervisees to achieve the
goal. In other words, group supervision will be the
main forum that brings together supervisor and
supervisees to develop competence, confidence,
compassion, and creativity (Proctor, 2000). Simply
stated, group supervision is a supervisory activity
involving a supervisor with several supervisees
that is aimed at developing personal competence
and professional identity through feedback on
supervisory experiences from other supervisees
and supervisor.
Experts recommend the number of group
supervision members to be ranging from 3-6
supervisees to create a conducive and safe
atmosphere for honest, comprehensive, and
effective presentation of experience and feedback
(Page and Wosket, 2003; Proctor, 2000). Other
experts argue that the number of members in a
supervision group is limited to 4-8 homogenous
supervisees at the developmental level and the
topic of interest (Newman, et al, 2013).
The expert considers that the use of group
supervision in education and professional
development of counsellors is essential. Single
subject case studies found that task-oriented group
supervision, contributing to learning, and increase
affiliation of supervisory groups (Werstlein and
Borders, 1997). Therefore, Cohen (2004) advises
supervisor to prepare and use group supervision.
Strength vs. Weakness of Group Supervision.
Group supervision has several advantages over
individual/dyadic supervision. First, it can
supervise multiple supervisees at the same time.
Secondly, there is an atmosphere for supervisors to
share experiences in dealing with similar problems
conducively. Third, the supervisor may receive
reflection, feedback, and input from other
supervisor and supervisees. Fourth, supervisor can
test emotional response of each supervisee to the
material presented. Fifth, an extensive life
experience can increase empathy amongst
supervisees, supervisors, and counselees. Sixth,
there is a wide opportunity to use a variety of
supervision techniques. Finally, there is a learning
opportunity for supervisors on how to supervise
group management and group dynamics shown
group supervision (Hawkins and Shohet, 2010).
Group supervision provides a unique opportunity
for supervisees, including feedback from fellow
supervisors, social networking development, many
listeners, learning through observation, empathy
development, modeling and discussion exercises
and sharing positive and productive ideas,
developing speaking skills and public
presentations, and professional development
(Valentino, et al., 2016).
Group supervision also has several
disadvantages: (a) sometimes, it tends to reflect the
Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic, Triadic, and Group Supervision
449

dynamics of individual therapy if the supervisor
focuses only on a particular supervisee; (b) group
norms set by group leaders, enabling a supervisory
member to feel restrained; (c) competition amongst
supervisees may weaken group dynamics and
inhibit supervisory activity; (d) group that are too
dynamic or static may ignore the interests of
counselees present in supervision activities; and (e)
limited time for each supervisor to obtain
supervision (Hawkins and Shohet, 2010). Other
disadvantages for supervisees include causing
anxiety for supervisees who are not accustomed to
present case in public; do not get adequate attention
when the case urges; disturbed by other group
members; there is a monopoly, and subgroups
formation; and group tends to be static or dynamic
is negative group (Andersson, 2008).
Type. Proctor (2000) proposes four types of
groups for group supervision: autoritative,
participatory, co-operative, and peer group
supervision. This typology is formulated with the
aim of assisting supervisors and supervisees in (a)
identifying roles and responsibilities in groups, (b)
clarifying all contracts between supervisors,
counsellors/supervisors and agents, and (c) making
appropriate agreements and rules “best“ for the
group, either between supervisor and the
supervisees, or among the supervisees.
Type 1: Supervision of authoritative group.
This type is also called group supervision. In this
type, the supervisor takes full responsibility for
supervising the supervisees. The main role of
supervision is observer/learner. In order to take
supervision effectively, supervisor need to pay
attention to the principles of (a) setting goals, (b)
agreeing roles and responsibilities, (c) respecting
the context and expectations of other stakeholders,
(d) understanding style, learning needs, agenda,
and the terms of reference of supervisors, (e)
confidence and safe assumptions about best
practice, and (f) capable of carrying out managerial
and administrative tasks appropriate to a particular
context.
Type 2: Supervision of participative groups.
This type is also called supervision with group.
This means that supervisor take primary
responsibility in supervising, managing, and
becoming group facilitator. However, supervisor is
also encouraged, directed, and taught to supervise
each other actively.
Type 3: Co-operative supervision. This type is
also called supervision by group. Supervisor
remains responsible for all supervisory activities
with less-active leadership roles. Each supervisor
is responsible to identify what the group wants and
how it is supervised.
In order for group 2 and 3 type supervisory
activities to be effective, supervisor needs to take
account of best practice principles on type 1,
supplemented by (a) managing supervision work,
(b) establishing, maintaining and improving
supervisory relationships, (c) supporting and
challenging supervisees in developing themselves
for the better; and (d) overlapping relief efforts,
such as counselling and supervision.
Type 4: Peer group supervision. In this type,
there is no supervisor responsible for performance
and ensuring group welfare. Formal leadership can
be appointed alternately according to the
agreement of all members of supervisees. Each
supervisee is responsible and equally responsible
to supervise and/or to be supervised.
Supervision Procedure. Group supervision
procedures that need to be considered in order for
the supervision process to be effective include
several steps. (1) The supervisees identify/pay
attention to the video counselling content and
request feedback. (2) Peer supervisor selects or
obtains a role, a perspective, or a task to review the
recording of the presenter. (3) Recording sections
are presented. (4) The supervisor provides
feedback from the supervisor or peer supervisor
through roles or perspectives. (5) The supervisor
facilitates group discussion; (6) the supervisor
summarizes the outcomes of the activities. (7) The
supervisees give feedback to the supervisor of the
supervised activities they have received (Borders,
1991).
A practical guide for supervisors. Some
practical guidelines can be used by supervisor to
maximize group supervision. The first is to create
a standardized schedule and format for each
supervision session by taking full advantage of
group dynamics. The second is to use group
supervision to generalize and to improve
professional skills gained from individual
supervision. The third is to give each supervisee a
chance to present the case to other supervisees in
the group. The fourth is to plan specific behavioral
targets to be achieved to ensure each supervisee
benefits from each group supervision session.
Finally, supervisor actively manages group
dynamics to anticipate negative things that may
arise during supervision session (Valentino, et al,
2016). In other words, group supervision can be an
attractive option because it has abundant potential
resources if it is performed with trust, effective
leadership, and well managed (Baruch, 2009).
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
450

4 CONCLUSIONS
An effective multicultural counselor is a wise
multicultural counselor. Wisdom is a fundamental
quality of personality and the culmination of
effective multi-cultural counselor competence. The
wisdom of multicultural counselor candidates can
be developed in counselor education program
through supervisory activities undertaken by
supervisors (counselor educators). Supervision is a
vital component in counselor education program.
The core role of supervisor is to develop wisdom
as the fundamental quality of personality and the
peak of multicultural counselor competence. The
interaction between supervisor and supervisees is
expected to provide an adequate learning
environment for the development of the
supervisor’s wisdom. Supervisor needs to provide
widest possible opportunity for the counselor
candidate as a supervisor to be able to ask, reflect,
integrate, internalize, and interpret experiences.
There are three forms of supervision: dyadic,
triadic, and group supervisions. All of them have
opportunities and they can be considered as a
supervision format to develop the wisdom of
multicultural counselor candidates in counselor
education programs. These three supervision
formats have their own characteristics, advantages,
and limitations. No one supervision format is better
than other formats. Dyadic supervision is good in
the depth of process and quality of the relationship
between supervisor and supervisee. However, it is
time-consuming and labor-intensive. In triadic
supervision, supervisor can increase productivity
by supervising two supervisees at the same time
and learning from other supervisees. The weakness
of triadic supervision is to sacrifice aspects of the
depth of supervision. Finally, group supervision is
efficient in terms of time and effort as many parties
are involved and supervisor can share experiences
and feedback. However, the disadvantage is that
the case discussion and the experience of each
supervisee are shortened. It makes personal and
professional development, including wisdom,
becomes inadequate.
The selection of supervision format that will be
used by supervisor to develop the wisdom of
multicultural counselor candidates depends on the
objectives, supervisor and supervisee factors, and
other contexts. Of course, the flexibility of
supervisors in choosing and using supervision
format according to certain considerations will be
better. Effective supervision depends on the ability
of the supervisor to assess and accurately adjust the
needs and levels of wisdom development of the
supervisees, needs of the counselees, and the
situational, personal, and private factors that
influence them. The results of the study of Worthen
and McNeill (2001) reveals that effective
supervision emphasizes the quality of supervisory
relationships, commitment to supervision, clarity
of duties and procedures, attention to
developmental levels, responsibility for evaluation
and feedback, clarity of expected outcomes, and
methods to evaluate the outcome of supervision.
Research projects need to be undertaken to
develop and test the effectiveness of dyadic,
triadic, and group supervision in the development
of the wisdom of multicultural counselor
candidates. Empirical studies also need to be
conducted to examine the effect of the supervisee
experiences, the competence of the multicultural
supervisor, the quality of the supervision
relationship, and the wisdom of the supervisor on
the effectiveness of the dyadic, triadic, and group
supervision and the development of wisdom of the
supervised multicultural counselor candidate.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to committee and reviewer of 1st
International Conference in Educational Sciences
2017 at Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
REFERENCES
Ammann, R., 2008. Supervision of standplay therapy. In:
H. S. Friedman & R. R. Mitchell, Eds. Supervision in
an international, multilingual, and multicultural
therapy world. London & New York: Routledge, pp.
107-112.
Andersson, L., 2008. Psychodynamic supervision in a
group setting: Benefits and limitations. Psychotherapy
in Australia, 14(2), pp. 36-41.
Ardelt, M., 2011. The measurement of wisdom: A
commentary on Taylor, Bates, and Webster's
comparison of the SAWS and 3D-WS. Journal of
Experimental and Aging Research, 37(2), pp. 241-255.
Association for Counselor Education and Supervision,
2011. Association for Counselor Education and
Supervision. [Online] Available at:
www.acesonline.net
[Retrivied 10 September 2017].
Baltes, P. B., Gluck, J., Kunzmann, U., 2005. Wisdom: Its
structure and function in regulating successful life span
development. In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez, Eds.
Handbook of positive psychology. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, pp. 327-347.
Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic, Triadic, and Group Supervision
451

Baruch, V., 2009. Supervision groups in private practice:
An integrative approach. Psychotherapy in Australia,
15(3), pp. 72-76.
Bernard, J. M., Goodyear, R. K., 2009. Fundamentals of
clinical supervision. 4th Eds. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bernard, J. M., Goodyear, R. K., 2014. Fundamentals of
clinical supervision. 5th Eds. Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey: Pearson.
Bluck, S., Gluck, J., 2005. Form the inside out: People's
implicit theories of wisdom. In: R. J. Sternberg & J.
Jordan, Eds. A handbook of wisdom: Psychological
perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
pp. 84-109.
Borders, L. D., 1991. A systematic approach to peer group
supervision. Journal of Counseling & Development,
69(3), pp. 248-252.
Borders, L. D., 2012. Dyadics, triadic, and group model of
peer supervision/consultation: What are their
components, is there evidence, of their effectiveness?.
Clinical Psychologist, Volume 16, pp. 59-71.
Borders, L. D., Brown, J. B., Purgason, L. L., 2015. Triadic
supervision with practicum and internship counseling
students: A peer supervision approach. The Clinical
Supervisor, 34(2), pp. 232-248.
Borders, L. D. et al., 2012. Individual and triadic and group:
Supervisee and supervisor perceptions of each
modality. Counselor Education & Supervision, Volume
51, pp. 281-295.
Brown, S. C., 2004. Learning across the campus: How
college facilitates the development of wisdom. Journal
of College Student Development, 45(2), pp. 134-148.
Corey, G., Corey, M. S., Callahan, P., 2011. Issues and
ethics in the helping professions. 8th Eds. Celmont, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related
Educational Programs, 2015. Council for Accreditation
of Counseling and Related Educational Programs.
[Online]
Available at: www.cacrep.org
[Retrieved 10 September 2017].
Dahir, C. A., 2009. School counseling in the 21st century:
Where lies the future?. Journal of Counseling &
Development, Volume 87, pp. 3-5.
D'Andrea, M., Daniels, J., 2001. RESPECTFUL
counseling: An integrative model for counselors.
Dalam: D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. Coleman, Eds. The
interface of class, culture, and gender in counseling.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 417-466.
Frantz, G., 2014. Wisdom: Experience or education?.
Psychological Perspectives, 57(1), pp. 1-3.
Gillam, S. L., Baltimore, M. L., 2010. Triadic supervision.
In: J. L. Culbreth & L. L. Brown, Eds. State of the art
in clinical supervision. New York & London:
Routledge, pp. 45-62.
Hanna, F. J., Bemak, F., Chung, R. C.-Y., 1999. Toward a
new paradigm of multicultural counseling. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 77(2), pp. 125-134.
Hawkins, P., Shohet, R., 2010. Supervision in the helpin
professions. 3rd Eds. New York: McGraw-Hill, Open
University Press.
Hein, S. F., Lawson, G., Rodriguez, C. P., 2011. Supervisee
compatibility and its influence on triadic supervision:
An examination of doctoral student supervisor's
perspectives. Counseor Education & Supervision,
Volume 50, pp. 422-436.
Jones, W. E., 2015. Wisdom as an aim of higher education.
Journal of Value Inquiry, Volume 49, pp. 1-15.
Lawson, G., Hein, S. F., Stuart, C. L., 2009. A qualitative
investigation of supervisee's experience of triadic
supervision. Journal of Counseling & Development,
Volume 87, pp. 449-457.
Lawson, G., Hein, S. F., Stuart, C. L., 2010. Supervisor's
experiences of the contributions of the second
supervisee in triadic supervision: A qualitative
investigation. Journal of Specialists in Group Work,
Volume 35, pp. 69-91.
Lunenberg, M., Korthagen, F., 2009. Experience, theory,
and practical wisdom in teaching and teacher education.
Journal Teachers and Teaching, 15(2), pp. 225-240.
Newman, D. S., Nebbergall, A. J., Salmon, D., 2013.
Structured peer group supervision for novice
consultants: Procedurs, pitfalls, and potential. Journal
of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23(3),
pp. 200-2016.
Osterlund, L. C., 2014. Wisdom in the counseling
relationship. Jesuit Higher Education, 3(2), pp. 74-84.
Ozolins, J. T., 2015. Reclaiming paedeia in an age of crises:
Education and the necessity of wisdom. Educational
Philosophy and Theory, 47(9), pp. 870-882.
Page, S., Wosket, V., 2003. Supervising the counsellor: A
cyclical model. 2nd Eds. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis
e-Library.
Phan, L. T., Torres-Rivera, E., Volker, M., Maddux, C. D.,
2009. Wisdom in multicultural counseling: The omitted
ingredient. Interamerican Journal of Psychology,
43(1), pp. 154-161.
Portman, T. A. A., 2009. Faces of the future: School
counselors as cultural mediators. Journal of Counseling
& Development, Volume 87, pp. 21-27.
Proctor, B., 2000. Group supervision: A guide to creative
practice. London: Sage Publications.
Sellers, T. P., Valentino, A. L., LeBlanc, L. A., 2016.
Recommended practices for individual supervision of
aspiring behavioral analysts. Behavioral Analysis
Practice, Volume 9, pp. 274-286.
Sternberg, R. J., 2005. WICS: A model of positive
educational leadership comprising wisdom,
intelligence, and creativity synthesized. Educational
Psychology Review, 17(3), pp. 191-262.
Sternberg, R. J., 2013. Reform education: Teach wisdom
and ethics. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), pp. 44-47.
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., McDavis, R. J., 1999.
Multicultural counseling competencies and standards:
A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 70(4), pp. 477-486.
Valentino, A. L., LeBanc, L. A., Sellers, T. P., 2016. The
benefits of group supervision and a recommended
structure for implementation. Behavioral Analysis
Practice, 9(4), pp. 320-328.
Walter, C. A., Young, T. M., 1999. Combining individual
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
452

and group supervision in educating for the social work
profession. The Clinical Supervisor, 18(2), pp. 73-89.
Walter, C. A., Young, T. M., 1999. Combining individual
and group supervision in educating for the social work
profession. The Clinical Supervisor, 18(2), pp. 73-89.
Werstlein, P. O., Borders, D. L., 1997. Group process
variables in group supervision. The Journal for
Specialists in Group Work, 22(2), pp. 120-136.
Yang, S-Y., 2008. Real-life contextual manifestations of
wisdom. International Journal of Aging and Human
Development, 67(4), pp. 273-303.
Developing Wisdom of Multicultural Counselor through Dyadic, Triadic, and Group Supervision
453