IJSP Number 8, 2026

International Journal of Supervision in Psychotherapy, Number 8, 2026 Page | 50 development, regardless of specific theoretical orientation [8]. The Contextual Supervision Relationship Model (CSRM) is a relevant example, integrating relational, developmental, and contextual dimensions into a coherent structure [10]. Overall, these models converge in recognizing supervision as a relational and formative process, while their differences reflect distinct emphases on evaluation, relationship, and professional development. This theoretical diversity supports reconceptualizing supervision as a reflective educational space capable of integrating these dimensions coherently. 3.2. SUPERVISION AS THE PEDAGOGY OF PRACTICE: AN EMERGENT EDUCATIONAL DIMENSION Beyond specific models, contemporary literature describes supervision as a privileged form of the pedagogy of practice, often considered a “signature pedagogy” of the helping professions. This conceptualization highlights that supervision is the primary framework through which theoretical knowledge is integrated with practical experience and transformed into professional competence [7]. As a pedagogy of practice, supervision facilitates situated learning processes in which concrete practice experiences are subjected to reflection, critically analyzed, and integrated into a broader conceptual framework. In this sense, supervision goes beyond the role of control or evaluation and becomes an educational space where metacognitive, reflective, and self-regulatory capacities develop [18, 19]. The educational dimension of supervision is also evident in non-clinical contexts such as teacher training, counseling, and other psychosocial professions. Recent studies indicate that reflection-oriented supervision contributes to organizational culture, supports continuous professional development, and strengthens professional identity [11]. In these contexts, supervision functions as a mediating space between institutional demands, the subjective experience of practice, and the individual’s professional values. This educational perspective allows supervision to be conceptualized as a process of continuous formation in which guided reflection and experience integration are central. Supervision thus becomes a relational learning framework where professionals develop the capacity to understand their own practice, regulate emotional reactions, and build a coherent professional identity. 3.3. LIMITS OF CURRENT CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF SUPERVISION Despite growing recognition of supervision’s educational dimension, the literature identifies conceptual limits that restrict its potential as a reflective space for professional development. One frequent limitation is the excessive focus on evaluation and technical competence at the expense of self-regulatory and identity processes [7]. In many training contexts, supervision remains predominantly associated with performance control, standards compliance, and competence assessment. While necessary, over-emphasis on these functions can inhibit deep reflection and the exploration of subjective experience, thereby limiting the development of self-regulation and professional identity [9]. In such frameworks, supervision risks being perceived as hierarchical and conformity-oriented rather than formative.