The Supervisory Relationship Experiences of Turkish First-Time and Advanced Supervisees

The aim of this study was to examine Turkish first-time and advanced supervisees’ supervisory relationship experiences. A phenomenological design was preferred for examining whether undergraduateand graduate-level supervisees’ supervisory relationship experiences according to their professional developmental levels. The participants consisted of 27 supervisees enrolled in undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral programs in Counseling and Guidance at a public university in western Turkey. A semi-structured interview form was used to collect data. The results of content analysis demonstrated that according to first-time and advanced supervisees, the unchanged but definitive constructs of the supervisory relationship were supervisor’s facilitative and prescriptive interventions, sincere and nonjudgmental characteristics, constructive feedbacks; supervisee’s self-disclosure within supervision, anxiety in the early stages of the relationship and calmness in the further stages of the relationship, development of self-awareness and professional skills. The study findings were discussed and some implications are suggested.

upervision has an important role for each professional developmental level of counselors.Supervisees gain experiences with counseling practices and strengthen their professional identity through supervision.The variables regarding quality supervision have been frequently studied within supervision literature.For instance, supervisor's feedback (Ladany, Mori, & Mehr, 2013;Phelps, 2013), supervisor's skills and interventions such as active listening, reflection of feeling, and selfdisclosure (Ladany et al., 2013) and as well as the supervisory relationship are some of the variables regarding quality supervision.
Reviewing professional developmental levels of counselors, supervision researchers (Beinart, 2014;Bernard & Goodyear, 2009;Bordin, 1983;Holloway, 1995) widely accepted that supervisory relationship has an essential role for both first-time supervisees who had first practicum experiences under supervision and also advanced supervisees who had previous counseling and supervision experiences.The developmental supervision models (Blocher, 1983;Loganbill et al., 1982;Rønnestad & Skovholt, 2003;Stoltenberg, 1981) mentioned that counselors gained experiences when passing through professional developmental stages which have qualitatively different characteristics.Accordingly, developmental

S T
needs and expectations of supervisees differentiated based on their own professional developmental levels.Therefore, supervisees' role and feedback expectations from supervisors can change in supervision.

Clinical Supervision in Undergraduate and Graduate Levels in Turkey
Turkey is one of the rare countries providing counselor education in both undergraduate and graduate programs (Doğan, 2000;Korkut-Owen & Yerin-Güneri, 2013;Poyrazlı, Doğan, & Eskin, 2013).Four-year undergraduate programs include prepracticum and practicum courses.Practicum courses such as Individual Counseling Practice (ICP), Group Counseling Practicum (GCP), School Counseling Practicum, Career Guidance and Counseling Practicum, and Field Practice in Institutions allows counselor trainees to practice counseling skills, interventions, and theories under supervision (Aladağ & Kemer, 2016).In term of the contents of the practicum courses, counselor trainees mostly have a chance to work with real clients under supervision in ICP (CoHE, 2018).Therefore, ICP is inseparable part of undergraduate counseling programs.Reviewing graduate-level counselor education programs, supervision is mainly given under ICP and GCP in both the master's and doctoral programs (Aladağ & Kemer, 2016).Similar to undergraduate programs, supervisees in master'sand doctoral-programs work with real clients in mostly ICP.In brief, graduate supervisees differ from undergraduates in that graduates had previous experiences in counseling and supervision.

The Purpose of the Study
Although supervision studies in Turkey provide a perspective for supervisory relationship, there is an obvious need for understanding how supervisees at different developmental stages experience supervisory relationship.Accordingly, this study was examined Turkish first-time and advanced supervisees' supervisory relationship experiences.The research question was posed; "How does first-time supervisees (undergraduates) and advanced supervisees (graduates) experience supervisory relationship?" Taking into consideration of supervisory relationship's fundamental role in determining the effectiveness of the supervision (Beinart, 2014;Bernard & Goodyear, 2009;Bordin, 1983;Bradley & Ladany, 2001), we believe that understanding the experiences of supervisees at different developmental stages and the effects of this relationship on their personal and professional development will have importance role for training qualified counselors in Turkey.Nevertheless, we believe that the results of this study will raise supervisors' awareness for using appropriate skills, interventions, and feedback based on developmental levels of supervisees when developing supervisory relationship.

Research Model
This study is a phenomenological study examining whether undergraduateand graduate-level supervisees' supervisory relationship experiences according to their professional developmental levels.The phenomenological study is a kind of qualitative research method trying to show how an event is perceived by individuals, how this event is described, how it is remembered, how it is evaluated, and what type of language is used while discussing the event (Patton, 2002).Therefore, this research design was selected in order to deeply understand (Moustakas, 1994) the supervisory relationship experiences from the participants' own perspectives.

Study Group
In this study, we preferred convenience sampling method in terms of the access opportunities to the participants.Additionally, to increase the reliability of the study findings; a maximum variation sampling method was also used to make it easier to find common factors or similarities between events (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2013).The participants consisted of 27 supervisees (23 female, four male) enrolled in undergraduate, master's, and doctoral programs in Counseling and Guidance at a public university in western Turkey.The mean age of participants was 23.92.Nineteen were undergraduates, seven were master's, and one was a doctoral supervisee.During the semester, the undergraduate level supervisees worked with one to two clients an average of 10 counseling sessions, the master's level supervisees worked with two clients an average of 18 counseling sessions, and the doctoral level supervisee worked with three clients 24 counseling sessions.

Semi-structured interview form
In this study, a semi-structured interview form was used to collect data.We firstly created a question matrix based on supervision literature to relate subproblems to the interview questions.The draft interview form created after the matrix was subjected to evaluation by three counselor educators who had doctoral degrees in Counseling and studies on supervision.A pilot interview was conducted with a supervisee in order to check functionality and clarity of the interview questions and calculate the average interview period.
In the final forms of the interview questions, undergraduate supervisees were asked 11 questions and graduate supervisees were asked 13 questions.In the form of master's and doctoral level participants, there were two additional questions regarding their previous supervision experiences as well as similarities and differences between current and previous supervisory relationships.Some questions in the interview forms were as follows: "What would you tell your close friend/colleague about the supervisory relationship in this semester?Why?"

Data Collection
All interviews were conducted by the first author.Since authors paid attention to protect the privacy of interviews and try to create a standard interview environment for each participant, same author conducted interviews in the same office.Interviews lasted for 25 minutes on average.Interviews were completed between January-June 2017.During interviews, the purpose and content of the study, information about the privacy and interview process were explained to each participant.Then, participants' informed consents were obtained.To keep the identities of participants private, each participant was coded as K1-K27.The undergraduate level supervisees were coded as K1-K19, the master's level supervisees were coded as K21-K27, and the doctoral level supervisee was coded as K20.

Data Analysis and Interpretation
The data were analyzed with content analysis (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2013).Accordingly, 27 interviews which lasted 690 minutes were transcribed.The transcriptions of the data were read by researchers at certain periods.Since both authors planned to analyze the data, separate coding lists were prepared based on the supervision literature.After the first coding, the researchers found 37% agreement.Before the second coding, draft coding lists were created with consensus.After completing the second coding, the calculated agreement was 75%.This level of agreement indicated adequate reliability (Miles & Huberman, 1994).Next, each meaningful unit which showed the participants' experiences in transcriptions (Moustakas, 1994) was identified as codes.The naming and structuring of the categories and themes was based on the supervision literature.After content analysis, the findings were examined and discussed based on categories and themes.These were then linked with sub-problems of the study and quotations which emphasized the Development of Supervisory Relationship and the Effects of the Relationship.Quotations which covered a larger data source and explained the theme and codes as well as variation were chosen.

Validity and Reliability
To ensure validity and reliability of the study, authors took certain precautions.To provide internal validity, expert views were consulted during data collection and analysis to increase the quality of the study.Open-ended questions were used with semi-structured interview forms to obtain meaningful information.Pilot interview was conducted to review functionality of the questions.Both the data source and the researchers were varied.The confirmation from participants was also taken to increase the reliability of the data.For external validity, a purposeful sampling method was preferred.In addition, in order to increase trustworthiness, variation was achieved when quoting the findings.Direct quotations were used to show different situations and participants' experiences.
To achieve internal reliability, interviews were audio recorded to prevent data loss.The raw data of the study was kept.To provide external reliability, researchers openly explained their roles and explained this role in a study report to guide other studies in the future (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982).Confirmation review was made with an expert opinion.The participants, environment, and process of the study were defined in detail to compare it with other samples.Lastly, the data and the methodology were explained in detail (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Role of Researchers
The researchers were research assistants.The first author had a doctoral degree and the second author had a master's degree in Counseling and Guidance.The first author supervised undergraduate supervisees since the fall semester of the 2017-2018 academic year.The doctoral thesis of both authors was about clinical supervision.The researchers had articles about supervisory relationship.Therefore, as it was believed that they may have common structure in the related literature, they decided to undertake separate data coding processes.After the first coding, it was observed that the first author coded based on interview questions' structures while the second author followed an inductive approach.Therefore, before second coding, a coding list was created.It was believed that this analysis process served to increase data reliability.

Results
The category, theme, sub-theme, and codes regarding the supervisory relationship experiences of undergraduate-, master's-, and doctoral-level supervisees were presented in Table 1.The Development of Supervisory Relationship

Intervention
Facilitative: This intervention included codes such as supervisor's supporting, encouraging, and motivating interventions, and using selfdisclosure.One participant expressed this intervention as follows: Since I believed that [my supervisor] thought I will be calm for something I don't feel right and I will not fully apply it on client, this was open to debate, supervisor was directive but not dictator, supervision was facilitator.(K20-DR) Directive: This intervention represented supervisor's telling participants what to do and how to intervene or explain theoretical concepts when supervisees struggled.The findings showed that undergraduates expected from supervisors to be more like a guide while masters' expected to be more independent and have supportive supervisors rather than directive ones.One participant expressed this intervention as follows: ... I wanted [my supervisor] to guide me... S/he had lots of clients until now.So, s/he knew what to do from her/his previous experiences.In this sense, things we asked to [clients] could be guided...It did not have to be, but it could.(K4-U) Exploratory: This included handling uncovering emotions of supervisees towards client; asking questions to increase personal awareness; and creating a suitable environment for this purpose.One participant expressed this intervention as follows: I felt that I was trusted, in this case I trusted myself.Then, there were times I did wrong things.Actually, when I did something missing, [my supervisor] didn't say anything, s/he made me think.[For example], I asked her/him something, s/he always asked me back what you think.Because client was [my client], I knew her/him better.(K3-U) Roles: Supervisors had counselor, teacher, and consultant roles.The counselor role involved supervisor's behaviors to reveal personal experiences and emotions of supervisees.This role emphasized that supervisor help supervisee to notice own emotions and ideas.The teacher role corresponded to the supervisor's guiding role and emphasized her/his teaching.The consultant role referred to support supervisee to show her/his potential in a more equal relationship.One participant reported as follows: Supervisor X was actually giving supervision about clients as well as us in the sessions.S/he told be my strengths and weaknesses s/he observed.For example, s/he said "Be a person who control her/his own life.Do not look for approval from others.I observed that you have such part... (K1-U) Feedback: This contained oral or written feedback from transcriptions/session summary forms by supervisor.While positive feedback emphasized only successful sides of supervisee; corrective feedback emphasized things to be corrected or changed.These two types of feedback together were called balanced feedback.Also, based on supervisees' evaluations about feedback, destructive and constructive feedback classifications were created.Destructive feedback was defined as demotivating feedback which made them felt incompetent.Constructive feedback did not harm self-confidence of supervisees; but, they helped supervisees for awareness by hearing about their mistakes.. Some of participants also stated that they received fast, timely, and regular feedback.This was defined as systematic feedback.One participant's expression was given as follows: For example, that week I did something unplanned with my client in session and I mean when I shared that, but my supervisor gave positive feedback.(K24-M) It was found that destructive feedback was the hardest element in supervisory relationship.Participant (K16) stated that hardest part of supervision relationship was my supervisor's criticisms, because this affected me badly and decreased my motivation.
Tasks: This contained structuring supervision and supervisory relationship.The structuring supervision included informing supervisee regarding roles and responsibilities within supervision.The structuring supervisory relationship referred to the style of supervisor to develop the relationship.One participant reported as follows: [My supervisor] at first seemed as distant and strict person.That of course made me struggle at first in supervision process to leave negative energy behind.Instead of doing this in time, I wanted to do that at the beginning but how this will happen, I have no suggestion.Maybe some information can be provided at the beginning of the relationship.(K26-M) Personal Characteristics: Participants reported that their supervisors were understanding, sincere, accepting/not judging, active listener, distant, accessible, humorous, fair, and trustworthy.One participant stated as follows: [My supervisor] was calm and made supervision relationship easy for me.Generally, I was comfortable because s/he was not judging.(K20-DR)

Supervisee-related variables
Self-Disclosure: Self-disclosure reflected sharing personal and professional experiences with supervisor in a comfortable supervision environment.One participant stated as follows: ... I could not ask certain things at some point, I mean I was intimidated, after that disappointment, after that distance, I mean I could not ask somethings I needed to ask, I mean, in order to not to receive harsh answers, criticism.(K18-U) Previous Experiences: This was formed of supervision experiences, supervisory relationship experiences, and also previous relationship experiences.Findings indicated that previous supervisory relationship affected current supervisory relationship.For undergraduates, if supervisor was a lecturer, this also affected supervisory relationship.
Previously we really had sincere relationship and this did not change in supervision process.There was nothing extra in this sense.We are closer, deeper, as I received supervision from same supervisor in master's degree.(K20-DR) Developmental Needs: It was found that supervisory needs and expectations of supervisees differed based on their developmental levels.For undergraduates, developmental needs were to focus intensely on their own behavior; intense anxiety; to ask for concrete and directive interventions and feedback; low self-esteem; and dependence on supervisor.While masters' needed for less directive but more exploratory interventions; and needed to create a suitable environment for self-disclosure and approval.The developmental needs of doctoral supervisee were being aware of the weaknesses and getting more responsibilities.A quotation was as follows: ...My needs… Actually rather than dictating, having an environment where we can use brainstorming or at least discuss the logic of things I don't understand yet.(K20-DR)

Supervision-related variables
Group Supervision: Undergraduate and master's levels received group supervision.Since there was only one supervisee at doctoral level, that participant received individual supervision.Therefore, in this sub-theme the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of group supervision method on supervisory relationship was emphasized for undergraduate-and master's-level participants.One participant stated as follows: ... We have lots of peers in the group and sometimes this hindered talking things openly.Few times just couple of times.(K5-U) Supervision Techniques: This sub-theme included audio/video recordings, transcriptions/session summary forms, and experiential techniques codes.One participant indicated that: ...I think s/he had to listen to audio recordings for developing strong relationship.S/he didn't... (K16-U)

Personal effects
Emotional Experiences: At the beginning, supervisees experienced anxiety, excitement, incompetence, indecisive, and unease.One participant mentioned as follows: For the first one or two sessions, I was anxious.Because I had no idea about how the process will go and how will I go forward.And since I had no such experience, it caused me to think if I make any mistake or bad things.(K23-M) At the maturity stage, supervisees reported that strong supervisory relationship decreased their anxiety, provided to feel better, increased their self-efficacy, and make them happy.One participant stated that: I can say I had anxiety in the first session, very intense.In the last session, I felt just the opposite feeling, relaxing, and then joy.(K12-U) Personal Awareness: This referred to gain awareness about emotions and ideas; and notice her/his own dynamics while helping clients.One participant reported as follows: I used self-disclosure skill to my client.And, actually this was the skill I used not to upset my client.Actually, there is a thing to be upset about for my client and I acted as I was compensating it.This was caused by my personal characteristics.… My supervisor helped me notice my personal characteristic.(K22-M)

Professional effects
Self-Efficacy: Supervisory relationship affected supervisees' self-efficacy.One supervisee (K3-U) indicated that the most developing part of supervision relationship was to develop my self-confidence.
Professional Skills: This included supervisee's counseling skills and sensitivity to multi-cultural topics.One participant stated as follows: I can tell that my supervisor was a good example for me as a relationship.Because I think that the relationship had a great sense of profession... (K26-M) In order to better understanding of supervisees' supervisory relationship experiences, we used metaphor questions.Supervisees were asked to explain their own role and supervisor's role in supervisory relationship with metaphors.Some of the metaphors and explanations are presented in Table 2. Considering the findings of the study, the sub-themes that supervisees mentioned with the highest frequency were as follows: facilitating and directive interventions, sincere and acceptable supervisors, supervisors' constructive feedback, supervisees' self-disclosure, performance anxiety and relaxation, gain personal awareness, and development of professional skills.The common structures of the findings were presented in Figure 1.
Regarding supervisors' roles, Discrimination Model (Bernard, 1979) and Systems Approach Model (Holloway, 1995) mentioned that supervisors might adopt certain roles for supervisees at different professional developmental levels based on their supervisory needs and expectations.Bernard (1979) defined these roles as teacher, counselor, and consultant.Additionally, Bernard and Goodyear (2009) suggested that supervisors adopt mostly teacher role for first-time supervisees and consultant role for advanced supervisees.Furthermore, regardless of the professional developmental levels of supervisees, they also recommended for supervisors to be flexible and open to change for adopting any supervisory roles.
Regarding tasks, Bordin (1983) and other researchers (Ladany et al., 2013;Olk & Friedlander, 1992;Rabinowitz, Heppner, & Roehlke, 1986) emphasized that supervisory relationship should be determined by supervisor and supervisee together in the beginning phase of supervision, especially in the first three weeks (Rabinowitz et al., 1986), to decrease role ambiguity and conflict as well as to strengthen supervisory relationship.
Evaluating whole supervisor-related variables together, firstly, it should be remembered that undergraduate supervisees in this study experienced their first counseling practices under supervision.Because first-time supervisees experienced more performance and supervision anxiety than advanced supervisees (Blocher, 1983;Loganbill et al., 1982;Rønnestad & Skovholt, 2003;Stoltenberg, 1981), it is understandable that first-time supervisees in this study needed more structure in supervision at the beginning of the relationship and expected from supervisors to be accepting and trustworthy.In terms of roles, first-time supervises expected counselor role rather than teacher role from supervisors.This could be interpreted as first-time supervisees in this study could have more personal needs and issues.
Regarding the supervisee-related variables, self-disclosure, previous experiences, and developmental needs affected the development of supervisory relationship.In terms of self-disclosure, existing studies (e.g.Hutt et al., 1983;Ladany & Lehrman, 1999) mentioned that self-disclosure can include sharing what happened during counseling sessions as well as sharing personal emotions and thoughts in supervision; and supervisees were ambivalent about sharing their feelings, attitudes, plans and conflicts.Nevertheless, if supervisors were warm, kind, respectful, accepting, and open, the relationship became stronger.Next, supervisees could openly express their emotions, thoughts, and plans to supervisors.In this study, although first-time supervisees did not share the details about topics of their self-disclosure needs, they reported that self-disclosure affected their supervisory relationship.However, under supervisor-related variables theme, first-time supervisees reported that they expected from supervisors to adopt counselor role.Evaluating these two findings of this study together, it could be interpreted that first-time supervisees needed self-disclosure about their personal needs and this affected the supervisory relationship.
In term of previous experiences, advanced supervisees reported that previous supervision and supervisory relationship experiences affected current supervisory relationship.Studies (e.g.Holloway & Gonzalez-Doupe, 2002) found that if advanced supervisees had negative previous experiences, it was possible for reflecting these experiences to the current supervisory relationship.This was because negative experiences regarding supervision and supervisory relationship caused prejudice, discomfort, and anxious in current supervision and supervisory relationship.However, there was no such effect in first-time supervisees because they are learning supervision, roles and tasks in their current relationship.Yet, in both cases, supervisors should handle positive and negative sides of previous experiences in an acceptable attitude and determine expectations from current relationship (Worthen & McNeill, 1996).In this study, even though first-time supervisees had no previous experiences with their supervisors, some had taken other courses from same supervisor as a lecturer.It means that they had no previous supervisory relationship but some could have previous teacher-student relationship.The results of this study showed that having a previous teacherstudent relationship between supervisors and undergraduate, master's, and doctoral level participants could also affect supervisory relationship.If supervisory relationship is considered as a type of interpersonal relationship, it can be interpreted as the current relationship between people who know each other under different conditions might be affected from previous experiences.
Regarding developmental needs, first-time supervisees reported that they had higher anxiety; focused on their own behaviors in counseling sessions; were more dependent on their supervisors; and needed feedback and direct interventions.It was also found that anxiety gradually decreased and selfawareness increased in advanced supervisees.For these supervisees, facilitative and exploratory interventions came to replace directive interventions.These results are consistent with the Developmental Supervision Models (Blocher, 1983;Loganbill et al., 1982;Rønnestad & Skovholt, 2003;Stoltenberg, 1981).This sub-theme was also consistent with all other sub-themes within the supervisor-related variables theme.Therefore, to develop strong supervisory relationship, it is logical that supervisors should use proper interventions, roles, feedback, and tasks by considering the needs and expectations of supervisees.
For supervision-related variables, first-time supervisees reported that feedback from peers in group supervision helped them.However, some firsttime and advanced supervisees expressed that high number of peers in supervision group caused that they received less quantity of feedback.Group supervision enriches supervision because participants can receive feedback from different sources.However, participants criticized that group supervision increased the number of peers receiving feedback from supervisor.This limits to receive enough feedback from supervisor.In this case, it seems that both first-time and advanced supervisees needed enough quantity of feedback and group supervision limited it.
Regarding supervision techniques, there were three codes as audio/video recordings, transcripts/session summary forms, and experiential techniques.Both the undergraduates and doctoral-level participant emphasized audio/video recordings and transcripts/session summary forms.Since transcripts/session summary forms provide written support, these methods are recommended to help supervisees coping with anxieties and considering proper skills and interventions (Arthur & Gfoerer, 2002).Similarly, correct examples and feedback on live examples in audio/video recordings is an important supervision technique in order to strengthen supervisory relationship (Borders & Brown, 2005;North, 2013).Since first-time supervisees had higher anxiety, it was normal that they expressed that these techniques affected their supervisory relationship positively.In terms of doctoral-level participant, s/he had also higher anxiety due to individual supervision.If so, using these techniques decreased her/his anxiety and facilitates to develop supervisory relationship.However, it was notable that master's-level participants did not mention supervision techniques.This finding could be associated with individual differences, because it is known that there are various variables affecting developing supervisory relationship.Not each variable affects each supervisee.Therefore, selected supervision techniques may not affect the development of relationship between master's level supervisees and their supervisors.
For personal effects theme, supervisees reported that supervisory relationship affected their emotions and personal awareness.In Developmental Supervision Models (Blocher, 1983;Loganbill et al., 1982;Rønnestad & Skovholt, 2003;Stoltenberg, 1981), due to the lack of knowledge and experience of first-time supervisees about counseling and the supervision, anxiety and incompetence feelings were understandable.It can be claimed that feeling anxious, excited, nervous, indecisive, and incompetent at the beginning of supervisory relationship, and feeling relaxed and self-confident, and increasing personal awareness in the following stages were expected findings in terms of professional developmental stages of supervisees.
Lastly, for the professional effects theme, supervisees reported that supervision and supervisory relationship affected their self-efficacy and professional skills.Hutt et al. (1983) found that weak supervisory relationship hindered professional development.Similarly, Horrocks and Smaby (2006) found that strong supervisory relationship was an important predictor for the professional development of supervisees.Therefore, parallel with the higher self-confidence level of supervisees at the maturity stage in this study, it is thought that supervision and supervisory relationship are important to increase the self-efficacy and professional skills of supervisees.
In conclusion, the common experience of supervisees revealed that when supervisor use facilitative interventions, provide constructive feedback, and are sincere and accepting, supervisees can easily disclose themselves and perceive the supervisory relationship as more positive.As the supervisory relationship becomes more positive, this would decrease the supervisee's anxiety and help him or her to relax.This increase personal awareness and develop professional skills of supervisees.

Limitations
We hoped that the results of this study will guide supervisors for developing supervisory relationship with both first-time and advanced supervisees.However, this study has own limitations.One of these limitations is that the data was only obtained from supervisees at one university, which might limit the external validity of the results.Another limitation is that, since there was only one person in the doctoral-level, the data at the doctoral-level was only collected from one supervisee.This might limit the understanding of supervisory relationship experience of the doctoral-level.

Implications for Research and Practice
The results showed that the development of supervisory relationship with undergraduate-, master's-, and doctoral-level supervisees were mainly affected from supervisor-and supervisee-related variables.Fundamentally, considering the facilitator role of supervisors on supervisory relationship, it is recommended for supervisors to consider these variables for developing supervisory relationship.
Another result of this study was that supervisees at different professional developmental stages had different supervisory needs and expectations; therefore, first-time and advanced supervisees needed different supervisor's interventions, role, feedback, and task expectations.In this sense, it is recommended that supervisors should develop supervisory relationship by considering developmental needs of supervisees.Additionally, it was found that there were individual differences between participants at same age and professional developmental levels.Because of this, supervisors should be flexible regarding interventions, feedbacks, and roles.Another important result of this study was that, regardless of the professional developmental level of supervisees, they mostly experienced anxiety at the beginning phase of the supervisory relationship.Supervisors should use interventions to decrease anxiety and increase self-efficacy of the supervisees.Additionally, results indicated that supervisors should have a variety of supervision skills and interventions.Given the importance of having knowledge of supervision models, supervision methods and techniques, and supervisory relationship, supervisors were recommended to have formal supervision training (Koçyiğit-Özyigit & İşleyen, 2015).
Finally, there are limited studies regarding supervisory relationship for supervisees in Turkey.Therefore, for future studies, it is recommended that, in order to understand the supervisory relationship experiences of supervisees at different developmental levels, different research methodologies should be used and more data should be collected from various universities.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Common Structure of Participants' Supervisory Relationship Experiences

Table 1
Categories, Themes, Sub-Themes, and Codes

Table 2
Examples of metaphors and their explanations