"I'm Flying By the Seat of My Pants:" Supervisors' Ability to Identify and Respond to MSW Intern Trauma Exposure

Background and Purpose: Institutional and racial trauma are interwoven into the make-up of our society; hence, social workers are often exposed to traumatic client experiences leading to secondary traumatic stress (Armes et al., 2020; Bride, 2007). As social work interns are new to the profession and may not be equipped to successfully cope (Tarshis & Baird, 2019), supervisors play a crucial role in ensuring interns develop skills to respond to systemic, racial, and individual trauma exposure (Author et al., 2025). While research highlights the importance of effective supervision in mitigating interns’ secondary trauma (Quinn et al., 2019), there is limited understanding of what individual and systemic factors contribute to the supervisors’ ability to respond to their interns’ exposure to trauma. To address this gap, a secondary data analysis was conducted to answer the question, how are supervisors able to identify and respond to their social work interns’ exposure to trauma in placements? Findings seek to better integrate research, policy, and practice by advancing evidence-based approaches for social worker training.

Methods: In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 supervisors between October 2020 and December 2021 from two universities from the Midwest and West Coast. A secondary data analysis of this data was performed utilizing thematic analysis to answer the research question. Braun and Clark’s (2021) six steps were applied while moving through the analysis process. Open coding was implemented as prior identified codes did not exist, and codes were developed and modified throughout the coding process. Semantic and latent approaches were implemented for theme identification. Once coding was completed, the researchers met to form the codes into categories using reflexive memos. Categories were then compared to determine how supervisors are able to identify and respond to social work interns’ trauma exposure in placements until three themes were developed.

Results: To explicate how supervisors can identify and respond to their interns’ exposure to trauma in placement, three themes were generated: responsibility to interns, policies and support inform approach, “It’s what I know.” First, while some supervisors tended to their interns’ emotional well-being, many believed their responsibility lied primarily in teaching skills, leaving interns’ trauma unaddressed. Next, policies [organizational and professional] informed supervisors’ approaches to responding to interns, frequently failing to address interns’ mental well-being. Finally, every supervisor reported that their understanding of trauma and how to recognize it was informed by their personal and professional experiences. Ultimately, without adequate evidence-based training, supervisors heavily relied on their own interpretations, experiences, and policies when working with interns exposed to trauma.

Conclusions and Implications: Results highlight the individual and systemic factors that influence supervisors’ ability to effectively support interns following trauma exposure in placements. Of particular concern, supervisors did not describe leveraging evidence-based supervisory practices to support their interns, indicating a lack of research, policy, and practice integration. Using evidenced-based training to prepare social work supervisors to respond to and support social work interns exposed to client and systemic trauma, social work researchers can lead the academy in implementing transformative policies and practices.