You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The psychoanalytic class is a unique educational experience because candidates constitute a closed working group that endures over a four-year period during training. In a working group such as a class, the nature of group dynamics influences the quality of the learning experience. Nonetheless, little attention is paid within the psychoanalytic literature to the nature of the class experience, although a great deal of attention is paid to the nature of the supervisory relationship. In a recent issue of Psychoanalytic Inquiry devoted to the topic of supervision, the issue editors, Drs. Levy and Kindler, note the common emphasis among contributors on the importance of the “learning alliance” in supervision, including “sensitivity to the candidate's self-esteem regulation, particularly to his or her propensity to shame experiences… to the candidate's level of development as an analyst, strengths and vulnerabilities, and sense of self” (1995, p. 268). However, little attention is paid to these issues within the psychoanalytic class, even though the education literature suggests that the nature of the teacher-learner relationship is central to education(Nias 1987).
Each class of psychoanalytic candidates can be characterized along multiple dimensions. For example, a class may be known for the quality of group dynamics, including the extent of group cohesion or conflict. Classes can also be characterized by the willingness of candidates to read and to learn, their level of intellectual inquiry, their openness to ideas both new and old, their relationships with supervisors and teachers, their degree of clinical competence, and the extent of their participation in the activities of the society. In the Toronto