PROBATION OFFICERS ARE SUPERVISED TO ENSURE A MINIMUM LEVEL OF PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE, TO PROMOTE THE MATURATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL AS A PROBATION OFFICER, AND TO ASSURE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY IS CARRIED OUT. STAFF SUPERVISORS ACT AS CONSULTANTS, TEACHERS, SUPPORTERS, AND JUDGES OF THE PROBATION OFFICERS; THEY REPRESENT THE ADMINISTRATION AND ACT AS BUREAUCRATS. AS A CONSULTANT, THE SUPERVISOR DRAWS UPON HIS OWN EXPERIENCE IN PROBATION WORK TO ADVISE PROBATION OFFICERS ON SPECIFIC CASES. THE TEACHER ROLE REQUIRES THE GENERALIZATION OF EXPERIENCES TO FORM CONCEPTS THAT CAN BE TAUGHT TO THE PROBATION WORKERS. THE SUPERVISOR SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE SOURCES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, SUCH AS DOCTORS, LAWYERS, AND ECONOMISTS. THE SUPPORTER ROLE OF THE SUPERVISOR IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE PROBATION WORK IS OFTEN TENSE AND THERE ARE NO DIAGNOSTIC MEASUREMENTS AVAILABLE. VERBAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT CAN BE GIVEN. THE PROBATION OFFICER MUST MAINTAIN A CERTAIN REMOTENESS FROM HIS CLIENT, AND THE SUPERVISOR SHOULD ACT AS THE JUDGE OF THIS RELATIONSHIP. THE SUPERVISOR EVALUATES THE SERVICES BEING PROVIDED BY THE PROBATION OFFICER. THREE PREDOMINANT POSITIONS MAY BE ASSUMED BY A SUPERVISOR: (1) IDENTIFYING PRIMARILY WITH THE ADMINISTRATION; (2) IDENTIFYING MAINLY WITH THE FIELD (PROBATION WORKERS); AND (3) KEEPING AN IN-BETWEEN POSITION. THE FIRST TWO POSITIONS KEEP THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE FIELD RELATIVELY APART, WHILE THE THIRD KEEPS THEM IN CONTACT. THE SUPERVISOR IS ALSO A BUREAUCRAT AND A PROFESSIONAL WHO MUST DECIDE ON AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SUPERVISION, AND DETERMINE WHERE THE FOCUS SHOULD BE IN THE SUPERVISORY CONFERENCE. THE SUPERVISOR, APPOINTED FROM THE RANKS, MUST LEARN TO MOVE HIS ATTENTION FROM CASES TO PERFORMANCE LEVELS AND WORKING STYLES OF THE PROBATION OFFICERS. THERE MUST BE AN AWARENESS THAT SUPERVISORY WORK, BASED SOLELY ON PAST EXPERIENCE WITH CASES, CAN BE GROWTH-DELAYING, AND THAT THEORETICAL CONCEPTS SHOULD BE DRAWN FROM THIS EXPERIENCE FOR GENERAL USE. TWO APPROACHES TOWARD SUPERVISORY WORK ARE SUGGESTED: (1) MAKING THE PROBATION OFFICER ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS WORK AS AN OFFICIAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICE AND AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT; AND (2) SUPERVISING THE PROBATION OFFICER'S PROFESSIONALISM THROUGH GROUP, INDIVIDUAL, OR PEER SUPERVISION. (DAG)