[Lightning Talk] Emily Axel - Process Recordings: Documenting Social Work Conversations

Process recordings—verbatim documentation of what’s said in a client session, paired with the worker’s internal reactions and supervisory commentary—are portrayed as a demanding but high-value tool for improving practice. In social work training, the format goes beyond case notes: it captures not only the conversation, but also what the practitioner was thinking, feeling, and reacting to in real time, plus a separate space to explain the rationale behind interventions and to invite supervisor feedback. That structure matters because it turns reflection into something concrete and reviewable, rather than leaving learning to memory.

Emily Axel’s experience in social work, including field placement work at Riker’s Island with incarcerated teenagers, highlights both the workload and the payoff. Students often “love to hate” process recordings because they require multiple entries per week and can feel brutally honest—tracking distractions, gut reactions, and moments of uncertainty can be uncomfortable. Yet she found that documenting the verbatim dialogue was less difficult than expected, especially with practice and when entering a conversation already knowing it will be written down. The act of anticipating documentation sharpened attention during sessions, making details easier to capture.

The most practical benefit she describes is learning through comparison: reviewing a completed process recording helps surface mistakes, identify what went well, and clarify what might have been done differently. Instead of relying on retrospective impressions, the written record anchors reflection in the exact words used and the practitioner’s contemporaneous internal state. That combination—what happened, what it triggered, and why an action was taken—creates a feedback loop that supports improvement.

Axel also frames process recordings as a tool for empathy-building. Empathy is treated as a skill that can be trained, and the method forces practitioners to recognize that nobody approaches a conversation as a blank slate. Personal histories, biases, and emotional responses shape what gets said and how it lands. By writing down those reactions and their influence, practitioners become more aware and more accountable.

Finally, she argues the technique has relevance beyond social work. The same discipline—recording what was said, why it was said, and what could change next time—can be applied to difficult conversations in other settings, such as managing tough interactions, addressing code of conduct issues, or handling workplace conflict. The goal isn’t just documentation; it’s making hard talks less intimidating by preparing a clearer, more reflective approach for future encounters.