Exploring Outcomes of a Targeted Supervisory Training Curriculum on Developing Multicultural Competency and Social Justice Advocacy

Abstract

Although there is extensive literature addressing the need to incorporate multicultural competency and social justice advocacy training in school counseling coursework, there are few empirical studies that have examined outcomes of incorporating such curriculum into field placement course work. Qualitative content analysis was employed to examine the use of targeted instruction on developing multicultural competency and social justice advocacy with a sample of 21 counseling students during a school practicum placement. Analyses of semi-structured interviews suggested the potential benefit of infusing targeted instruction on multicultural competency and social justice advocacy. Implications for counselor training and research are provided.

Keywords

counselor training social justice advocacy multicultural counseling urban schools supervision

Researchers have identified the need for multicultural training and social justice advocacy during induction to the profession and beyond (Estrada, Frame, & Williams, 2004; Toporek, Ortega-Villalobos, & Pope-Davis, 2004). Multicultural counseling competency (MCC) includes building counselor development in the areas of self-awareness (understanding one’s values, beliefs, biases, and privileges), knowledge (learning about cultural worldviews and understanding patterns of oppression and marginalization), and skills (employing culturally sensitive and relevant counseling interventions) to serve diverse client populations (Arredondo et al., 1996; Constantine, Hage, Kindaichi, & Bryant, 2007). Social justice advocacy has been defined as a “process of acknowledging systemic societal inequities and oppression while acting responsibly to eliminate the systemic oppression in the forms of racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, and other biases in clinical practice both on individual and distributive levels” (Odegard & Vereen, 2010, p. 130). A socially just education adheres to the notion that all students can learn and should be treated fairly and equitably when delivering educational and counseling services (Holcomb-McCoy, 2007).

Building MCC and a social justice orientation among counseling trainees are fundamental goals across counseling programs (Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins, & Mason, 2009). The American Counseling Association’s (ACA) Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014), Section F.7.c., emphasizes the importance of infusing material pertaining to diversity across all courses, and the American School Counselor Association National Model (ASCA, 2012) identifies the need for school counselors to engage in advocacy to promote equitable educational opportunities for all students, thereby supporting principles of social justice (Paisley, Bailey, Hayes, McMahon, & Grimmett, 2010). In providing MCC training, counselor educators must engage students in discussions that extend beyond topics pertaining to race and ethnicity to also include issues of gender, sexual orientation, disability status, socioeconomic status (SES), and religion or spirituality (Estrada et al., 2004). Considering the growing diversity of U.S. schools, it behooves counselor educators to incorporate discussions of relevant cultural issues of students and families in teaching practices, such that school counseling students are prepared to understand and respect different values (Wilczenski, Schumacher, & Cook, 2010). Preparing school counseling students to address diversity issues is integral to the development of conceptualizing student needs and addressing concerns of parents and caretakers from diverse backgrounds (Dickson, Argus-Calvo, & Garcia Tafoya, 2010).

Supervisors and counselor educators must also engage students in discussions pertaining to issues of oppression and privilege (Chang, Crethar, & Ratts, 2010; Glasoff & Durham, 2010). Urban schools encounter qualitatively different issues compared to rural and suburban schools (Flores, 2007; Wilczenski, Cook, & Hayden, 2011). Disparities in academic achievement persist with low-income and minority students encountering significant educational challenges and barriers to success (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2010; Cook, Pérusse, & Rojas, 2012; Grothaus & Cole, 2010). Barriers to academic achievement are often perpetuated through school culture and unintentional educational practices that sustain racial inequities in academic success (Bryan, 2005). Efforts to promote greater equity must be comprehensive (Cook et al., 2012), and school counselor educators need to provide learning experiences that address such barriers (Bemak & Chung, 2005; Wilczenski & Schumacher, 2008). To effectively engage in advocacy and work toward closing the achievement gap, school counseling students need to develop a strong understanding of urban culture—that is, how culture influences learning and the school environment; how one’s own culture may differ from ethnic, racial, and inner-city cultures; and how culture influences one’s development, relationships, and interactions (Wilczenski et al., 2011).

School counseling students can deepen their knowledge and understanding of urban schools and communities through engaging in specific training experiences that promote social justice beyond general school counseling competencies (Glasoff & Durham, 2010). To achieve MCC and social justice competency as an urban school counselor, students must become effective practitioners and become strong advocates for educational access and equity. In preparing future school counseling professionals to facilitate change and engage in leadership, urban school counselor education can explicitly focus on developing students’ awareness, knowledge, and competencies in social justice (Bemak & Chung, 2005; Wilczenski et al., 2011).

Service learning is an effective way to prepare counseling students to develop MCC and social justice awareness within an urban, low SES school context (Ockerman & Mason, 2012; Wilczenski & Schumacher, 2008). Given that counselors are advocates and leaders in promoting educational equity (ASCA, 2012), it behooves counselor educators to provide counseling students a solid foundation in social justice advocacy skills. Implementing fieldwork training in an urban, low SES setting provides school counseling students opportunities to develop MCC and social justice competency (Hayden, Cook, Gracia, Silva, & Cadet, 2015). Simultaneously, through their services, school counseling students can help to prevent and address educational challenges that low-income and minority students may encounter (Grothaus & Cole, 2010).

Although there is significant attention within the counseling literature related to MCC and/or social justice advocacy, researchers have asserted the need for counselor educators to consider how to incorporate pedagogical strategies that prepare counseling students to become committed to social justice (Odegard & Vereen, 2010; Wilczenski et al., 2011) as well as dedicate time at school placements to teach social justice advocacy skills (Dixon, Tucker, & Clark, 2010). Glasoff and Durham (2010) recognized that counselor educators may overlook promoting active reflection on topics concerning MCC and social justice advocacy and their application to practice due to being preoccupied by discussions of client cases, logistical concerns, and other occurrences at the field placement site. This present study aims to fill a gap by examining outcomes of a targeted supervisory curriculum that deliberately focused on the development of MCC and social justice advocacy during fieldwork experience in an urban, low SES high school setting.

More specifically, this present study builds from the work of Hayden et al. (2015), which examined the impact of an urban field placement experience, using a targeted supervisory curriculum, on the development of counseling students’ self-efficacy. Their findings suggest the potential benefit of employing a targeted supervisory curriculum, with the majority of participants engaging in the curriculum expressing increased self-efficacy to provide counseling services to urban student populations. The work of Hayden et al. (2015) focused on examining counseling skill development using the ASCA National Model (ASCA, 2012) as a guiding framework to build students’ sense of self-efficacy in working with an urban student population. The present research was conducted as a pilot study to explore a different set of outcomes, specifically in what ways school counseling students develop MCC and social justice advocacy through implementation of Hayden and colleagues’ (2015) targeted supervisory curriculum during an urban practicum fieldwork experience.

A qualitative investigation using qualitative content analysis (QCA; Schreier, 2012) of semi-structured interviews was conducted to identify themes associated with developing MCC and social justice advocacy. The following two research questions guided our inquiry in the present study: (a) In what ways do practicum students develop MCC and social justice advocacy skills? (b) Did experiences differ based on whether or not students engaged in the targeted supervisory curriculum? To examine Research Question 1, we analyzed transcriptions of recorded interviews to identify codes and themes related to participants’ development of MCC and social justice advocacy skills. To analyze Research Question 2, we conducted frequency counts of coded themes and descriptively analyzed themes to compare presence, absence, and frequency of occurrence between standard practice and targeted supervisory groups. Through these research questions, we aimed to examine whether employing a targeted supervisory curriculum further honed students’ MCC and social justice advocacy skills above and beyond the standard curriculum. Although the standard curriculum was housed in a school counseling program that endorsed an urban and social justice mission (see Wilczenski et al., 2011), the targeted supervisory curriculum was developed with intentionality to develop specific MCC and social justice competencies.

Method

Research Team

The researchers conducting the study included three Caucasian counselor educators (two female and one male) and one Caucasian female graduate research assistant pursuing a degree in mental health counseling. Each of the counselor educators has research interests and professional experiences in diverse school settings. One is bilingual and has worked with Latino students and families. The research assistant grew up in an impoverished community and identified her SES as low. During planning stages, members of the research team shared their assumptions regarding the research questions. They anticipated that through exposure to an urban school setting, participants would begin to acknowledge their cultural biases and understand how they impact their work as school counselors in training. We also hoped that the targeted discussions and assignments would have an additional impact in informing participants’ development of MCC and building a social justice orientation.

Participants

The sample included 21 participants (20 female and 1 male) who were first year graduate school counseling students. The age of participants ranged from 22 to 45 years (M = 27, SD = 5.7, N = 21). There were 19 White students, 1 Asian student, and 1 Latina student. Years of experience working in a school setting ranged from 1 year to 4 years (M = 1.8, SD = .95, N = 21). Fourteen reported being raised in a suburban setting, 3 reported being raised in a rural setting, and 4 in an urban setting. Fourteen reported currently residing in a suburban setting, while 7 reported residing in an urban setting. Reported family income ranged from US$25,000 to greater than US$100,000, with half of the participants reporting a family income of US$80,000 or above. The students participating varied in terms of previous courses completed in the graduate program, but students had not yet completed an MCC course. The number of courses participants completed in the school counseling program prior to practicum varied from 3 courses to 10 courses, and courses taken concurrently with practicum also varied. More specifically, 2 of the 21 participants were concurrently pursuing course work in the mental health counseling program and had completed 10 courses, while all other participants had completed between 3 to 7 courses.

Measures

Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted at the completion of practicum that included questions based on the work of Arredondo et al. (1996) and Holcomb-McCoy (2007) on MCC and social justice advocacy. Through conducting semi-structured interviews, lasting 30–45 minutes, we asked 12 questions within three categories (MCC/social justice awareness, knowledge, and skills) and followed the participants’ lead from within each category. The following are examples of interview questions and categories: (a) What are your cultural biases? Awareness. (b) How do these beliefs influence your decisions and practices? Skills. (c) Share your thoughts on why some students achieve and others do not. Knowledge. (d) Describe what your responsibility as a counselor is in closing the achievement gap. Knowledge. All interview questions were presented in an open-ended manner to give participants the opportunity to fully reflect on their thoughts.

Procedure

Institutional review board approval was granted to conduct the study. Students were given the opportunity to decline participation and were notified that any involvement or lack thereof would in no way affect their grade. All 21 students elected to participate in the study, although 1 student declined being audiotaped during the semi-structured interview. Participants were selected to engage in the present study through convenience sampling. Twenty-one master’s-level school counseling practicum students were randomly assigned to one of four different course sections, with two groups receiving the standard curriculum and two groups receiving the targeted supervisory curriculum. Practicum consisted of a 100-hour field placement experience completed over the course of a semester, with participants attending one of two urban, low SES high schools one day per week. At each school site, students were randomly divided into separate groups (standard practice group and targeted supervisory group).

Two faculty members with expertise in teaching, fieldwork, and providing supervision were assigned to supervise two practicum sections at one of two schools and to implement the targeted supervisory curriculum. Faculty supervisors remained on-site throughout the school day to facilitate exposure to school counseling activities and to provide regular feedback and supervision to practicum students. Although students were not informed of group placement, students were likely aware of their assignment, given differences in requirements and the close relationships they formed during the practicum experience. To maintain separate groups, weekly seminar meetings occurred at different times of the school day. The faculty closely collaborated with the school staff to coordinate various school counseling activities for practicum students, including individual, small group counseling, classroom interventions, and student data analyses. In addition, the two faculty members collaborated throughout all phases of the study to reduce variability in curriculum delivery. Close collaboration occurred during curriculum development, curriculum implementation, data collection, and data analyses via biweekly meetings and frequent e-mail/phone contact. Throughout curriculum development and implementation, the researchers were cognizant of the possibility that students assigned to the standard curriculum may miss out on potential opportunities to improve MCC and social justice competencies. With that in mind, participants were informed that their subsequent internship supervisory experience would offer access to the most effective supervisory curriculum, whichever of the two curricula could best meet students’ training needs.

Standard practice group curriculum

Participants assigned to the standard practice group engaged in a supervisory experience that was delivered to all students and was standard practice within the school counseling graduate program. The standard curriculum consisted of participating in supervision seminar meetings, completing nontargeted journal writing assignments, and discussing reactions to reading assignments in relation to experiences at practicum. As part of the fieldwork experience, the standard practice curriculum included engagement in a variety of school counseling activities, including providing individual counseling, academic coaching, small group counseling, and classroom guidance teaching. Supervision seminars with students in the standard practice group were held separately from students in the targeted supervisory group and consisted of engaging in reflection of field experiences and critique of counseling skills. In keeping with the urban and social justice mission of the school counseling program (Wilczenski et al. 2011), the standard practice group curriculum incorporated topics related to MCC and social justice advocacy via class seminar discussions and the main text for the course but were not methodically delivered via a scripted curriculum.

Targeted supervisory group curriculum

Participants in the targeted supervisory group engaged in the same fieldwork experiences as the standard practice group participants, but they were encouraged to actively and systematically reflect on experiences related to counseling urban youth, cultural sensitivity, and social justice advocacy through specific discussion, modeling, and role-playing prompts. Faculty purposefully engaged students in discussions through using reflective questioning to facilitate engagement in critical reflection to raise awareness (Glasoff & Durham, 2010). Participants also completed specific reading assignments, such as Holcomb-McCoy’s (2007) text, and targeted journal entries focusing on MCC and social justice advocacy. Seminar discussions consisted of processing targeted journal entries and reactions to readings, with a focus on honing MCC and social justice advocacy skills based on experiences at the practicum site. The following are examples of weekly journal writing prompts.

Now that you are just beginning your practicum experience, please describe and explore the thoughts and feelings you have interning in this school. What is familiar, what is different compared to your own previous experiences? Were there things that you had to get used to?

Please describe how you feel and the thoughts you have when you leave the school building for the day. How do these feelings and thoughts relate to your work as a school counselor? How do these feelings and thoughts affect other areas of your life?

Please share how you would respond to a colleague whose conversations frequently include disparaging and potentially racist comments. For example, your colleague attributes a student’s low grades to laziness, lack of motivation, and parent apathy. What barriers do you foresee in being able to respond to this situation and how might you overcome these challenges? How might you take action? Please provide examples of how you would take action (or not)?

The two public high schools where students completed the practicum placement were similar in terms of student demographics, location, and size. The student population of both schools consisted of 95% students of color, and students receiving free or reduced lunch comprised 80.1% and 89.7% for each of the schools. The overall structure of the practicum seminars was consistent across all sections. The amount of readings, journal writing assignments, and engagement in counseling activities was the same for both groups. Differences pertained to content delivered during the supervision sessions, journal writing assignments, and targeted readings, with assignments and discussions focusing on building MCC and social justice competency to serve an urban population. More specifically, the targeted supervisory group curriculum incorporated specific seminar discussion prompts and guided weekly journal writing questions focusing on MCC and social justice competency. Although the standard group curriculum incorporated discussions related to MCC and social justice competency, faculty did not employ specific discussion, modeling, or role-playing prompts and did not assign guided journal questions. The text used for the two groups was the same; however, three readings were substituted within the targeted supervisory curriculum to provide for a greater depth and breadth of coverage on topics related to MCC and social justice. The two instructors teaching the targeted supervisory curriculum communicated twice a month to share progress and process content delivery to ensure consistency and curriculum adherence across groups of participants. This close collaboration permitted the instructors to maintain curriculum fidelity and to ensure that learning needs of all students were supported regardless of group assignment.

Data Analyses

We selected QCA to guide the research because of its effectiveness in making comparisons between small groups, while simultaneously supporting the possibility of obtaining a descriptive understanding of participants’ development of MCC and social justice competencies (Schreier, 2012). The ability to make comparisons, such as through the use of frequency counts, was of primary importance in collecting and analyzing preliminary data and served as a way to work toward obtaining a reliable and valid understanding of participants’ growth. Our first step in conducting QCA (Schreier, 2012) involved transcribing recorded interviews and developing a coding frame, also known as a coding structure containing main categories and subcategories, related to our research questions. To develop a coding frame, we focused on key aspects of our data within the main categories of analysis that were consistent with themes related to practicum students’ development of MCC and social justice advocacy. We reduced our transcribed material into units of coding through selecting data relevant to our coding frame and then structured that data into meaningful subcategories, using structural coding (Saldaña, 2013). Structural coding is a “question-based code” that serves to focus data analyses within a specific content area (Saldaña, 2013, p. 84), in this case, how do practicum students develop MCC and social justice advocacy skills? We then defined each of the subcategories and explored patterns and their relation to each other, through employing deductive and inductive approaches. Deductively, we examined transcribed data to identify material related to participants’ development of self-awareness, knowledge, and skills in MCC and social justice. That is, we started out with a specific set of hypotheses, grounded in the work of Arredondo et al. (1996) and Holcomb-McCoy (2007), to guide our analyses related to participants’ development of MCC and social justice competencies. We then inductively reviewed the data to see what additional themes emerged, keeping an open perspective to the possibility of the development of new ideas and experiences.

Next, consistent with QCA, we tested our coding theme by double coding the data and checking for consistency (Schreier, 2012). To ensure trustworthiness, two of the investigators followed an iterative consensus process and reviewed transcriptions when differences arose until they reached consensus (Kvale, 1996). The research assistant also engaged in analysis of the coding and theme identification process, and we discussed any differences in coding identification. Triangulation of data consisted of one investigator and research assistant independently reviewing the data and identifying codes and themes. We then discussed the diverse and similar ways the data were understood. This process of triangulation resulted in final revisions to our coding frame and identification of subcategories that we agreed upon as representing the experiences of participants. Furthermore, since two of the investigators served as the instructors and conducted the interviews, the third counselor educator and research assistant led the QCA process to reduce the likelihood of researcher bias in conducting data analyses. This consistency check was particularly important during the process wherein the coded subcategories were quantified for frequency of occurrence to compare between groups. The last step involved recording the number of times themes occurred within the final coding frame to make comparisons between the standard practice and targeted supervisory groups related to students’ experiences in developing MCC and social justice advocacy skills.

Results

The final coding frame included two main categories: (a) increasing self-awareness and (b) developing a social justice orientation. These two main categories each contained subcategories identified through deductive and inductive analyses. In relation to the main category of increasing self-awareness, participants’ responses to interview questions were organized into two subcategories: (a) increasing self-confidence as an urban school counselor and (b) recognizing biases and privileges. Within the main category of developing a social justice orientation, three subcategories were identified as common themes: (a) holding high achievement expectations and promoting equitable educational practices, (b) engaging in collaborative efforts, and (c) importance of accessing resources. Please see Table 1 for coded themes, main categories, subcategories, and number of participant responses by group.

Table 1.

Identified Themes for Multicultural Counseling Competency (MCC) and Social Justice Competencies Endorsed by Participants.

Main Categories	Subcategories	Participants by Group	Description of Theme
Increasing self-awareness	Increasing self-confidence as an urban school counselor (n = 12)	Targeted supervisory group (n = 6)	Completing practicum in an urban setting increased self-confidence to work with diverse high school students
		Standard practice group (n = 6)
	Recognizing biases and privileges (n = 6)	Targeted supervisory group (n = 6)	Increased ability to recognize biases toward diverse population and understanding privileges
	Recognizing biases and privileges (n = 6)	Standard practice group (n = 0)
Developing a social justice orientation	Holding high achievement expectations and promoting equitable educational practices (n = 8)	Targeted supervisory group (n = 6)	Increased understanding of school counselors’ role in closing the achievement gap and promoting equity
Developing a social justice orientation		Standard practice group (n = 2)
	Engaging in collaborative efforts (n = 8)	Targeted supervisory group (n = 6)	Expressed need for multiple stakeholders to work together to promote success among at risk students
	Engaging in collaborative efforts (n = 8)	Standard practice group (n = 2)
	Importance of accessing resources (n = 12)	Targeted supervisory group (n = 7)	School counselor’s role to access resources to best serve students
	Importance of accessing resources (n = 12)	Standard practice group (n = 5)

Increasing Self-Awareness

Almost all participants (n = 18) expressed a growth in self-awareness in areas related to personal values, culture, and working in a diverse, urban setting. As an outcome of the practicum experience, participants from both the standard and targeted supervisory curriculum groups described becoming more invested in learning about high school students’ diverse backgrounds and cultures. Participants in the targeted supervisory group, in particular, described the importance of reflecting on privileges and biases, while recognizing the positive and negative impact of privilege and appreciating differences.

Increasing self-confidence as an urban school counselor

Twelve participants (six from standard practice group and six from targeted supervisory group) discussed the relevance and benefit of conducting practicum as a group experience in an urban, low SES high school setting. For example, one of the participants from the targeted supervisory group shared how having a peer group at the school placement helped her to feel comfortable to “share any concerns she ha[d] because she [was] able to discuss them (concerns) openly.” Two participants (one from standard practice group and one from targeted supervisory group) described the experience as eye-opening and increasing comfort level and desire to work with an urban and diverse population. Another participant (targeted supervisory group) shared how “This experience … has helped me you know with the urban setting and really opened my eyes that I might want to work more, in a more diverse area compared to just working in a predominantly White school.” Another participant (standard practice group) similarly expressed that the practicum experience was “validating.” Thus, the supervisory experience of completing a practicum placement in an urban setting helped in developing a sense of self-confidence among all participants regardless of whether or not they engaged in the targeted supervisory curriculum.

Recognizing biases and privileges

Within the main category of increasing self-awareness, the subcategory of recognizing biases and privileges was identified as a common theme among several participants in the targeted supervisory group (n = 6). These participants who expressed feeling hesitant to work with an unfamiliar diverse student population initially, however, identified developing understanding over time. For example, one participant explained, “So, any bias or any little type of fear I had before coming into this situation of working in an inner city school all kind of went away.… Before you knew it, everyone was very accepting of me, which made me accepting of them.” The six participants in the targeted supervisory group also discussed having limited experience in urban/diverse settings and, consequently, a previous lack of awareness of biases and privileges. One participant recognized her lack of awareness of biases and increasing sense of self-awareness stating:

I come from a very, very rich, White town. I’ve never really picked out—not necessarily my own biases, but my own privileges. I for some reason was just never aware of it, which is kind of sad, but I think that is something that working with such diverse kids here has taught me.

Another participant from the targeted supervisory group talked about her self-awareness, stating:

I don’t know why I wasn’t aware of it (her bias) … maybe it’s because of where I grew up, but now I am much more aware, and it is because of this experience at this school with the kids that has taught me.

Although participants in both the targeted supervisory and standard practice groups expressed greater self-awareness in working with diverse populations, participants in the targeted supervisory group associated feelings of increased self-awareness with a developed ability to recognize biases toward a diverse population and understanding of privileges. The theme of recognizing biases was not identified among participants in the standard practice group. In fact, one participant from the standard practice group stated, “I don’t think I have any biases,” but stated she is “open to other cultures.”

Developing a Social Justice Orientation

All participants emphasized a strong desire to serve as change agents on behalf of high school students. They expressed a desire to make a difference and inspire motivation in the lives of students, through holding high expectations, engaging in collaborative efforts with school and community stakeholders, and understanding how to access key resources. Participants in the targeted supervisory group, in particular, expressed a strong sense of responsibility in their role as school counselors, through advocacy and collaboration, to promote educational equity and academic success.

Holding high achievement expectations and promoting equitable educational practices

Participants discussed the importance of providing support to students and holding high academic expectations. One participant (targeted supervisory group) described an experience that illustrated the role of achievement expectations on student performance:

When I got the SAT scores for my juniors, I couldn’t believe how low these scores were … and the counselors said, “Geez, well these scores are fit for this school.” … and just explaining it by “that’s the way it is,” I didn’t think was acceptable, and that attitude may be one of the reasons for the achievement gap.

Eight participants (six from targeted supervisory group and two from standard practice group) acknowledged the impact educators have in supporting achievement through setting high expectations. One participant (targeted supervisory group) stated, “a big attribution to it is how they’re perceived by the people in their world, and if they are set up to succeed, and if they are treated as if they are going to succeed, then they probably will.” Another participant in the targeted supervisory group talked about the importance of leveling the playing field and engaging in socially just educational practices.

It is important to keep in mind where students are at when they come to you … where are they at with their grades and classwork … what is their background like … where they are coming from … what is their history basically and getting a good comprehensive story of the … student … and then being a little flexible. Not every kid is coming to you with the same background … some kids might struggle in certain subjects, some … may have learning disabilities … emotional, social problems, so sort of, not really tailoring, but adjusting the curriculum possibly to help them be more successful compared to the student who doesn’t have some of those challenges.

Another participant in the targeted supervisory group discussed the need to go above and beyond to assist students, “The school counselor is the expert … when thinking about college … [and we] put in the extra effort to find ways to help [students] achieve that dream.” Similarly, another stated, “I think school counselors need to take on the responsibility to close the achievement gap, and … learning new languages … try a couple of words to make some people feel you are trying and then you might have better relationships with parents.”

Although participants in the targeted supervisory group expressed understanding the school counselors’ role in closing the achievement gap, a few of the participants in the standard practice group acknowledged having difficulty understanding the school counselors’ role in promoting equitable educational practices. For example, in discussing the school counselor’s role, one participant in the standard practice group stated, “I’m still trying to understand … I really don’t know.” In other words, many participants within the targeted supervisory group placed a strong emphasis on external factors in supporting student achievement (as opposed to internal motivation), emphasizing the importance of equity in education, and recognizing the ability of counselors to take action. For example, one of the participants (standard practice group) discussed how students with internal motivation were more likely to reach out for other external supports to help them achieve, whereas those without internal motivation “were less likely to be successful.”

Engaging in collaborative efforts

Eight participants emphasized the need for multiple stakeholders to work together to promote academic success among at risk students. For example, one participant (targeted supervisory group) stated, “If there’s a safe culture … a motivated culture, if everyone around the student is believing that success is possible … the student eventually believes in their own potential.… ” Eight participants (six targeted supervisory group and two standard practice group) placed a strong emphasis on engaging in a collaborative role to close the achievement gap. For example, one participant stated, “The effort is on everyone who is a stakeholder, the teachers, the parents, the students, and administrators, you know the state legislators, that kind of thing, like everyone has really got to work in unison.” Another participant in the targeted supervisory group discussed the importance of “work[ing] with the community … just to maximize those resources … and really reach out to the parents … everyone has to collaborate, work together.”

Importance of accessing resources

Twelve participants (seven from targeted supervisory group and five from standard practice group) discussed the lack of resources that is common among urban, low SES schools as a limitation in serving students. For example, a participant (standard practice group) stated, “Some schools in the urban area don’t have as many counselors as needed.” Another participant (standard practice group) suggested that by “offering a more developed course load … like doing more vocational programs” students would have greater access to educational opportunities. Seven students in the targeted supervisory group discussed the need to increase equitable opportunities and access to resources, while encouraging open collaboration among stakeholders to promote access to educational resources. For example, one participant (targeted supervisory group) emphasized the importance of figuring out “what supports are in place for the students who are doing well through analyzing where the gap is … and what can we do as a group, as a team, to fix that?” Both groups of participants understood the importance of accessing resources, and participants in the targeted supervisory group made connections between access to resources and equity. They also emphasized the responsibility school counselors have to access resources that best serve students.

Discussion and Implications

The study builds on the work of Hayden et al. (2015) by exploring the use of their targeted supervisory curriculum in developing MCC and social justice advocacy skills among school counseling students during an urban practicum field placement. The present pilot study served to examine preliminary data and outcomes of employing a targeted supervisory curriculum on promoting the development of MCC and social justice advocacy skills above and beyond a standard supervisory curriculum. Given the school counseling program’s urban and social justice mission, we aimed to further enhance program delivery of MCC and social justice competencies in counseling fieldwork preparation. Through conducting semi-structured interviews, we sought to understand participants’ fieldwork experiences, with a lens toward exploring any differences that may have emerged based on group assignment. Our findings suggest the benefit of conducting field placements in urban, low SES settings with diverse student populations, given the increase in self-confidence to work in an urban setting among all participants regardless of group assignment—a finding that is also supported by the work of Hayden et al. (2015).

Through examining the effects of multicultural course work on attitudes of racial diversity and self-perceived MCC, Dickson, Argus-Calvo, and Garcia Tafoya (2010) found that counseling students need to have sufficient exposure to diverse cultural settings to achieve significant change in affective attitudes. However, mere exposure to completing fieldwork in urban and diverse settings is arguably insufficient to effectively develop MCC and social justice advocacy skills (Hayden et al., 2015). Findings from the present study may suggest that the targeted supervisory curriculum helped in developing school counseling students’ MCC and social justice competencies beyond a standard field placement experience in an urban setting. That is, students in the targeted supervisory group expressed an increased sense of self-awareness through recognizing biases and privileges. Recognizing one’s biases, privileges, and achieving self-awareness are necessary components of developing greater multicultural awareness and sensitivity related to social justice (Arredondo et al., 1996; Ockerman & Mason, 2012). They also expressed a greater understanding of school counselors’ role in closing the achievement gap by setting high expectations for students and understanding the importance of taking action collaboratively to support academic success among at risk students. Participants in the targeted supervisory group expressed the desire and need to take action—the social justice component that was not as strongly expressed by participants in the standard practice group.

Participants who engaged in the targeted curriculum, wherein they were guided to reflect in a critical manner on their experiences related to the development of MCC and social justice advocacy, particularly understood the importance of collaborating with multiple stakeholders and promoting equitable educational practices (Holcomb-McCoy, 2007). They understood the various roles school counselors serve, including their role as an advocate, consultant, and leader in promoting educational success and equity (ASCA, 2012). These findings may suggest the benefit of incorporating a targeted supervisory curriculum that focuses on developing MCC and social justice advocacy skills. Such supervisory experiences may help to meet the greater need for course content that specifically focuses on building MCC and social justice awareness (Pieterse et al., 2009).

Numerous researchers have emphasized the need to promote equitable educational opportunities that focus on closing the achievement gap among minority students (e.g., Archer-Banks & Behar-Horenstein, 2012; Flores, 2007; Werblow, Urick, & Duesbury, 2013). Participants who engaged in the targeted supervisory group curriculum discussed the importance of accessing resources to promote greater equity to assist students in overcoming potential barriers to success that many urban and low-income students encounter. These findings may suggest the importance of supervisors discussing how to access and use relevant community-based resources, particularly if resources are limited in the school (Cook et al., 2012). The field placement experience conducted in an urban or diverse setting could prepare counseling students to garner resources effectively through employing targeted instruction that incorporates active reflection of readings and engaging in discussions on issues of equity and education.

It is also helpful for counselor educators to prepare students to recognize and understand the dynamics that may present in urban and low SES schools. According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2002), urban settings are not only city locations but also inclusive of myriad social interactions, yielding complex cultural environments. Due to the richness and diversity of urban culture, urban and low SES schools encounter concomitantly complex issues that counseling students need to recognize and understand to be effective in these settings (Wilczenski et al., 2011). Thus, school counselor training needs to incorporate learning opportunities that address nuanced cultural differences, including how a school’s sociopolitical context can preclude low SES students from achieving success, while teaching advocacy skills (Wilczenski et al., 2011). Completing practicum with one’s peer group in an urban, low SES setting that infuses a targeted supervisory curriculum integrating development of MCC and social justice advocacy could help build the necessary knowledge and skills to work effectively with minority and low-income student populations in urban school settings. Fieldwork experiences that systematically incorporate MCC and social justice supervisory curricula are of critical importance considering the increasing diversity and complex needs of diverse student and client populations. They are also aligned with the Association for Multicultural Counseling and Development’s efforts to revise the current MCCs to better reflect the intersectionalities of culture and address ways counselors engage in social justice advocacy (Ratts, Singh, Nassar-McMillan, Butler, & McCullough, 2015).

Limitations

Two urban, low SES high schools served as practicum locations with different instructors at each site. Although the instructors followed the same curriculum, there could have been differences in teaching style between the faculty supervisors that qualitative analyses failed to identify. Participants in the targeted supervisory and standard practice groups engaged in their practicum placement simultaneously. Thus, information could have been shared across groups, although supervisory seminar meetings were held separately, at different times of the day to reduce likelihood of information sharing. Additionally, the identified themes shared commonalities among the targeted supervisory and standard practice groups with small differences observed based on frequency of coded responses. This finding is likely due to the practicum experience taking place at an urban school setting, making it difficult to parcel out students’ experiences related to exposure to the targeted supervisory curriculum.

Given the similarity of themes across groups coupled with the small number of participants, findings need to be interpreted with caution with respect to the efficacy of the targeted supervisory curriculum. Although the present study using QCA provided preliminary data in support of curriculum efficacy, the sample size was small and limited the ability to draw significantly distinct comparisons between groups. Consequently, further research using a larger sample size is needed to better ascertain feasibility and applicability of the curriculum across schools, such as elementary and middle schools, and other urban settings with different demographics and varying needs. Given the use of self-reported data, instructor characteristics, and specific schools used for the study, the ability to generalize results to counselor education programs is limited.

Conclusion and Future Research

Findings may suggest the benefit of integrating a targeted supervisory curriculum to develop school counseling students’ MCC and social justice advocacy skills. However, more research is needed to further explore the outcomes and impact of targeted training on urban high school students. One way to accomplish this is to survey high school students regarding their perceptions of school counseling students’ knowledge and skills to support their needs in a culturally appropriate manner. Counselor educators can explore ways to incorporate pedagogical strategies that prepare counseling students to become committed to social justice, since providing MCC and social justice training through course work alone may be insufficient to prepare counseling students to work effectively with diverse populations (Odegard & Vereen, 2010). As emphasized in the Counselors for Social Justice (CSJ) Code of Ethics (CSJ, 2011), social justice advocacy is a critical component of MCC training and guides the work of counselors to promote equity and access, while focusing on clients’ cultural, contextual, and developmental needs. Incorporating a targeted field placement supervisory curriculum that develops school counseling students’ commitment to social justice is an important step toward dismantling educational and societal inequities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

American Counseling Association. (2014). ACA code of ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf

American School Counselor Association. (2012). The ASCA National Model: A framework for school counseling programs (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Author.

Archer-Banks

D. A. M.

Behar-Horenstein

L. S.

(2012). Ogbu revisited: Unpacking high-achieving African American girls’ high school experiences. Urban Education, 47, 198–223. doi:10.1177/0042085911427739

Arredondo

Toporek

Brown

S. P.

Jones

Locke

D. C.

Sanchez

Stadler

(1996). Operationalization of the multicultural counseling competencies. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24, 42–78. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.1996.tb00288.x

Bailey

D. F.

Bradbury-Bailey

M. E.

(2010). Empowered youth programs: Partnerships for enhancing postsecondary outcomes of African American adolescents. Professional School Counseling, 14, 64–74. Retrieved from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-members/publications/professional-school-counseling-journal

Bemak

Chung

(2005). Advocacy as a critical role for urban school counselors: Working toward equity and social justice. Professional School Counseling, 8, 196–202. Retrieved from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-members/publications/professional-school-counseling-journal

Bryan

(2005). Fostering educational resilience and achievement in urban schools through school-family-community partnerships. Professional School Counseling, 8, 219–228. Retrieved from http://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-members/publications/professional-school-counseling-journal

Chang

C. Y.

Crethar

H. C.

Ratts

M. J.

(2010). Social justice: A national imperative for counselor education and supervision. Counselor Education & Supervision, 50, 82–87. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00110.x

Cook

A. L.

Pérusse

Rojas

E. D.

(2012). Increasing academic achievement and college-going rates for Latina/o English language learners: A survey of school counselor interventions. Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision, 4, 24–40. doi:10.7729/42.0023

10.

Constantine

M. G.

Hage

S. M.

Kindaichi

M. M.

Bryant

R. M.

(2007). Social justice and multicultural issues: Implications for the practice and training of counselors and counseling psychologists. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 24–29. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00440.x

11.

Counselors for Social Justice. (2011). The counselors for social justice (CSJ) code of ethics. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 3, 1–21. Retrieved from http://www.psysr.org/jsacp/Ibrahim-v3n2_1-21.pdf

12.

Dickson

G. L.

Argus-Calvo

Garcia Tafoya

(2010). Multicultural counselor training experiences: Training effects and perceptions of training among a sample of predominately Hispanic students. Counselor Education & Supervision, 49, 247–265. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00101.x

13.

Dixon

A. L.

Tucker

Clark

M. A.

(2010). Integrating social justice advocacy with national standards of practice: Implications for school counselor education. Counselor Education and Supervision, 50, 103–115. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00112.x

14.

Estrada

Frame

M. W.

Williams

C. B.

(2004). Cross-cultural supervision: Guiding the conversation toward race and ethnicity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 307–319. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)2161-1912

15.

Flores

(2007). Examining disparities in Mathematics education: Achievement gap or opportunity gap? The High School Journal, 91, 29–42. doi:10.1353/hsj.2007.0022

16.

Glasoff

H. L.

Durham

J. C.

(2010). Using supervision to prepare social justice counseling advocates. Counselor Education and Supervision, 50, 116–129. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00113.x

17.

Grothaus

Cole

(2010). Meeting the challenges together: School counselors collaborating with students and families with low income. Journal of School Counseling, 8, 1–23. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ895909.pdf

18.

Hayden

L. A.

Cook

A. L.

Gracia

Silva

Cadet

(2015). Evaluating fieldwork and a targeted curriculum on urban counselor trainees’ self-efficacy. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 6, 33–46. doi:10.1177/2150137815573789

19.

Holcomb-McCoy

(2007). School counseling to close the achievement gap: A social justice framework for success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

20.

Kvale

(1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

21.

Ockerman

M. S.

Mason

E. C. M.

(2012). Developing school counseling students’ social justice orientation through service learning. Journal of School Counseling, 10, 1–26. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ978861.pdf

22.

Odegard

M. A.

Vereen

L. G.

(2010). A grounded theory of counselor educators integrating social justice into their pedagogy. Counselor Education and Supervision, 50, 130–149. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00114.x

23.

Paisley

P. O.

Bailey

D. F.

Hayes

R. L.

McMahon

H. G.

Grimmett

M. A.

(2010). Using a cohort model for school counselor preparation to enhance commitment to social justice. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 35, 262–270. doi:10.1080/01933922.2010.492903

24.

Pieterse

A. L.

Evans

S. A.

Risner-Butner

Collins

N. M.

Mason

L. B.

(2009). Multicultural competence and social justice training in counseling psychology and counselor education: A review and analysis of a sample of multicultural course syllabi. The Counseling Psychologist, 37, 93–115. doi:10.1177/0011000008319986

25.

Ratts

M. J.

Singh

A. A.

Nassar-McMillan

Butler

McCullough

(2015, 3). Revision of the AMCD Multicultural Counseling Competencies: Future directions in counseling practice and research. Working document presented at the American Counseling Association, Orlando, FL. Abstract retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/docs/default-source/2015-conference/programguide2015.pdf?sfvrsn=2

26.

Saldaña

(2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27.

Schreier

(2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

28.

Toporek

R. L.

Ortega-Villalobos

Pope-Davis

D. B.

(2004). Critical incidents in multicultural supervision: Exploring supervisees’ and supervisors’ experiences. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32, 66–83. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2004.tb00362.x

29.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). Census 2000 urban and rural classification. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html

30.

Wilczenski

F. L.

Cook

A. L.

Hayden

(2011). Conceptual and curricular frameworks for infusing social justice in urban school counselor education. Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision, 3, 6–17. Retrieved from http://www.naraces.org/Resources/Documents/journal/3-1/Wilczenski_Cook_Hayden.pdf

31.

Wilczenski

F. L.

Schumacher

R. A.

(2008). Service learning integrated in urban school counselor preparation. Journal of School Counseling, 6, 1–23. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ894783.pdf

32.

Wilczenski

F. L.

Schumacher

R. A.

Cook

A. L.

(2010). School counseling principles: Mentoring and supervising. Alexandria, VA: American School Counselor Association.

33.

Werblow

Urick

Duesbery

(2013). On the wrong track: How tracking is associated with dropping out of school. Equity & Excellence in Education, 46, 270–284. doi:10.1080/10665684.2013.779168