by Chandler J. Zolliecoffer, M.S. & Benjamin W. Katz, B.A., University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Clinical psychologists occupy a unique role within research, educational, and clinical contexts wherein they are afforded proximity to individuals of varying identities and backgrounds. Appropriately, the training and development of culturally responsive clinical psychologists is emphasized within the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS) program review criteria (PCSAS, 2011). Still, for some institutions, the infusion of multicultural considerations into training programs tends to be insufficient. For example, students in self-reported clinical science programs perceive their training sites to integrate multiculturalism into coursework and supervision to a lesser extent than students in scientist-practitioner programs (Gregus et al., 2019). Furthermore, Gregus and colleagues found that Black students perceive their training in multiculturalism to be of lesser quality, and their programs as less receptive compared to non-Black students. Moreover, some students report their training environments to be unsafe and unsupportive, such that marginalized students and their ideas are not valued.
These findings underscore extant programmatic discrepancies in training models and also highlight how the experiences of minoritized groups can differ from those of majority groups. Given the association between trainee multicultural sensitivity and program climate and multicultural training environment (Peters et al., 2011), the pressing need to establish an anti-racist, inclusive, and equitable training environment to support the development of cultural humility for all students becomes further elucidated. Among clinical psychology programs in the U.S., students with a diversity committee (DC) report more positive impressions of multicultural training compared to students without one (Gregus et al., 2019) suggesting that the establishment of a DC may be helpful in cultivating such an environment. The present article highlights our experience creating a DC to offer insights to other programs seeking to integrate diversity initiatives into their training.
Inaugurated in Fall 2019, our DC was formed as a collective of students and faculty working to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion-related initiatives. To efficiently target all training areas within our program we developed four subcommittees: Research, Clinical, Education, and Community Outreach. Within each subcommittee specific actions were identified. For example, the Research subcommittee prepared the results from our first clinical psychology program climate survey. Other subcommittees have taken additional actions such as the revising of our training clinic’s forms for inclusive and affirming language (Clinical), reviewing curriculum to infuse diversity-related topics throughout coursework (Education), and creating a shared calendar with web links and reminders for ongoing campus and community events (Community Outreach).
While acknowledgment of progress made is important, it is equally critical to reflect on barriers to progress and highlight areas where we may have fallen short. Many of these challenges arose during initial DC meetings. In reflecting on this, we have identified several culprits for these barriers including: a superficial approach to effecting change, disproportionate distribution of labor between faculty and students, and creating goals that were not concrete, measurable, or sustainable. Without the appropriate distribution of meaningful and well-defined initiatives using an action-oriented approach, it is easy to succumb to the pitfalls of performative or optical allyship.
Despite the aforementioned challenges, there appears to be a promising cultural shift happening right now in clinical psychology with respect to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. This process is dynamic and will evolve over continued sociopolitical shifts. Importantly, administrators and faculty must be held accountable to model diversity, equity, and inclusion work. Students must also hold each other accountable to effectively facilitate change within their training environments. Such efforts can help create a climate denouncing racism and other forms of discrimination, and promote a climate that maintains values consistent with anti-racism, diversity, equity, and inclusivity. These efforts will be futile, however, if programs do not authentically position these values within their training models.
Acknowledgements: The authors thank Drs. Christine Larson and Krista Lisdahl for their comments on an earlier draft of this article.
Note: Both authors contributed equally to this work. Authorship order was determined by a coin flip.
________________________________________________________________
References
Gregus, S. J., Stevens, K. T., Seivert, N. P., Tucker, R. P., & Callahan, J. L. (2019). Student perceptions of multicultural training and program climate in clinical psychology doctoral programs. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000289
Peters, H. J., Krumm, A. J., Gonzales, R. R., Gunter, K. K., Paez, K. N., Zygowicz, S. D., & Haggins, K. L. (2011). Multicultural environments of academic versus internship training programs: Lessons to be learned. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 39(2), 114-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2011.tb00145.x
Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (2011). Review criteria. https://www.pcsas.org/accreditation/review-criteria/
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this newsletter are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS).