A Qualitative Study of Feminist Multicultural Trainees’ Social Justice Development

Abstract

Social justice–oriented development was examined by recruiting practicum trainees from a site selected for its unique emphasis on feminist multiculturalism and social justice. The grounded theory design triangulated multiple data from 20 female participants. Analysis yielded an empirical model of how core experiences contributed to 3 types of growth: (a) doing your own work, (b) honoring your voice and others’ voices, and (c) challenging power to create systemic change. Counseling, supervision, and training implications are provided.

Social justice competencies for counselling and psychotherapy: Perceptions of experienced practitioners and implications for contemporary practice

“…This perspective is increasingly evidenced within current training of therapists and is viewed positively by students in training (Motulsky, et al ; Ali, Liu, Mahmood, & Arguello, ; Arthur, Collins, Marshall, & McMahon, ; Arthur, Collins, McMahon, & Marshall, ; Burnes & Singh, ; Singh et al, ; Speight & Vera, ; Toporek, Lewis, & Crethar, ). The implicit connection between sociopolitical forces as root causes of personal problems is clear (Hoover & Morrow, ).…”

“…The term “appropriated oppression” reflects the source of unjust beliefs about self as external to the individual and adopted by the individual, rather than constructed by, or somehow caused by, the individual (Banks & Stephens, ). An essential consideration in multicultural and social justice counselling competencies is the sensitivity to sociopolitical forces as a root cause of client problems (Hoover & Morrow, ).…”

A Journey Toward Feminist Supervision: A Dual Autoethnographic Inquiry

“…In regard to a truly collaborative, relational supervisory relationship, Mangione et al (2011) said, "Actually naming the issue of power and the unequal power status is essential" (p. 163). Hoover and Morrow (2016) found that supervisees at a feminist-multicultural training site questioned whether true shared power was possible in the supervisory context, even though they felt their supervisors generally aspired to the ideal. Szymanski, 2003) and were helpful in guiding my intentions and behaviors early in the semester.…”

“…Interestingly, none of the supervisees in Murphy and Wright's (2005) study described evaluation in negative terms, perhaps indicating that instances of negative use of supervisor power around evaluation did not occur for these participants. The supervisees in Hoover and Morrow's (2016) study remained always aware of the evaluative nature of supervision in their social justice oriented practicum which at times led them not to disclose certain thoughts or defer to their supervisors even when feeling overextended. …”

Untitled

“…In regard to a truly collaborative, relational supervisory relationship, Mangione et al (2011) said, "Actually naming the issue of power and the unequal power status is essential" (p. 163). Hoover and Morrow (2016) found that supervisees at a feminist-multicultural training site questioned whether true shared power was possible in the supervisory context, even though they felt their supervisors generally aspired to the ideal. …”