Multicultural Issues in Graduate Advising Relationships

Abstract

Although advisor-advisee relationships are ubiquitous to graduate training, there is relatively little scholarship bearing on advising relationships. Not surprisingly, the intersection between multiculturalism and advising relationships is also sparse. Given the potential increase in the numbers of People of Color entering graduate training due to the changing demographics in the United States and the influence of advising relationships on advisees' personal and professional development, it is imperative to address the role of culture in the advising relationship-in this article, we will address race, sex, and sexual orientation. Hence, in this article, we address the potential impact of racial and cultural socialization processes on the advising relationship and organizational contexts.

International Advisees' Perspectives on the Advising Relationship in Counseling Psychology Doctoral Programs

“…It is also vital that advisors and advisees discuss, early in their relationship, the responsibilities and role expectations of each (Park-Saltzman et al, 2012). As earlier noted, such discussions may alleviate advisees' acculturative stress, and may also bolster the formation and maintenance of the relationship that Schlosser and colleagues (Schlosser et al, 2011a(Schlosser et al, , 2011bSchlosser, Talleyrand et al, 2011) assert is central to the advising process. Such conversations may also be prudent during the selection and admissions process: Potential advisors and advisees sharing their expectations of the advising relationship may reduce the likelihood of future conflicts and misunderstandings.…”

“…We still lack, then, a deep understanding of international counseling psychology doctoral students' experiences of the advising relationship, as informed by participants from multiple universities (Nilsson & Anderson, 2004;Rice et al, 2009). Furthermore, Schlosser et al's (2011aSchlosser et al's ( , 2011bSchlosser, Talleyrand et al, 2011) multicultural theory of advising relationships calls for accompanying empirical examination of such relationships.…”

Fostering Critical Feminist Multicultural Qualitative Research Mentoring

“…Scholars broadly and proactively have promoted the professional and personal development of mentees (e.g., Johnson, 2002; Johnson & Huwe, 2002), described the nuances of mentoring relationships (Schlosser, Knox, Pruitt, & Hill, 2003), articulated mentoring discrepancies across psychology fields (e.g., Johnson, Koch, Fallow, & Huwe, 2000), identified mentoring dimensions related to marginalized groups (Alvarez, Blume, Cervantes, & Thomas, 2009; Evans & Cokley, 2008; Russell & Horne, 2009; Schlosser, Talleyrand, Lyons, Kim, & Johnson, 2011), and examined the influence of mentoring on mentee research productivity and engagement in independent research (e.g., Hollingsworth & Fassinger, 2002). However, the extant scholarship has offered few guidelines for addressing issues of identity and power (e.g., Johnson, 2002), usually focusing on a single status such as race, gender, or sexual orientation (Alvarez et al, 2009; Chan et al, 2016; Russell & Horne, 2009; Schlosser et al, 2011). Additionally, guidance on how to provide mentorship to students wishing to conduct qualitative research is scarce (Levitt, Kannan, & Ippolito, 2013; Turner & Crane, 2016).…”

“…Additionally, guidance on how to provide mentorship to students wishing to conduct qualitative research is scarce (Levitt, Kannan, & Ippolito, 2013; Turner & Crane, 2016). Previous scholars have developed practice guidelines in research mentoring (Schlosser et al, 2011), yet few authors have stipulated theory-driven mentoring practices (Benishek et al, 2004; Fassinger, 1997), or addressed intersectional identities in mentoring relationships (Schlosser et al, 2011) specific to qualitative research. Moreover, we found no scholarship focused on CFM qualitative research mentorship.…”

“…To provide an antidote to the problems resulting from neoliberalism in higher education and to optimize the possibilities for enhancing mentees’ qualitative research success, we propose a CFM conceptual model for qualitative research mentoring. Our conceptual framework weaves together critical, feminist, and multicultural models that are empirical (Arczynski & Morrow, 2017; Chan et al, 2015) or conceptual (Benishek et al, 2004; Chan et al, 2015; Gormley, 2013; Schlosser et al, 2011) in nature. Three dimensions of a CFM mentoring approach include the following:…”