Answering The Call For Systems Change Facilitating

Answering the Call for Systems Change: Facilitating the
Development of a Social Justice Theoretical Orientation

and Skills in Counselor Trainees
Melanie M. Wilcox, Ph.D.
Department of Psychological Sciences, Augusta University,
1120 15th Street, Science Hall E1001, Augusta, GA 30912
Katharine S. Shaffer, Ph.D.
Division of Applied Behavioral Sciences, LC 400,
University of Baltimore, 1420 N. Charles St., Baltimore MD 21201
Laura Reid Marks, Ph.D.
Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems,
Florida State University, 1114 West Call Street, Tallahassee, FL 32306
Ashley Hutchison, Ph.D.
Department of Counseling Psychology, Social Psychology, and Counseling,
Ball State University, Health Professions Building Rm 442, Muncie, IN 47306
Candice N. Hargons, Ph.D.
Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology,
University of Kentucky, 239 Dickey Hall, Lexington, KY 40506
Abstract
There is much agreement within counseling psychology on the importance of social justice, yet social justice
education and training remain limited in counseling psychology programs (Beer et al., 2012; Pieterse et al.,
2009; Singh et al., 2010). Critical components to social justice education and training include an emphasis on
systems theories that could inform interventions (i.e. advocacy and activism) at the exosystem and mesosystem
levels as well as learning about the breadth of activism and advocacy skills. Assessment, diagnosis, and
conceptualization are considered core functional competencies in professional psychology (Fouad, 2009), yet
these processes are often only taught at the individual level. If the goal of advocacy and activism are to foster
systems change, considered a functional competency in counseling psychology (CCPTP, 2013), then it is crucial
to provide systems-level theories and skills in counseling psychology education and training. We describe how
we have attended to the provision of systems-level education and training in our respective programs. We will
provide recommendations about the inclusion of systems-level theories, classroom formats, assignments, and
mentorship designed to foster trainees’ development of a systems-level theoretical orientation, as well as skills
to engage in social justice research, leadership, and both micro- and macro-level advocacy interventions.
Keywords: social justice, advocacy, systems, training, theoretical orientation
© 2022 Wilcox, Shaffer, Marks, Hutchison, & Hargons. Journal for Social Action in Counseling & Psychology, 14(2), 2-24.
doi: 10.33043/JSACP.14.2.2-24. Shared with CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 License.
Wilcox, Shaffer, Marks, Hutchison, & Hargons | Answering the Call for Systems Change 3
Answering the Call for Systems Change: Facilitating the Development of a Social Justice
Theoretical Orientation and Skills in Counselor Trainees
Principles of social justice have been foundational to counseling psychology since its inception and
throughout its leadership within psychology (Brady-Amoon & Keefe-Cooperman, 2017; DeBlaere et al., 2019;
Fouad et al., 2004). Yet, there remains a disconnect between counseling psychologists’ theorizing and practice, as
shifting our perspectives toward systems-level change has seen little progress (DeBlaere et al., 2019; Liu, 2017; Olle,
2018). Of note, while a multicultural perspective should ideally be rooted in social justice action (Vera & Speight,
2003), too often, “multiculturalism” focuses on “cultural differences” rather than social justice action. As such, we
see the two as distinct, and focus here specifically on social justice. Scholars (e.g., Beer et al., 2012; DeBlaere et al.,
2019; Pieterse et al., 2009; Speight & Vera, 2004; Singh et al., 2010; Vera & Speight, 2003) have repeatedly called for
a focus on how to enact social justice prevention, outreach, advocacy and activism interventions within training
programs. To this end, Constantine and colleagues (2007) identified social justice competencies that delineated
the knowledge, awareness, and skills necessary for social justice action. Similarly, Lewis and colleagues’ (2003)
multidimensional model outlined a more comprehensive list of counselor advocacy competencies. More recently,
some examples of social justice education and training have been introduced into the multicultural literature,
including models of social justice counseling (e.g., Green et al., 2008), classroom assignments (e.g., Brinkman &
Hirsch, 2019; Murray et al., 2010), standalone courses and curricular changes (e.g., Sanabria & DeLorenzi, 2019),
community-based models (e.g., Hof et al., 2009), and program-based affinity groups (Brady-Amoon et al., 2012).
Yet even with these advancements, the integration of such activities and curricular changes in training
programs appears to be the exception rather than the rule. Moving from idea to action has been challenging for
graduate programs, perhaps due to the difficulties inherent in disentangling psychology, and the academy itself,
from their historic racist, sexist, and classist ideological roots (Goodman et al., 2004; Olle, 2018). Further, many
faculty have not received requisite training in this area (e.g., education in systems-level theory). Indeed, many
(though not all) of the published recommendations are still focused on social justice counseling, or advocacy at
the individual level. Further, incorporating some of the published recommendations in training programs would
require the creation of new courses or curriculum overhauls, which face several barriers in the academic world
(time, budget, and administrative constraints).
Regardless of the reasons, we can no longer wait. New clinicians, researchers, and consultants enter the
profession lacking skills in how to engage in advocacy and activism that fights oppression within the systems and
structures of our world. We find it imperative that training programs meet the real-world demand (and ethical
and professional duty) to join with communities of oppressed people and engage in dedicated action to fight
systems and structures that incarcerate, kill, and deny dignity and human rights. In the sections to follow, we
offer concrete suggestions for training new professionals with a critical lens -- to use theory to conceptualize and
intervene at levels beyond the individual.
Systems Theories, Social Justice, and Conceptualization
Despite the shift from merely theorizing to more concrete expectations (e.g., Scheel et al., 2018), social
justice training and education is often lacking in counseling psychology training programs (e.g., Beer et al., 2012;
Pieterse et al., 2009; Singh et al., 2010). This disconnect between theory and education, training, and practice may
be explained at least in part by three potential “stuck points”: (1) A lack of field-wide integration of comprehensive
systems-level, justice-oriented theories (DeBlaere et al., 2019), (2) A lack of field-wide education and training
on the breadth of activism and advocacy interventions (DeBlaere et al., 2019), and (3) Failure to recognize that
we must engage our case conceptualization skills to understand the systems-level etiology of our systems-level
problems, and to match our systems-level interventions with our conceptualization (Wilcox et al., 2020).
First, a note about distinguishing between the individual and systems levels. We believe that the recent
American Psychological Association (APA, 2021) resolution emphasizing psychology’s role in addressing racism
is a helpful place to start. They state that psychologists should consider the following four levels of racism:
4 JSACP | Volume 14., No. 2 | Winter 2022
Structural, Institutional, Interpersonal, and Internalized (APA, 2021). Structural racism is defined as that which
results from enacting or failing to repeal “laws, policies, and practices that produce cumulative, durable, and race-
based inequalities” (p. 1). Institutional racism refers to that which results from policies, practices, and procedures,
at the level of specific institutions. Structural and, to a lesser extent, institutional, represent the “systems level” to
which we refer, and map onto Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979) macrosystem and exosystem, respectively (APA,
2017). On the other hand, interpersonal and internalized racism (see APA, 2021)--notably, what we more often
learn about and focus on--represent the individual level.
For psychology, intervening upon the systems that lead to individual distress is a form of prevention
similar to physician John Snow’s removal of the London water pump responsible for the 1854 London cholera
outbreak: address the source of the illness, and prevent rather than remediate (treat or cure) the inevitable illness.
Yet while counselors and psychologists are generally able to express a vague sense that clients’ individual struggles
are driven by systems-level problems, they often have much more difficulty moving from theory to practice in
addressing those systemic issues.
At the individual level, “Assessment/Diagnosis/Conceptualization” is considered a functional
competency in professional psychology (Fouad, 2009). This is because counselors and psychologists recognize
treatment must be rooted in conceptualization, and conceptualization must be rooted in integrative theory.
Further, both conceptualization and treatment must be grounded in an understanding of sociopolitical
context as well as science. APA (2015) requires that training programs teach psychological theories that
serve as the foundation of individual case conceptualization, and comprehensive exams often require an
advanced ability to demonstrate the necessary knowledge and skills to apply theory to etiology and treatment.
Through case conceptualization, clinicians seek to answer several questions. First, what exactly is the target
of change (the “problem”)? How did it come to be (etiology)? What does the therapist know about problems
like this with similar etiologies? What does the therapist know about the client’s sociopolitical and interpersonal
contexts? Given the answers to these questions, how does theory suggest a therapist might intervene upon the
target of change (treatment plan)? Finally, what skills are necessary to enact and evaluate the treatment plan?
Clinicians spend a substantial proportion of their training years learning to apply this paradigm to the individuals
with whom they work, gradually incorporating this process into their professional practice.Throughout our
careers, we continue to write about how we personally engage this process, as required for predoctoral internship
applications, postdoctoral applications, job applications, and board certification. Indeed, some state licensure
boards still require an oral examination focused on our case conceptualization and treatment planning process.
Systems change is considered a subfacet of advocacy, a functional competency in counseling psychology
(Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs, 2013). Yet, despite the incredible emphasis that we place on
individual case conceptualization and treatment planning, rarely do we receive or provide training and education
in exosystem and macrosystem case conceptualization and intervention (APA, 2017; Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979).
How many of us have ever been asked to articulate our systems-level or social justice theoretical orientation, and
how it informs our “systems-level treatment planning”? Or how our personal contextual/ cultural positionality and
worldview informs our systems-level theoretical orientation? How many of us could articulate this if asked? To be
able to do so would require equally-extensive training in comprehensive, interdisciplinary theories and models of
exosystems and macrosystems (APA, 2017; Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979), as they inform etiology. Further, it would
require education and training on the substantial empirical research available demonstrating the macrosystem
causes of both individual and community distress (e.g., see Hatzenbuehler et al.,, 2013; Malat et al., 2018) and the
data supporting our systems-level theories. We would also need to learn comprehensive, interdisciplinary theories
and models of exosystem and macrosystem change (i.e. treatment), which is to say, better understand advocacy
and activism strategies (e.g., Lantz et al., 2016). Finally, we would need education and training in the breadth of
advocacy and activism skills that one can learn to facilitate such treatment (e.g., Lewis et al., 2003).
Matching Intervention to Conceptualization at the Systems-Level: Advocacy and Activism

For many, when they hear “social justice action,” what may come to mind is a particular, stereotypical set of
actions associated with a narrow set of activism strategies (e.g., marching; die-ins). Just as there exists a plethora of
intervention skills and approaches at the individual level, however, so too are there a plethora of intervention skills
and approaches for addressing problems at the exosystem and macrosystem levels. Advocacy and activism skills
exist along a continuum of intensity, ranging from conventional, to disruptive, to violent (Barnhardt, 2014; Lantz
et al., 2016). Skills can also be enacted from a number of locations within power structures, such as top-down (as
an “inside” person with some degree of power), bottom-up (grassroots), as an insider, or as an outsider (Lantz et
al., 2016).
One framework for matching intervention to conceptualization includes the recent Society of Counseling
Psychology Advocacy Toolkit (Banks et al., 2019). The authors highlight methods of intervention depending
upon the level of intervention. For example, two key questions guide conceptualization at the individual level: (1)
What is the source (etiology) of the client’s distress? and (2) Based on the etiology, what are the theoretical and
empirical mechanisms of change to resolve the distress? Upscaling the conceptualization process to systems-level
intervention, one might consider the level and source of the harm: is the root cause at the federal, state, local, or
organizational/institutional level? Given that, what structures should be targeted (e.g., a policy, school system,
or professional organization)? The answer may include multiple levels and multiple institutions. Subsequently,
depending upon the source(s) of the inequity (distress), and desired target of change, various direct or indirect
intervention methods or policy influence methods (Banks et al., 2019) may be selected.
Direct action examples include being involved in government hearings, policy conferences, or serving
on policy task groups (Banks et al., 2019). Indirect action focuses energy on mechanisms likely to influence or
shape public opinion about policy (for example, media, social media or podcasts), but does not directly involve
contact with policy makers (Banks et al., 2019). In deciding on direct versus indirect action, one should also take
into account one’s systems-level theoretical orientation and the mechanism (e.g., education, guidance, persuasion,
or pressure) by which one hopes to influence policy, as the mechanism of influence may shape whether one
pursues direct or indirect means of change (Banks et al., 2019). These considerations should be intertwined with
considering how and where the inequity first manifests. Lastly, the chosen intervention may also be a function of an
individual’s skill sets and strengths in four broad domains: communication, relationship-building, research, and
strategic analysis skills (Banks et al., 2019). The complexities of intervening across these levels requires additional
skills that can complement traditional training norms (e.g., teaching skills, theories).
Thus, it is imperative for social justice action that graduate training programs provide their students with
the knowledge and skills necessary to conceptualize and address systems-level change. We must work intentionally
to foster our students’ ways of thinking about systems change such that it eventually comes naturally, just as
we expect at the individual level. Otherwise, trainees may continue to conceptualize systems-level problems as
nested within the individual, contributing to a host of clinical errors (e.g., blaming, misdiagnosis, or inadequate
treatment approach). There are a number of ways in which such training, formal and informal, may occur within
graduate programs. Below, the authors provide recommendations and examples of how they have implemented
such training in their own educational practice.
Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Social Justice Training
Course Design
Trainees cannot develop a social justice orientation to their work if their core coursework does not
center social justice theory and action. As an initial step in developing a social justice theoretical orientation,
instructors must critically examine their syllabi and course design. As a baseline step, faculty should examine
course syllabi for evidence of social justice material being threaded through a course, as opposed to being a topical
focus of discussion on one or two days in a semester. Relatedly, most coursework in counseling psychology usually
incorporates elements of ethical practice. Ensuring that multicultural and social justice perspectives are included
alongside ethics instruction reinforces the interdependent nature of ethics, multiculturalism, and social justice.
Lastly, in order to truly facilitate a social justice orientation among trainees, it must be infused across curricula
consistently, regardless of course content and instructor. If required coursework is also often cross-departmental,
this likely requires not only intra-program coordination, but also inter-program/departmental collaboration.
Example
The first author (MMW) redesigned her multicultural counseling class to center a systems theories frame,
encourage emotional engagement, directly address Whiteness and White supremacy, and provide education and
training in advocacy and activism (see Appendix A for a list of resources). In-class time is predominantly process-
oriented, with accountability for readings and content attended to through weekly journals (Appendix B), in a
quasi-flipped classroom approach. The first two class sessions, however, are content-oriented such that students
learn about the original tripartite multicultural competence model (Sue et al., 1982), the multicultural orientation
model (Davis et al., 2018), Critical Race Theory, Critical Whiteness Theory (e.g., Nayak, 2007), intersectionality
(e.g., Crenshaw, 1991; Moradi, 2017; Grzanka, 2020), Fundamental Cause Theory (Hatzenbuehler et al., 2013),
and social justice advocacy as a form of prevention.
We discuss how family systems theories and critical philosophy emphasize that systems (and the
individuals within them) strive for equilibrium, often resisting even positive, healthy, and desired change; and,
that White supremacist bourgeois patriarchy (see Liu, 2017) is the overall system within which we exist, and which
constantly strives to maintain status quo. This is the foundation of fostering students’ social justice orientations:
Just as in individual models, they are exposed to multiple theoretical lenses; asked to consider how they believe
systems-level problems develop; how they believe systems change best occurs; and how their answers align with
the given theories. For example, we discuss the approaches to advocacy and activism described in Lantz et al.
(2016), emphasizing that the approaches they cover are just some of many. MMW then asks students to consider
not only how they see themselves intervening with systems through this lens, but the ways in which their implicit
orientation is rooted in their positionality. MMW uses herself as an example, noting that she leans more toward a
tempered radical approach (i.e., working from within rather than outside organizations using a tempered approach;
see Kezar et al., 2011; Lantz et al., 2016), which she sometimes calls a “Trojan Horse” orientation owing to the
ancient Greek myth; but, that her orientation toward tempered radicalism is likely rooted in her Whiteness and
ability to social-class “pass” in some spaces.
We then further discuss the importance of matching one’s intervention to the identified problem from
the perspective of one’s social justice orientation. MMW has observed over the years that this foundation helps
students to articulate their own social justice theoretical orientation and better identify strategies to address
systemic problems, including the development of long-term strategies (e.g., career goals).
We co-create a living document of group engagement rules that guide us throughout the semester. Students
are asked to simultaneously hold space for critical thinking about the systems level, emotional engagement
about its impacts at the individual level, and the interplay between the two. I (MMW) introduce my students
to a concept I have come to call critical self-compassion. I explain that one of our central tasks is to learn to hold
multiple, opposing truths simultaneously. In that vein, I advise students that to do the necessary personal work
required of our multicultural journey, we must be able to experience our own reactions non-judgmentally and
allow ourselves compassion as we encounter new information. More specifically, we must understand that we
did not elect to learn the problematic beliefs and ideas that we now must unlearn; and, we must also be willing to
critically examine our reactions and from where they originate, holding ourselves accountable to challenge those
ideas, beliefs and reactions.
Students are expected to read empirical literature throughout the semester, and demonstrate adequate
integration and application of concepts learned in weekly reflection journals. During most class periods, students
are shown a video (see Appendix A) meant to elicit emotional connection with experiences of oppression, as
well as provide them with contextual historical information. During the second half of the class, we process the
feelings and reactions that were elicited, with particular emphasis on examining our own roles in systems of
oppression from the systems-level frames previously discussed. These class sessions can be deeply emotional,
and sometimes tumultuous, explosive, or violent at some level. Of note, MMW has observed that discussing
critical self-compassion, as well as White Fragility (DiAngelo, 2018) at the beginning of the course helps to temper
(but not eradicate) this tumult. The weekly reflection journals are an opportunity to process the video and class
discussion in a more private space.
At least two additional class sessions are reserved for didactic learning about social justice. Emphasis
is placed on (1) developing one’s social justice theoretical orientation, built upon the systems frames
discussed earlier, and (2) activism and advocacy skills. Regarding theoretical orientation, students are
asked to reflect on how systems change occurs and how they can be most effective as social change agents.
We discuss theories of advocacy, activism, and change, and MMW uses herself as an example, sharing
her tempered radical approach, how her approach is evident in the work that she does, and the ways in
which her approach is linked to her positionality, personality, and experiences. Students learn about
the continuum of activism and advocacy experiences, and she provides political advocacy training.
Assignments and Activities
The primary project associated with MMW’s course is a political advocacy project (see Appendix C). After
their training on social justice, activism, and advocacy theory as well as advocacy and activism skills, students
work on a collaborative project that culminates, ideally, in meeting with their United States congressperson to
advocate for a policy position relevant to counseling and psychology. So far, this has been advocating for the
preservation and strengthening of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. If we are unable to obtain a
meeting, we instead work on a detailed letter advocating for our position. Students are trained and supervised in
conducting background research; preparing notes on relevant research and stories that highlight the importance
of our position; and on making connections with our congressperson’s legislative priorities. Students use these
notes to either prepare for our meeting or write their letter. Feedback has consistently suggested that students find
this project intimidating at first, but then experience both relief and enjoyment afterward.
Several projects included in the second author’s (KSS) Master’s-level Multicultural Counseling syllabus
are designed to help students begin the process of engaging in advocacy and activism as professionals-in-training.
The first project is an in-class exercise designed to help students apply their knowledge and practice thinking
systemically about problems in real-world clinical treatment. The second project involves consultation work with
a non-profit (see Appendix D).
First, building upon readings for the class that include systems-level theory (e.g., Sue et al., 2019), empirical
literature (e.g., Goode-Cross, 2011), critical theory and essays (e.g., Adams et al., 2018), and professional critiques
(e.g., Rogers-Sirin, 2017), students are placed into small groups for a class period and given a hypothetical case
study involving an urban, outpatient clinic serving low-income clients of color, a setting in which many of our
students may work. Embedded within the prompt are details that call for a systems-level conceptualization and
intervention strategies. For instance, clinicians in the scenario are White, are noted as making racist or classist
remarks about clients, and it is noted that clinician turnover is high. Further, the prompt describes that clients who
identify as women often terminate treatment sooner than men, that clients are described as having “emotional
outbursts,”and that treatment of addiction and mental health issues is focused only on the individual.
After reviewing the case, students must develop a plan that conceptualizes the issues they see as concerning
(e.g., perhaps women leave treatment because there are limitations to accessible childcare in the community). Next,
we discuss how we might conceptualize the clinic and its community members from a systems perspective (e.g.,
systemic racism and classism is ingrained in the facility’s structure and practices; its healing practices are based on
White, middle-class values; the assumption that clients are having “emotional outbursts” instead of investigating
what these legitimate frustrations might be signaling about where the pathology truly resides). Finally, we discuss
specific systems-level interventions that would target areas of concern (e.g., staff development on multicultural
and social justice competencies; investing in bringing in a more diverse clinical staff; partnering with childcare
facilities) and ameliorate the reliance on pathologizing clients whose participation within an unjust, racist, sexist,
classist system is unlikely to lead to positive mental health or wellness outcomes.
Another critical professional skill for counselors and counseling psychologists is consultation, which rarely
receives instructional attention or supervised practice in real-world settings. Recently, for the second project, I
(KSS) partnered with a Black woman-owned nonprofit small apparel company aimed at promoting social justice
through design, with a long-term goal of providing training to K-12 public school employees and students on
systemic racism (see Appendix D). Students in my Multicultural Counseling course were assigned to groups,
each of whom met with the CEOs and learned about their business plan and ideas. Each group was then tasked
to use counseling psychology research and social justice practices to provide recommendations to the CEOs
about existing models of intervention in educational settings, engaging in advocacy and activism, and ideas for
socially just community, legal, legislative, and financial engagement. Students presented their work to both the
organization CEOs and the class for their final project.
Similarly, CNH designed and teaches a Social Justice Consultation Class in which students partner with
nonprofits run by a racially marginalized person and a local government office (Clements-Hickman et al., 2018).
In its second year being offered, students elected to partner with two nonprofit organizations run by Black women:
Nerd Squad and Step by Step (see Appendix E). Students engaged in assessment with the nonprofit directors to
understand their needs and determine what could be achieved in one semester. Students visited each nonprofit’s
regular meetings, developing relationships with the people served by the nonprofits (girls of color interested in
STEM and young single mothers, respectively). They then utilized their research and consulting skills to complete
a project identified by each director. Students noted that having an opportunity to be treated as professionals,
observe the dynamics of small organizational systems, and be agents of change by employing their social justice
lens to consultation made the course work meaningful.
Finally, in the third author’s (LRM) advanced diversity seminar, students are asked to develop and
implement a social justice intervention (see Appendix F). The project has three parts. First, students identify a
marginalized group for which they plan to implement the intervention and conduct a review of the literature
on the needs of their chosen group. Second, students present their planned social justice intervention to
the class for critical feedback and suggestions. Students are encouraged to communicate and seek feedback
from stakeholders within their chosen population to ensure that the development of the intervention is
collaborative. Last, students implement the social justice intervention, write a reflection on what did and
did not go well with the intervention, and share their realizations with the class in an informal discussion.
Research Training
Social justice research training includes critically evaluating the field’s research methodologies and
resulting knowledge base, particularly in terms of scope of representation, appropriateness of research
methodologies, and integration of social justice principles in research activities (Adams et al., 2015; Fassinger
& Morrow, 2013; Grzanka et al., 2017). Similar to needed changes to coursework structure, research mentors
must first critically evaluate the methods they teach (and do not teach). In reviewing research methods courses,
we should be asking: What are the dominant methodologies given the most space and time? What is the balance
of quantitative and qualitative methodologies? How does content integrate diverse methodologies from outside
the traditional, postpositivist lens? Does content include specific research paradigms such as intersectional
(Grzanka et al., 2017), critical race, participatory action research (Kidd & Kral, 2005), and queer approaches
(Grzanka, 2019)? Are philosophies of science explicitly taught, or is this ignored, which often results in an implicit
positivist frame? We recommend research educators conduct an honest and critical examination of what they
teach and practice, and thus communicate, about the value of social justice-focused research. At minimum,
research educators and mentors should examine training through a decolonization framework (Adams et al.,
2015), centering cultural psychology and liberation psychology principles (Martin-Baró, 1991, 1994; Tate et
al., 2013). In addition, educators should emphasize diverse approaches to scientific inquiry and research by
providing instruction and hands-on experiences and mentorship in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method
approaches that use social justice informed principles (Cokley & Awad, 2013; Lyons et al., 2013; Ponterotto, 2013).
Examples
The second author’s and fifth authors’ (KSS and CNH) approach to social justice within the research training
environment involves the critique of empiricism to understand complex contextual experiences (Wampold &
Imel, 2015). Additionally, we question the field’s reliance on experimental or other strict empirical processes
using participants, often with WEIRD (Wetsern, educated, industrialized, rich, Democratic) characteristics,
to generalize “‘fundamental’ or ‘universal’ truths” to all of humanity (Brady et al., 2018, p. 11407). In research
methods, psychopathology, and advanced technique courses, students are challenged through reading, dialogue,
and article critiques to articulate the ways in which dominant group narratives are centered in psychological theory
and scholarship. Students are asked to carefully examine the participant pool, instrumentation, and definitions or
thresholds of defined psychopathology or categories of the DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) in
the extant literature, as well as questioning the gold standard of randomized clinical trials for treatments identified
as empirically-supported. By questioning the processes by which we come to know “the truth” about psychological
processes, students begin to understand that the endeavor of psychology itself is culture-bound. Further, we
must question the authority granted to the profession as it continues to exclude vast categories of people from
its investigation into human behavior, and indeed to pathologize the non-pathological (and under-pathologize
the culturally-accepted pathological) in the process. Adequate representation of participants from all groups and
appropriate methodological and epistemological diversity are necessary to understand complex individual and
systemic processes and to create socially just psychological research.
Further, in Dr. Shaffer’s research team, students are asked to write and reflect on their identities related
to the team’s qualitative work investigating the phenomenon of Whiteness in the clinical training environment.
The group discusses their biases and cultural lenses that will shape their interpretation of data, as well as their
contribution to the team itself. An explicit discussion of power dynamics among the team members and the
faculty advisor allows for the dismantling of White, hierarchical power narratives inherent in academic structures.
The advisor aims to share power with the students, encouraging the use of their experiences to shape the project’s
direction.
Using critical paradigms, informed by queer theory, critical race theory, and intersectionality, provides
transformative options for the way we do science and the dissemination of our findings. Scholarship within
these paradigms requires that the product serve more than the academic audience, so Dr. Hargons’ students
are encouraged to create social media posts relaying the key findings from their work to community and
lay audiences. Her doctoral mentees have developed social media outlets such as @Blkfolxtherapy and @
Academics4BlackLives as research dissemination platforms. Moradi and Grzanka (2017) point out the
importance of intersectionality in social justice-informed research, citing it as “critical praxis for social justice”
(p. 500). Drawing upon Crenshaw’s (1991) framework, the populations we study are understood within a
context of multiple marginalizations and the power dynamics that lead to their stereotypical representation
in the canon. For Dr. Hargons, the empirical articulation of counternarratives is an important social justice
scholastic intervention. As an example, her research team’s work disrupts deficit narratives about Black sexuality
(Hargons et al. 2018), presenting a sex positive framework that holds the systems that create sexual risk
outcomes accountable, as they also examine the pleasure and benefits of healthy sexuality among Black people.
Mentorship
Mentorship and modeling are crucial to professional development in graduate school (Hargons et al.,
2017; Langrehr et al., 2017). Additionally, fostering social justice advocacy and systems-level ways of thinking
outside of the classroom emphasize these perspectives as a way of being rather than an academic exercise. MMW’s
approach to mentorship is a multicultural-feminist mentorship approach (Fassinger & Hensler-McGinnis, 2005),
with an emphasis on strengthening the pipeline into the profession for underrepresented students and early career
professionals (ECPs), particularly those who have a social justice orientation. This approach is grounded in a
systems-level etiology of the barriers faced by minoritized students in the pipeline. Fassinger and Hensler-McGinnis
(2005) describe principles central to a multicultural-feminist approach, including lessening the power differential
between mentor and mentee where possible; focus on the relational and the reciprocal nature of the relationship;
commitment to diversity; and ability to challenge “ist” structures. Fassinger and McGinnis (2005) go on to state
that boundaries operate differently in a multicultural-feminist framework, and that “[A mentor] will be presumed
to know (or care) little about the particular personal problems of her mentees, but in fact, she is likely to know
much about their contextual barriers and challenges” (pp. 156-157).
From this approach, I (MMW) seek to intentionally foster students’ (both undergraduate and graduate)
and ECPs’ roles as leaders, advocates, and activists, getting to know each person’s goals and strengths and helping
them to identify pathways into leadership roles and advocacy opportunities. I strive to identify barriers as well as
solutions, connecting students with resources when possible. This work requires that I foster a type of working
alliance with students, such that they know they can express their concerns and needs safely. Additionally,
I often “talk out loud” about the systemic barriers I am observing, their historical roots, and short- and long-
term solutions, seeking to model systems-level thinking and problem solving. My students have also attended
extracurricular political advocacy meetings with me (and on their own/on my behalf with my mentorship) and
have gone on to occupy a number of professional leadership positions.
The tasks for Master’s-level mentorship are somewhat different from doctoral-level mentorship. Often,
Master’s-level trainees are trained as practitioners first and scholars second, as the large majority of Master’s
trainees will make their careers in practice rather than research. In a qualitative inquiry (Boswell et al., 2015),
Master’s students reported that personal characteristics of their mentor, mentor encouragement, and discussion of
what to expect “in the real world” were critical to their mentorship. As such, ongoing discussions of what Master’s
students may face in practice, particularly as it relates to social justice issues and systems-level barriers, are of great
importance. For instance, we discuss that the systems in which they may work will be inherently racist, sexist,
classist, and heterosexist, and that their Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014) requires that they advocate for socially just
treatment for their clients within all systems (ACA, 2014, A.7.a). We also discuss the ethical imperative that they
learn to care for themselves within these systems (ACA, 2014), as they may be harmed by injustice in agencies
with oppressive systems and practices.
As Dr. Wilcox states above, strengthening the pipeline for students from marginalized groups into the
counseling profession and also into doctoral programs in counseling and counseling psychology is an important
task for Master’s-level (and undergraduate) faculty. In particular, identifying students from minoritized groups
who are interested in doctoral work and mentoring them into research and clinical experiences that will help
strengthen their applications for doctoral work is critical for the professions, particularly as the profession remains
overwhelmingly White (APA Center for Workforce Studies, 2019). Often, students with one or more minoritized
identities are first-generation students who can benefit from discussions of how to navigate academia, noting its
inherent biases, unequal power structures, and hierarchy. Mentoring talented students with oppressed identities
is critical to the social justice mission of diversifying the psychology workforce and shifting dominant-centered
narratives.
The third author’s (LRM) approach to mentoring is developmental and student-centered with a multicultural
lens. At the beginning of the mentoring relationship, no assumptions are made about what the student does and
does not know about the journey on which they are about to embark. LRM shares her career journey and how it has
been influenced by her identities. Much of this sharing is around her own marginalized identities. The intention
is to begin a dialogue about cultural backgrounds/differences between mentor and mentee that will continue over
the span of the student’s time in graduate school and beyond. Often what emerges is that the third author’s research
is actually “me-search,” as she seeks to understand how experiences of discrimination may affect not only mental
and physical health, but also career development. Another important facet of mentoring is role modeling, using
available opportunities to discuss important events (e.g., police shooting of Black people) to engage in discourse
about what “we” can do to begin changing the systems in which we live so they are more equitable. Action steps
may include involvement in certain groups (e.g., Black Lives Matter) or seeking leadership positions, where systems
change can be implemented. Students who choose to engage in leadership positions have commented that the work
can be rewarding and gives them insight into how change occurs at higher levels (e.g., the process is rarely linear).
Clinical Training and Supervision
We would be remiss not to speak about the importance of infusing social justice training into clinical
training and supervision. Coursework and experiences with research are meant to prepare students for clinical
practice by building a multicultural orientation (Davis et al., 2018). However, although trainees will likely embrace
social justice ideals, they often struggle most with social justice action, thinking it must be large in scope rather
than small changes in individual organizations that can have significant positive effects for clients. One way
to encourage social justice action in supervision is to ask trainees about their opinions on the ways in which
a particular agency can be improved, which may lead to discussion of organization-level changes and power
differentials therein. It is then possible for the trainee to incorporate small changes that positively affect clients and
articulate organizational inequities.
The third author (LRM) uses the ADDRESSING framework (Hays, 2016) to assist supervisees in
conceptualizing their and their clients’ diverse identities and to facilitate a critical reflection of identities of power
and privilege. Students are asked to begin by ADDRESSING themselves as a class activity (and may choose to
share or not) and to practice the use of ADDRESSING a client. ADDRESSING is an acronym that stands for
age, developmental/acquired disability, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, indigenious
background, nationality, and gender (Hays, 2016). Hays posits that attention to these identities leads to a more
complete understanding of the client and their experiences. Although the framework only provides a starting
place for the exploration of cultural identities, Hays’ approach can be beneficial because it provides a simple
reference point that supervisees can apply in their conceptualization of every client. Supervisees have noted that
this approach helps them to consider clients’ experiences of oppression as influential to their presenting concerns.
Further, understanding the identities in which supervisees and their clients hold more and/or less privilege is
important not only for social justice counseling, but also to take action toward systemic change.
The first author’s (MMW) early experience in community mental health working alongside social workers
allowed her to better integrate advocacy into clinical supervision practice. Through this early experience, Dr.
Wilcox learned about community resources, how to assess post-acute care needs, interface with interdisciplinary
agencies to connect clients directly with resources, and also leverage her professional position to facilitate the
procurement of those resources (e.g., connecting a client to case management and assisting in the Medicaid
application process). She found it striking to later hear from some of her own supervisors that this was “not
the work of psychologists.” We can challenge these narratives in clinical supervision by working with trainees
to develop this knowledge and these skills, and to foster an expectation that psychologists work with clients to
connect them with resources and advocate with them or for them (which is to say, intervene; Lewis et al., 2003) at
the microsystem level. This is the application of systems conceptualization and treatment planning.
We can also help students navigate power structures within the supervisory relationship. Often, supervisors
are lacking in their own multicultural and social justice advocacy awareness, yet they are ethically required to
ensure trainees possess these critical competencies (Bernard & Goodyear, 2019). Master’s-level trainees are
often working in systems that serve clients in minoritized groups or those with chronic, severe conditions (e.g.,
inpatient hospitals, addictions treatment). These settings are clinically challenging, often overloading trainees with
developmentally inappropriate levels of responsibility for clients. To the extent possible, it is critical that faculty
assist students in navigating conversations about clients (or concerns such as caseload or agency practices) with
their site supervisors. Students may have ideas about more socially just approaches to working with their clients or
within the system than their supervisors, but may be reluctant to address these topics in supervision. The tension
between advocating for a client’s (or trainee’s) best interest and disagreeing with or “defying” a clinical supervisor’s
direction is anxiety-provoking for trainees based on the evaluative nature of supervision (Bernard & Goodyear,
2019). Faculty can role play or practice these challenging supervision conversations with students. Further, when
faculty advocate with or on behalf of their trainees, they are also modeling systems-level interventions when they
do so.
Relatedly, it is critical that faculty encourage students to advocate for themselves. Universities and training
programs routinely make unilateral decisions affecting students without first consulting them. It is important that
training programs are willing to receive feedback about and take action to correct unjust practices within their own
domains. This requires intentional reflection and assessment. Ideally, programs should develop a mechanism for
receiving feedback and a process of decision-making that shares power with students above and beyond established
practices such as student program representatives. Faculty cannot expect students to hear feedback without being
willing themselves to confront the inequitable systems of power that govern their own practices.
Conclusion
It is clear that social justice is important to counseling psychology. How do we move past philosophizing,
however, to truly building a counseling psychology wherein social justice action, not just values, are the norm?
It undoubtedly involves a process of constant critical reflection and self-evaluation. In this paper, we sought to
identify some of the barriers to action, and provide both recommendations and examples across multiple areas of
training that readers can adopt in their own practice as educators. We must adjust our expectations for systems-
level education related to theory and practice to be commensurate with our expectations at the individual level.
Much is written about the importance that social justice be infused throughout the curriculum rather than
relegated to “special topic” status; however, this requires that we provide education on systems-level theories and
interventions to the extent that we do for individuals.
Certainly, there are barriers to making such substantial changes to the curriculum as well as to infusing
systems-level education and training into existing curricula. For example, it may be difficult to cover both
individual-level and systems-level considerations within a single semester; yet, it is also difficult to add additional
classes to an already burdensome curriculum. We argue, however, that thinking only in terms of “adding” (adding
to the syllabus; adding to the curriculum) has been another barrier to progress in social justice education and
training. Instead, we call on counseling and psychology to reconsider their overall approach to “multiculturalism”
and social justice. For example, Grzanka (2020) noted that psychology is epistemologically pulled toward situating
our analysis and conceptualization within the individual, to the detriment of systems and structural analysis.
Grzanka highlighted Metzl and Hansen’s (2014) similar critique of medical education and training, as well as
their Structural Competencies approach to recenter medicine on the structural rather than the individual. Such
an approach is not additive but rather transformative, emphasizing the need to move away from over-centering
pathology within the individual and, for our purposes, the intrapsychic. Whether within or across semesters, time
is indeed limited; and, we are overdue to reallocate time to the systemic and the structural.
This also means that educators must ground themselves in such knowledge and skills. We must be open to
critical feedback and be intentional in our ongoing growth, or we cannot expect counseling psychology training
to move forward. Indeed, as was likely true for the generations before us, little explicit training was available to us
on advocacy, activism, or developing a social justice theoretical orientation, much less providing such education
and training to our own students. Instead, we sought out learning and mentorship in these areas so as to be able to
foster a new generation of well-versed counselors and counseling psychologists. We believe it is incumbent upon
all of us to develop these competencies; however, we also understand that this is difficult given the lack of easily-
available, relevant education. Thus, we hope that the recommendations and examples provided herein are helpful
not only in guiding faculty, supervisors, and students toward new practices, but also in identifying areas where
readers may benefit from bolstering their own knowledge. We have found that the more that we learn in these
areas the better social justice advocates we are in all of the roles we occupy.
Author Correspondence
For correspondence regarding this article, please contact Melanie M. Wilcox, Ph.D., ABPP at
[email protected].
References
Adams, G., Dobles, I., Gómez, L. H., Kurtis, T., Molina, L. E. (2015). Decolonizing psychological science:
Introduction to the special thematic section. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 3(1), 213-238.
https://dx.doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v3i1.564
Adams, M., Blumenfeld, W. J., Catalano, D. C. J., DeJong, K.S., Peters, Hackman, H. W., Hopkins, L. E., Love,
B. J., Peters, M. L., Shlasko, D., M. L., Zúniga, X. (2013). Readings for diversity and social justice (4th ed.).
Routledge
American Counseling Association (2014). ACA code of ethics.
https://www.counseling.org/Resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2021, February). APA resolution on harnessing
psychology to combat racism: Adopting a uniform definition and understanding. Retrieved from
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/resolution-combat-racism.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2015, November). Commission on Accreditation implementing regulations.
Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/section-c-soa.pdf.
American Psychological Association (2017). Multicultural guidelines: An ecological approach to context, identity,
and intersectionality.https://www.apa.org/about/policy/multicultural-guidelines.pdf
APA Center for Workforce Studies (2020). CWS Data Tool: Demographics of the U.S. Psychology Workforce.
https://www.apa.org/workforce/data-tools/demographics
Banks, K. H., Beachy, S., Ferguson, A., Gobin, R. L., Ho, I., Liang, C. T. H., Maton,
K. I., Miles-McLean, H. A., & Toporek, R. L. (2019). Community Advocacy: A
psychologist’s toolkit for state and local advocacy. American Psychological Association.
https://www.div17.org/wp-content/uploads/Community-Advocacy_-A-Psychologist-Toolkit.pdf
Barnhardt, C. L. (2014). Campus-based organizing: Tactical repertoires of contemporary student movements.
New Directions for Higher Education, 2014, 43–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/he.20104
Beer, A. M., Spanierman, L. B., Greene, J. C., & Todd, N. R. (2012). Counseling psychology trainees’ perceptions
of training and commitments to social justice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 120–133.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026325
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2019). Fundamentals of Clinical Supervision (6th ed.). Pearson.
Boswell, J. N., Wilson, A. D., Stark, M. D., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2015). The role of mentoring relationships in
counseling programs. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education.
Brady, L. M., Fryberg, S. A., & Shoda, Y. (2018). Expanding the interpretive power of psychological science by
attending to culture. PNAS, 115(45), 11406-11413. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803526115
Brady-Amoon, P., Makhija, N., Dixit, V., & Dator, J. (2012). Social justice: Pushing past boundaries
in graduate training. Journal of Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 4(2), 85-98.
https://dx.doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.4.2.85-98
Brady-Amoon, P., & Keefe-Cooperman, K. (2017). Psychology, counseling psychology, and professional
counseling: Shared roots, challenges, and opportunities. The European Journal of Counselling Psychology,
6(1), 41-62. https://doi.org/10.5964/EJCOP.V6I1.105
Brinkman, B. G., & Hirsch, K. (2019). From proposal to action: Supporting student advocacy during
graduate counseling training. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 11(1), 51-66.
https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.11.1.51-66
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard
University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist,
32(7), 513–531. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
Clements-Hickman, A. L., Dschaak, Z., Hargons, C. N., Kwok, C., Meiller, C., Ryser-Oatmar, T., &
Spiker, D. (2018). Humility in homelessness: A social justice consultation course for counseling
psychology students. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 10(2), 34-48.
Cokley, K., & Awad, G. H. (2013). In defense of quantitative methods: Using the “master’s tools” to
promote social justice. Journal of Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 5(2), 26-41.
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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00440.x
Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs (2013). Counseling psychology core competencies, essential
components, behavioral anchors, and examples.
https://www.ccptp.org/assets/docs/copsy%20competencies%20final2.pdf
Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of
color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Davis, D. E., DeBlaere, C., Hook, J. N., Choe, E., Worthington Jr., E. L., Owen, J., Rivera, D. P. Van Tongeren, D.
R., & Paceres, V. (2018). The multicultural orientation framework: A narrative review. Psychotherapy,
55(1), 89-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pst0000160
DeBlaere, C., Singh, A. A., Wilcox, M. M., Cokley, K. O., & Delgado-Romero, E. A. (2019). Social justice in
counseling psychology: Then, now, and looking forward. The Counseling Psychologist, 47(6), 938-962.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000019893283
DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for White people to talk about racism. Beacon Press.
Fassinger, R., & Morrow, S. L. (2013). Toward best practices in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods
research: A social justice perspective. Journal of Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 5(2), 69-83.
Fassinger, R. E., & Hensler-McGinnis, N. F. (2005). Multicultural feminist mentoring as individual and
small-group pedagogy. In C. Z. Enns & A. L. Sinacore (Eds.), Teaching and social justice: Integrating
multicultural and feminist theories in the classroom. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association.
Fouad, N. A., Hatcher, R. L., Hutchings, P. S., Collins Jr., F. L., Grus, C. L., Kaslow, N. J., Madson, M. B.,
& Crossman, R. E. (2009). Competency benchmarks: A model for understanding and measuring
competence in professional psychology across training Levels. Training and Education in Professional
Psychology, 3(4), S5-S26. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015832
Fouad, N. A., McPherson, R. H., Gerstein, L., Blustein, D. L., Elman, N., Helledy, K. I., & Metz,
A. J. (2004). Houston, 2001: Context and legacy. The Counseling Psychologist, 32(1), 15-77.
Goode-Cross, D. T. (2011). Same difference: Black therapists’ experience of same-race therapeutic dyads.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42(5), 368-374. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025520
Goodman, L. A., Liang, B., Helms, J. E., Latta, R. E., Sparks, E., & Weintraub, S. R. (2004). Training counseling
psychologists as social change agents: Feminist and multicultural principles in action. The Counseling
Psychologist, 32(6), 793-837. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000004268802
Green, E. J., McCollum, V. C., & Hays, D. G. (2008). Teaching advocacy counseling within a social justice
framework: Implications for school counselors and educators. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and
Psychology, 1(2), 14-30. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.1.2.14-30
Grzanka, P. R. (2020). From buzzword to critical psychology: An invitation to take intersectionality seriously.
Women & Therapy, 43(3-4), 244-261. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2020.1729472
Grzanka, P. R. (2019). Queer Theory. In P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J.W. Sakshaug, & R.A. Williams
(Eds.), SAGE Research Methods Foundations. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526421036767663
Grzanka, P. R., Santos, C. E., & Moradi, B. (2017). Intersectionality research in counseling psychology. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 64(5), 453-457. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cou0000237
Hargons, C., Lantz, M., Marks, L. R., & Voelkel, E. (2017). Becoming a bridge: Collaborative autoethnography
of four female counseling psychology student leaders. The Counseling Psychologist, 45(7), 1017-1047.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000017729886
Hargons, C. N., Mosley, D. V., Meiller, C., Stuck, J., Kirkpatrick, B., Adams, C., & Angyal, B. (2018). “It Feels
So Good” : Pleasure in Last Sexual Encounter Narratives of Black University Students. Journal of Black
Psychology, 44(2), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798417749400
Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Phelan, J. C., & Link, B. G. (2013). Stigma as a fundamental cause of
population health inequalities. American Journal of Public Health, 103(5), 813-821.
https://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301069
Hays, P. A. (2016). Addressing cultural complexities in practice: Assessment, diagnosis, and therapy (3rd ed.).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Hof, D. D., Dinsmore, J. A., Barber, S., & Suhr, R. (2009). Advocacy: The T.R.A.I.N.E.R. model. Journal for Social
Action in Counseling and Psychology, 2(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.2.1.15-28
Kezar, A., Bertram Gallant, T., & Lester, J. (2011). Everyday people making a difference on college campuses: The
tempered grassroots leadership tactics of faculty and staff. Studies in Higher Education, 36(2), 129–151.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070903532304
Kidd, S. A., & Kral, M. J. (2005). Practicing participatory action research. Journal of counseling psychology, 52(2),
187-195. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.187
Langrehr, K. J., Green, C. E., & Lantz, M. (2017). The implications of doctoral students’ professional
socialization experiences in graduate training. The Counseling Psychologist, 45(8), 1162-1183.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00110000177485588
Lantz, M. M., Fix, R. L., Davis, B. L., Harrison, L. N., Oliver, A., Crowell, C., Mitchell, A. M., & García, J. J.
(2016). Grad students talk: Development and process of a student-led social justice initiative. Journal of
Diversity in Higher Education, 9(3), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000033
Lewis, Arnold, House, & Toporek (2003). ACA Advocacy Competencies.
https://www.counseling.org/Resources/Competencies/Advocacy_Competencies.pdf
Liu, W. M. (2017). White male power and privilege: The relationship between White supremacy and social class.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64(4), 349-358. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cou0000227
Lyons, H. Z., Bike, D. H., Ojeda, L., Johnson, A., Rosales, R., & Flores, L. Y. (2013). Qualitative research as social
justice practice with culturally diverse populations. Journal of Social Action in Counseling and Psychology,
5(2), 10-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.5.2.10-25
Malat, J., Mayorga-Gallo, S., & Williams, D. R. (2018). The effects of whiteness on the health of whites in the
USA. Social Science & Medicine, 199, 148-156. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.034.
Martín-Baró, I. (1991). Developing a critical consciousness through the university curriculum. In J. Hasset and
H. Lacey (Eds.), Towards a society that serves its people: The intellectual contributions of El Salvadors
murdered Jesuits (pp. 220-244). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
Martín-Baró, I. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Metzl, J. M., & Hansen, H. (2014). Structural competency: Theorizing a new medical
engagement with stigma and inequality. Social Science & Medicine, 103, 126–133.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.06.032
Moradi, B. (2017). (Re)focusing intersectionality: From social identities back to systems of oppression and
privilege. In K. A. DeBord, A. R. Fischer, K. J. Bieschke, & R. M. Perez (Eds.), Handbook of sexual
orientation and gender diversity in counseling and psychotherapy (pp. 105–127). American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/15959-005
Moradi, B., & Grzanka, P. R. (2017). Using intersectionality responsibly: Toward critical epistemology,
structural analysis, and social justice activism. Journal of counseling psychology, 64(5), 500-513.
https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000203
Murray, C. E., Pope, A. L., & Rowell, P. C. (2010). Promoting counseling students’ advocacy competencies
through service-learning. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 2(2), 29-47.
Nayak, A. (2007). Critical whiteness studies. Sociology Compass, 1(2), 737-755.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00045.x
Olle, C. D. (2018). Breaking institutional habits: A critical paradigm for social change agents in psychology. The
Counseling Psychologist, 46(2), 190-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000018760597
Pieterse, A. L., Evans, S. A., Risner-Butner, A., 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(1), 93-115.
Ponterotto, J. G. (2013). Qualitative research in multicultural psychology: Philosophical underpinnings,
popular approaches, and ethical considerations. Qualitative Psychology, 1(S), 19-32.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/2326-3598.1.S.19
Rogers-Sirin, L. (2017). Psychotherapy from the margins: How the pressure to adopt evidence-based-treatments
conflicts with social justice-oriented practice. Journal for Social Action in Counseling & Psychology, 9(1),
55-78. https://doi.org/10.33043/JSACP.9.1.55-78
Sanabria, S., & DeLorenzia, L. (2019). Social justice pre-practicum: Enhancing social justice identity
through experiential learning. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 11(2), 35-53.
Scheel, M. J., Stabb, S. D., Cohn, T. J., Duan, C., & Sauer, E. M. (2018). Counseling psychology model training
program. The Counseling Psychologist, 46(1), 6-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000018755512
Singh, A. A., & Burns, T. R. (2010). Shifting the counselor role from gatekeeping to advocacy: Ten strategies for
using the competencies for counseling with transgender clients for individual and social change. Journal
of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 4(3-4), 241-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15538605.2010.525455
Speight, S. L., & Vera, E. M. (2004). A social justice agenda: Ready, or not? The Counseling Psychologist, 32(1),
109-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000003260005
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural counseling competencies and
standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling & Development, 70(4), 477-486.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1992.tb01642.x
Sue, D. W., Sue, D., Neville, H. A., & Smith, L. (2019). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice. John
Wiley & Sons.
Tate, K. A., Rivera, E. T., Brown, E., & Skaistis, L. (2013). Foundations for liberation: Social justice,
liberation psychology, and counseling. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 47(3), 373-382.
https://dx.doi.org/10.30849/RIP/IJP.V47I3.231
Vera, E. M., & Speight, S. L. (2003). Multicultural competence, social justice, and counseling
psychology: Expanding our roles. The Counseling Psychologist, 32(3), 253-272.
Wampold, B. E., & Imel, Z. E. (2015). Counseling and psychotherapy.The great psychotherapy debate: The evidence
for what makes psychotherapy work (2nd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Wilcox, M. M., Franks, D. N., Taylor, T. O., Monceaux, C. P., & Harris, K. (2020). Who’s multiculturally
competent? Everybody and nobody: A multimethod examination. The Counseling Psychologist, 48(4),
466-497. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000020904709
Appendix A
Multicultural Teaching Media Resource List
Books
Alexander, M. (2012). The new jim crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New
Press.
Coates, T. (2015). Between the world and me. Melbourne, Australia: Text Publishing.
Coates, T. (2017). We were eight years in power: An American tragedy. New York: One World Publishing.
DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for White people to talk about racism. Boston: Beacon Press.
Evans-Winters, V. (2019). Black feminism in qualitative inquiry: A mosaic for writing our daughter’s body.
Routledge.
Hunter, D. (2015). Building the movement to end the new jim crow: An organizing guide. New York: The New
Press. [organizing guide companion to Alexander, 2012]
Kendi, I. X. (2016). Stamped from the beginning: The definitive history of racist ideas in America. New York:
Nation Books.
Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist. New York: One World Publishing.
Lensmire, T. J. (2017). White folks: Race and identity in rural America. New York: Routledge.
Oluo, I. (2018). So you want to talk about race. New York: Seal Press.
Wise, T. (2011). White like me: Reflections on race from a privileged son. New York: Soft Skull.
Documentaries
Racism
Last Chance for Eden Part I
White Like Me
13th
Sexism & Toxic Masculinity
Killing Us Softly 4
Last Chance for Eden Part II
Miss Representation
The Mask You Live In
Gender Identity
Trans
Sexual Orientation
For the Bible Tells Me So
Social Class
People Like Us: Social Class in America
The One Percent
Immigration
No Le Digas a Nadie (Don’t Tell Anyone)
Shorter Videos with Links
Criminal Justice Reform
John Oliver Sequence on Criminal Justice System (Note: this is an HBO series, so you may need to screen for
editing/content):
1. Mandatory minimums: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDVmldTurqk
2. Prisoner Re-entry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJtYRxH5G2k
3. Municipal violations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto
4. Public defenders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USkEzLuzmZ4
5. Civil forfeiture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

6. Bail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS5mwymTIJU
7. Police accountability: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaD84DTGULo
Racism
1. The Unequal Opportunity Race: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX_Vzl-r8NY
2. How Microaggressions are like Mosquito Bites:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDd3bzA7450&t=37s
3. Dr. Matt Miller’s SPOKENproject:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9T2nlhsGHhPRc4oyeMkh9A/featured
Social Class
1. Wealth Inequality in America: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM&t=2s
Ableism
1. How Autism Freed Me to Be Myself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ95xlZeHo8&list=WL&index=17&t=5s
2. I Got 99 Problems... Palsy is Just One:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buRLc2eWGPQ&list=WL&index=19&t=7s
Religion (Islamophobia):
Ageism
1. The Harmful Effects of Ageism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnp3T4Yzaws&list=WL&index=13&t=0s
2. Let’s End Ageism: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/religion+ted/
KtbxLvHcNMtpggSCTVHgjQJtXSRMwqhVsV
Websites and Podcasts
Seeing White (as featured on Scene on Radio podcast): https://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/
On Being: Mahzarin Banaji - The Mind is a Difference Seeking Machine: https://onbeing.org/programs/
mahzarin-banaji-the-mind-is-a-difference-seeking-machine-aug2018/
The Synapse: For the Culturally Responsive Educator: https://medium.com/synapse/podcast-recommendations-
for-the-culturally-responsive-educator-tax-day-edition-31d7fc316ac5
Teaching Guides
Teaching the New Jim Crow (High School):
https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/publications/teaching-the-new-jim-crow
The Real Cost of Prison Project -
http://www.realcostofprisons.org/materials/riverside_new_jim_crow_study_guide.pdf
Society of Counseling Psychology Advocacy Toolkit
https://www.div17.org/scp-connect/community-advocacy-a-psychologists-toolkit-for-state-and-local-
advocacy/
Appendix B
Weekly Journal Prompt
Melanie M. Wilcox, Ph.D., ABPP
Each week, you are to submit a journal (approximately 2 pages) that integrates your own personal experience of the
video and the class discussion afterward with the readings of the week (and those prior if applicable). The readings
should match the class content (e.g., social class and social class). The journals must demonstrate that you know
and understand the content from the readings; that you understand the topic as discussed in class; demonstrate
reflection and introspection on your own privilege, oppression, and how it shapes you as a person and a counselor;
and integrate all of these.
Appendix C
Advocacy Project
Melanie M. Wilcox, Ph.D., ABPP
This semester, we will build upon the theory and skills you are learning by engaging in an advocacy project.
Advocacy comes in many forms and may be engaged in at multiple levels of systems. We will specifically target policy
advocacy.
On [date], the lecture in class will focus on political advocacy training similar to that provided by the
American Psychological Association. We will focus on advocating for the preservation and strengthening of the
Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. During class time, after learning about effective advocacy, we will begin
to workshop the elements of successful advocacy specifically for our federal legislators (senators and members of
the House of Representatives). In the meantime, [professor] will coordinate with [legislator’s] office to attempt to
schedule an in-person meeting. We will prepare as though we will be attending an in-person meeting (for those
available to attend) with [legislator]; however, if a meeting is unable to be set, you will write a collaborative letter
instead.
As we will discuss, as a class, you will need to (1) explain your “ask” (in this case, gaining their support for
preserving and strengthening PSLF in any reauthorization of the Higher Education Act); (2) connect your issue
to [legislator’s] priorities; (3) connect personal and professional experiences (no identifiable client information) to
your issue and the legislator’s priorities through story; (4) provide research to support your position, sharing it in
a succinct and digestable way; and (5) reiterate your ask (will you support the preservation and strengthening of
PSLF in the reauthorization of the HEA?).
After our initial workshopping as a class, you will work collaboratively outside of class time to prepare for
our in-person meeting (or letter writing) by:
• Doing background research on the issue
• Collecting relevant stories from your group and practicing them with each other
• Determining who will discuss (or write) which components and in which order during the meeting
• Compiling an agenda with notes to prepare for the meeting (or preparing the letter)
• Those who are unavailable to attend the in-person meeting will still be expected to assist their classmates
with the preparation.
After we attend the in-person meeting, you will collaboratively write a “thank you” letter to [legislator],
reiterating our ask and inviting them to contact us with any questions.
To receive a grade, as a class, you will submit at the conclusion of the project:
1. Your preparation notes
2. Your meeting agenda (or letter)
3. Your “thank you” letter (N/A if no meeting)
And, each individual must submit:
4. Your individual reflection journal
5. Your signature sheet signed by your peers confirming that you assisted with the class project
[Professor] is available to consult and support you through these steps at each stage, and will be with you
at the meeting.
Appendix D
Social Justice Consultation Project
Katharine S. Shaffer, Ph.D.
Students will be working with the client, XXXX, a justice-focused apparel company that is expanding its
mission.
Students will be placed in groups of approximately 6 students each. Once students receive their group
assignments by the course instructor, the group will be responsible for coordinating a conference call Zoom
meeting with the Founders of XXXX:
During this Zoom conference call, students will be required to gather information to help support the
mission expansion of this organization in the form of a consultation project. Your aims are as follows:
• The call should be scheduled for no later than ___
• During the call:
• Get a detailed history of the organization and its beliefs, values and mission
• Understand the organization’s ideas, objectives and plans for expansion
• After the call:
• Help the client (the organization) devise strategies for meeting their objective(s), as described in the
meeting
• Your research work will begin here,
• Once you have clearly detailed and identified all of the above, it is now time to turn to:
• the scholarly literature
• Research already completed
• Experts
• current community practice models
• other resources (perhaps websites, podcasts, etc.)
• The research portion of the project should take place between the time of your call (no later than
____) and approximately _____.
• After the research is completed
• Work with your team to compile your data in a systematic way that represents your ideas clearly and
concisely, using APA style citations
• Assemble a powerpoint style presentation that outlines what you learned from the organization about
who they are and what they want to achieve, and then provide recommendations for how to best meet
those objectives based on your research.
• Make sure to provide a reference list and save copies of your references that can be shared with the
organization
• Your presentation is due for final presentation to the class (and due in your Assignments section) on___. You
will also provide a copy of the powerpoint and all resources to the organization after your presentation.
A few notes:
The organization may decide to ask you to focus on a very small, targeted and specific objective, a few
at a time, or a larger, bigger picture objective. Any of this is doable. The org. is aware that you have fewer than 7
weeks to complete this project. The organization may decide to ask each group to research the same topics, or they
may ask for different topics from different groups. Work only within your own group to respond to your specific
advocacy research task(s).
Once you and your team have met with the organization for the first meeting and then discussed your
strategies for research afterward, you may find that a second meeting with the org, or a very detailed email
exchange is helpful. This is not required, but it might be helpful to ensure the direction your team is taking for
research and recommendations is useful to the organization. Please make sure to give the organization plenty of
time to schedule a second meeting (do not wait until the last minute).
Appendix E
Social Justice Consultation Project Description
Candice N. Hargons, Ph.D.
This year’s projects will be with Step by Step and Nerd Squad. We will be conducting a participatory
organizational consultation project on the impact of the program on the children of Step by Step moms, starting at
the grassroots by connecting with the moms who are involved, the executive director, and staff, potentially ending
with a strongly established relationship with the organization, kids, mentors, moms, and a presentation for the
community. You will investigate with parents using surveys, focus groups, and interviews for a better picture of
what their lives are like. For example, many of the moms are transient, couch hopping for housing. The executive
director would love for them to self-report how their children’s behaviors are affected, and identify how our team
can offer a social justice informed set of sustainable solutions.
With Nerd Squad’s consultation, you will work with the founder/executive director, FCPS teachers, and
squad (girls receiving STEM mentoring services) to co-create a plan for advancement and expansion. The director
is interested in what FCPS teachers think is missing from STEM education.
A 15-30 minute PPT or other multimedia presentation is required (roughly 15-25 slides), and a
complementary, well-designed executive report should be developed as a handout. Collaborating with the
organizations to execute the project and present the findings is also part of the assignment. A complete trial run
(in class) of your presentation before presentation day is required to ensure that it is high quality. This project will
be guided by a specific consultation model selected by the group.
1. Using a Qual:quan mixed methods approach, examine the experience of young single moms and/or
youth in Lexington, which will include your time spent with people in the programs.
2. Research from peer-reviewed articles and other relevant sources should inform your presentation.
3. Include recommendations informed by various stakeholders, including executive directors, parents,
staff, youth, etc.
4. Highlight cultural and social justice considerations.
5. Provide an executive report with APA formatted references used for your presentation (no more than
25 pages).
Appendix F
Social Justice Project
Laura Reid Marks, Ph.D.
Students are expected to develop a social justice intervention in a community of their choice. Students may choose
to develop an intervention individually or as a group with other students in the class. Students should carefully
consider the community when planning the intervention. In other words, students should review the literature
of their population of choice and reach out to stakeholders in that community and hold a meeting with them to
discuss the intervention and solicit feedback. The intervention can only be finalized when stakeholders’ feedback
has been sufficiently integrated (as determined by all parties). This project should be a collaboration and not
simply students going into a community without input from stakeholders. Students will deliver this intervention
at some point this semester and present a summary of the intervention experience in class. This project will have
three components:
1. Students will present in 10-15 minutes their planned intervention by incorporating a brief literature
review of the population of interest and a need for an intervention, who the stakeholders are, theory/
model guiding the intervention, implementation plan, evaluation, and potential strengths/weaknesses
of the intervention. Students may opt to use a PPT presentation or handout. A copy of the PPT or
handout should be submitted.
2. Students will deliver the intervention after collaborating with stakeholders and incorporating any
suggested feedback. Interventions may occur at one time point or multiple time points throughout the
semester.
3. Students will write a 8-10 page paper describing their final intervention. They will also present in 25-
30 minutes their final intervention using a PPT presentation. Students should be sure to include a
summary of the final intervention, challenges and barriers that they faced, and some form of evaluation
of their intervention. In addition, a reflection of the experience should be included. Some questions to
help guide this reflection are: What was easy? What was hard? What would you do differently? A copy
of the PPT and paper should be submitted. For the paper, APA style 7th edition should be followed.
Footnote
Dr. Marks would like to acknowledge Dr. Ayşe Çiftçi whose social justice project assignment she reproduces with
approval in her course. Dr. Çiftçi was Dr. Marks’ major professor while she was a doctoral student at Purdue
University. Dr. Çiftçi is currently a full professor and faculty head of Counseling and Counseling Psychology in
the College of Integrative Sciences and Arts at Arizona State University.

Answering The Call For Systems Change Facilitating

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answering The Call For Systems Change Facilitating

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answering The Call For Systems Change Facilitating

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Answering the Call for Systems Change: Facilitating the

Development of a Social Justice Theoretical Orientation

Matching Intervention to Conceptualization at the Systems-Level: Advocacy and Activism

5. Civil forfeiture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

You might also like