Nov 21, 2011 - Moreover, social justice work in counseling psychology seeks to enhance access to âtools of self-determinationâ among marginalized groups ...
Journal of Counseling Psychology 2012, Vol. 59, No. 1, 120 –133
© 2011 American Psychological Association 0022-0167/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026325
Counseling Psychology Trainees’ Perceptions of Training and Commitments to Social Justice Amanda M. Beer
Lisa B. Spanierman
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
McGill University
Jennifer C. Greene
Nathan R. Todd
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
DePaul University
This mixed methods study examined social justice commitments of counseling psychology graduate trainees. In the quantitative portion of the study, a national sample of trainees (n ⫽ 260) completed a web-based survey assessing their commitments to social justice and related personal and training variables. Results suggested that students desired greater social justice training than what they experienced in their programs. In the qualitative portion, we used a phenomenological approach to expand and elaborate upon quantitative results. A subsample (n ⫽ 7) of trainees who identified as strong social justice activists were interviewed regarding their personal, professional, and training experiences. Eleven themes related to participants’ meanings of and experiences with social justice emerged within 4 broad categories: nature of social justice, motivation for activism, role of training, and personal and professional integration. Thematic findings as well as descriptive statistics informed the selection and ordering of variables in a hierarchical regression analysis that examined predictors of social justice commitment. Results indicated that trainees’ perceptions of training environment significantly predicted their social justice commitment over and above their general activist orientation and spirituality. Findings are discussed collectively, and implications for training and future research are provided. Keywords: social justice, counseling psychology, graduate training, mixed methods
counseling psychology seeks to enhance access to “tools of self-determination” among marginalized groups (Goodman et al., 2004, p. 795). Social justice-oriented counseling psychologists argue that the field must expand therapists’ roles beyond individual counseling to encompass macro-level interventions. Indeed, broader roles are critical to address needs of marginalized communities in an increasingly diverse, multicultural society (e.g., Douce, 2004; Vera & Speight, 2003). Empirical research has begun to examine the ways in which social justice work has been incorporated into counseling psychology training programs (e.g., Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins, & Mason, 2009). Furthermore, recent studies (e.g., Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011; Singh et al., 2010) have focused on counseling psychology graduate students’ perspectives and experiences regarding social justice and training. In the current study we sought to extend emerging empirical research by using a mixed methods design to assess students’ perceptions of training, their personal and professional commitments to social justice, and the intersections thereof. We addressed limitations of previous research by utilizing quantitative measures with psychometric support to assess social justice commitment and predictor variables (e.g., spirituality, perceptions of training environment), and by incorporating a qualitative focus on activist trainees’ experiences.
In recent years there has been a surge of counseling psychology scholarship and professional activity addressing the topic of social justice (e.g., Fouad et al., 2004; Toporek, Gerstein, Fouad, Roysircar, & Israel, 2006; Vera & Speight, 2003). Counseling psychology scholars have defined social justice work as active efforts to transform institutions and systems that impede human rights and distribution of resources (Fouad, Gerstein, & Toporek, 2006). Moreover, social justice work in
This article was published Online First November 21, 2011. Amanda M. Beer, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign; Lisa B. Spanierman, Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Jennifer C. Greene, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign; Nathan R. Todd, Department of Psychology, DePaul University. Amanda M. Beer is currently living in Seattle, WA. This article is based on Amanda M. Beer’s doctoral dissertation at the University of Illinois, under the direction of Lisa B. Spanierman. Portions of this research were presented at the annual American Psychological Association Convention, August, 2011. We thank Carla Hunter, Helen Neville, and Elizabeth Vera for their helpful feedback. We also thank the Bureau of Educational Research at the University of Illinois at Urbana– Champaign for granting the first author a Dissertation Research Award that provided funding for the current research. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Amanda M. Beer, 341 Northwest 74th Street, Seattle, WA 98117. E-mail: umabeer@ gmail.com
Social Justice and Expanded Roles: Counseling Psychology Training Models The burgeoning emphasis on counseling psychologists’ responsibility to expand their roles necessitates training opportu120
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
nities beyond that of individual and small group counseling (e.g., Collison et al., 1998; Goodman et al., 2004; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002; Vera & Speight, 2003). Leaders in the field have proposed and implemented models for incorporating macro-level social justice interventions into graduate student training (e.g., Bemak & Chung, 2007; Goodman et al., 2004; McWhirter & McWhirter, 2007; Talleyrand, Chung, & Bemak, 2006). Although each model is unique, all emphasize conducting self-evaluation (as a program and among faculty and students), promoting critical consciousness, adding or transforming coursework, providing opportunities for community partnerships and power sharing, and fostering student empowerment. Admittedly, scholars note the challenges of establishing social justice training programs, such as allocating time to activities outside of the traditional tenure- and promotion-based activities required of faculty (Goodman et al., 2004) and ensuring that collaborators, such as adjunct supervisors, align with the social justice mission (Talleyrand et al., 2006). Initial empirical investigation of social justice training suggests that it is indeed important but underdeveloped in most programs. Pieterse et al. (2009), for example, analyzed a national sample (n ⫽ 54) of multicultural counseling course syllabi. Although their findings suggested that nearly 60% of instructors included social justice as a course objective, rarely did instructors focus on extending the roles of counseling psychologists beyond individual therapy, as social justice change agents. Because syllabi represent only one aspect of counseling psychology training (i.e., courses), research is warranted to determine if social justice activism is reflected in other facets of counseling psychology training programs.
Graduate Student Perceptions of Social Justice Training Although it is crucial to acknowledge the social justice commitments of counseling psychology professionals, it also is important to examine the perspectives of graduate trainees (Baluch, Pieterse, & Bolden, 2004; Singh et al., 2010). Some recent postgraduate professionals felt that their social justice commitments received minimal attention in their training programs (Baluch et al., 2004). In an effort to understand counseling psychology predoctoral interns’ (n ⫽ 66) experiences with and visions for social justice training in their programs, Singh et al. (2010) gathered responses to closed-ended online survey items and found that the majority of trainees (85%) had not taken a social justice class. Moreover, participants reported barriers to social justice training such as lack of faculty time, lack of funding, and coursework restrictions. Additionally, students desired more role models and opportunities for integrating social justice principles into their lives (Singh et al., 2010). Maintaining the focus on graduate trainees’ perceptions and experiences, we extend Singh et al.’s (2010) research in the current study by (a) including students in various stages of training, (b) utilizing established measures to assess students’ perceptions of training and their commitments to social justice, and (c) conducting qualitative interviews among trainees with strong commitments to social justice.
121
Expanding Understanding of Social Justice Commitment: Predictor Variables To understand trainees’ process of committing to social justice, it is essential to examine both training-related variables (i.e., characteristics of the training program) and personal variables (i.e., characteristics of the trainees) that facilitate such commitment. A content analysis of the interdisciplinary social justice literature revealed the following training variables as facilitative of social justice commitments among trainees: (a) providing knowledge of social justice scholarship, (b) delivering training in an environment supportive of social justice work, and (c) offering applied experiences through which to develop social justice activism skills (Beer, 2006). Initial research (Caldwell & Vera, 2010) provided support for the impact of knowledge of social justice scholarship on social justice commitment. Caldwell and Vera (2010) conducted a qualitative study with 36 counseling psychology doctoral students and professionals, and coursework and readings and scholarship emerged as critical incidents influencing participants’ social justice orientation. Recent studies (e.g., Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011; Singh et al., 2010) have incorporated the construct of training environment by examining perceived environmental supports and barriers to social justice commitment. Miller and Sendrowitz (2011) tested a social– cognitive model of social justice commitments among counseling psychology trainees, resulting in the novel finding that training environment supports and barriers indirectly affected trainees’ social justice commitments through social justice self-efficacy. With regard to opportunities for applied social justice experiences, such as community collaboration, initial research supported a desire for such experiences among students (Singh et al., 2010) and provided evidence that clinical and community work and research are critical incidents in the development of a social justice orientation among trainees and professionals (Caldwell & Vera, 2010). Additional empirical research is needed to fully understand and replicate the role of training in fostering social justice commitment among counseling psychology students. Thus, in the current study we included a comprehensive quantitative measure of trainees’ perceptions of their training environment and qualitative assessment of training experiences that support or inhibit commitments to social justice. Given the moral and value-laden nature of commitments to social justice, research also must consider personal variables of trainees (Helms, 2003; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). Hurtado, Engberg, Ponjuan, and Landreman (2002) found that several demographic variables (i.e., being a woman, being middle class, and having a high GPA) predicted students’ social justice involvement. Additionally, within the counseling psychology literature, personality traits such as moral imperative and spirituality (Arredondo & Perez, 2003; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Palmer, 2004), inner strength and courage (e.g., Arredondo & Perez, 2003; Vera & Speight, 2003), and empathy and compassion (e.g., Palmer, 2004) have been suggested to relate directly to social justice commitments. Empirical research has provided initial support for the role of moral imperative and spirituality in counseling psychologists’ development of social justice commitment. For example, Caldwell and Vera’s (2010) qualitative research revealed religion/ spirituality as a critical factor in social justice orientation development for a small percentage (14%) of participants. In addition, Miller and Sendrowitz’s (2011) findings indicated that a personal
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD
122
moral imperative, assessed with a three-item scale, both directly and indirectly (through social justice self-efficacy) related to trainees’ social justice commitments. To expand on the aforementioned findings, the current research included relevant demographic items as well as a broad measure of spirituality that incorporated inner strength, moral imperative, and compassion. Furthermore, we utilized qualitative methodology to examine the roles of spirituality and values on the development of social justice commitment among activist trainees. Finally, interests and behaviors have been shown to relate to student commitments to social justice. With regard to social justice activism behaviors, research among undergraduate students indicated that precollege diversity engagement (e.g., volunteer work, attending diversity programs, cross-racial friendships) was a strong predictor of students’ involvement in social justice activities during college (Hurtado et al., 2002). As one might expect, interest in social justice issues also predicted social justice commitments (Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011; Miller et al., 2009; Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005). Furthermore, Miller and Sendrowitz’s (2011) research examining a social– cognitive model of social justice commitment provided evidence that social justice interest has a direct impact on social justice commitment. There is some debate in the literature regarding the importance of political interest as a predictor of social justice commitment. One study, for example, found political interest as a unique predictor of trainees’ desires and perceived behaviors regarding social justice (Nilsson & Schmidt, 2005), whereas political interest did not emerge as a critical incident in the development of social justice orientation in Caldwell & Vera’s (2010) research. In the current investigation we expanded on previous research through qualitative methodology specifically addressing the role of political and personal interests in trainees’ social justice commitments.
The Present Investigation Given prior theoretical scholarship and empirical findings, research acknowledging the complex and often personal nature of social justice commitment is warranted among counseling psychology trainees. Therefore, the current mixed methods study integrated quantitative and qualitative research to provide an indepth portrayal of trainees’ commitments to social justice and to identify factors contributing to this commitment. Our purposes in the current study were consistent with those proposed for mixed methods designs (Greene, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; Mertens, 2005). Namely, the present research (a) used quantitative data to identify individuals who could provide in-depth descriptions of their social justice commitments, (b) combined methods in ways that were reciprocal (i.e., one informed the other), and (c) conveyed the needs of underrepresented individuals or groups (i.e., in this case students). In the true spirit of social justice and liberationfocused research, the present mixed methods investigation was designed to elicit the voices of counseling psychology trainees regarding their personal characteristics, perceptions of training, and commitments to social justice. Specific research questions were as follows: 1.
How do counseling psychology trainees rate and describe their own and their training programs’ commitments to social justice?
2.
What can we learn about the development of social justice commitment from activist trainees?
3.
To what extent and in what ways are personal and training variables related to trainees’ commitments to social justice?
Method We utilized a mixed methods design with the specific purpose of complementarity. Complementarity is characterized by using quantitative and qualitative methods to measure overlapping yet distinct facets of the phenomenon under investigation, to provide deeper and broader understanding than could be gained from a single method (Greene, 2007; Greene et al., 1989). As recommended by Hanson, Creswell, Clark, Petska, and Creswell (2005) and Greene and Caracelli (1997), we describe here the paradigmatic and theoretical assumptions for mixed methodology in the current study as well as the nature of the mixing. The proposed research design was guided by a dialectic stance, which encourages researchers to engage in juxtaposition between paradigms to elicit new understandings of investigated phenomena (Greene & Caracelli, 1997). In the present research, a postpositivist paradigm underlies the quantitative methodology, emphasizing prediction of phenomena that can be “studied, identified, and generalized” (Ponterotto, 2005, p. 129). Alternatively, the qualitative portion of the design was driven by a constructivist–interpretivist perspective, which assumes multiple realities of equal validity and accentuates the importance of the interaction and co-construction of reality between the investigator and research participants (Ponterotto, 2005). We selected a sequential mixed methods design and strove to give equal weight to the quantitative and qualitative portions of the research, with each informing the other throughout data collection and analysis (see Creswell, 2008). Survey responses were used to select interview participants and inform the interview protocol. Data analysis also was sequential and comprised three components: (a) preliminary statistical analysis of survey data, (b) thematic analysis of interview data, and (c) hierarchical regression analysis of survey data.
Quantitative Methodology The purpose of the survey portion of the study was to gather quantitative data regarding social justice commitments and related personal and training variables among a national sample of counseling psychology trainees. Survey participants. Two hundred sixty graduate trainees in counseling psychology completed the web-based survey. The majority of participants (n ⫽ 169; 65%) indicated they were in a doctoral program, 86 (33%) reported enrollment in a terminal master’s program, and five students did not report their program type. Graduate students represented first year (33.8%), second year (26.5%), third year (12.7%), fourth year (13.8%), and fifth year and beyond (13.2%) in their training. Their mean age was 28.4 years (range ⫽ 22–56; SD ⫽ 5.9). The majority of participants self-identified as White/European American (71.2%); other participants self-identified as Asian/Asian American (8.8%), Black/ African American (6.2%), Hispanic/Latino–non-White (5.4%), bi-
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
racial (4.6%), or “Other” (3.8%). The majority of participants were women (83.5%). Most self-identified as heterosexual (87.3%); 6.9% identified as bisexual, and 5% identified as lesbian or gay. Approximately half (52.3%) identified as Christian; other participants identified as agnostic (15.8%), “Other” (11.9%), atheist (6.5%), Buddhist (5%), or Jewish (3.5%). More than half reported their political affiliation as Democrat (60.4%); the remainder selfidentified as Republican (12.3%), Independent (10%), “Other” (2.3%), or “None” (15%). Among the 183 participants who provided contact information, at least 23 distinct training programs were represented from various geographical regions, including 20 states. Survey procedure. We contacted training directors (via e-mail) from the 65 active American Psychological Association– accredited counseling psychology doctoral programs in the United States during the time of the study. We asked that they forward a research participation message, which described the study as examining trainees’ perspectives of social justice, to all students in their training program. Only one program was eliminated, due to its requirement of institutional review board approval from their university. To increase the response rate, we sent three follow up e-mails to all participating training directors. Respondents were offered the opportunity to be included in a $150 cash drawing and to agree to be contacted for a follow-up phone interview. Data were screened and cleaned (resulting in one removed outlier) prior to quantitative analyses.
Measures Demographics. Participants completed a demographic questionnaire that assessed program type, year in program, gender, age, race, sexual orientation, political affiliation, political interest, and religious affiliation. Social justice commitment. The Activism Orientation Scale (AOS; Corning & Myers, 2002) is a 35-item scale designed to measure propensity for general activist behavior. For each item, participants respond to the question “How likely is it that you will engage in this activity in the future?” The response continuum ranges from 0 (extremely unlikely) to 3 (extremely likely). To calculate a total score items are summed, with higher scores indicating higher activism orientation. Construct validity of the scale has been supported by significant positive associations with a number of related measures, including a strong sense of sociopolitical control and past engagement in specific issue-related activism (Corning & Myers, 2002). Group differences criterion validity has been supported by differences between general university students, women’s studies students, and employed activists. Internal consistency of the AOS ranged from .87 to .97 (Corning & Myers, 2002). In the current study, ␣ ⫽ .96. We used the six-item version of the Confronting Discrimination (CD) subscale of the Social Issues Advocacy Scale (SIAS; Nilsson, Marszalek, Linnemeyer, Bahner, & Hansen, 2009) to measure participants’ responsibility to confront professionals and practices that uphold discriminatory acts. Participants rate their agreement with items on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) Likert-type scale. Example items include “It is my professional responsibility to confront colleagues who display signs of discrimination toward disabled individuals” and “It is my responsibility to ensure that my professional practice is inclusive of the
123
needs of various cultural groups.” Construct validity of the subscale has been supported by significant positive associations with interest and participation in sociopolitical activism and ethnocultural empathy (Nilsson et al., 2009). A later version of the subscale, with fewer items, demonstrated similar associations (Nilsson, Marszalek, Linnemeyer, Bahner, & Misialek, 2011). Internal consistency of the CD was .87 in previous research (Nilsson et al., 2009). In the current study, internal consistency was supported for the six-item CD scale (␣ ⫽ .86). Training variables. The Climate and Comfort subscale of the Multicultural Environmental Inventory—Revised (MEI–R; PopeDavis, Liu, Nevitt, & Toporek, 2000) was used to assess participants’ perceptions of their training environment relevant to social justice. The MEI–R was designed to measure perceptions about the degree to which graduate counseling programs address multicultural and social justice issues within curriculum, supervision, research, and overall training environment. The Climate and Comfort subscale consists of 11 items assessing the degree to which participants feel safe, comfortable, and valued within their training program. Respondents indicate the degree to which statements are reflective of their counseling program (1⫽ not at all, 3 ⫽ moderately, 5 ⫽ a lot). Example items include “There are faculty with whom I feel comfortable discussing social and political issues and concerns” and “There is a demonstrated commitment of recruiting students and faculty from minority cultural groups (e.g., racial and ethnic minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community members; individuals with disabilities; religious minorities).” Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the MEI–R factor structure adequately fit data for a new sample of graduate students and faculty (n ⫽ 336; Toporek, Liu, & Pope-Davis, 2003). Construct validity of the subscale has been supported by significant positive associations with multicultural knowledge and skills (Dickson & Jepsen, 2007). In previous research, ␣ ⫽ .92 for the Climate and Comfort subscale (Pope-Davis et al., 2000; Toporek et al., 2003). In the current study, ␣ ⫽ .87 for the Climate and Comfort subscale. To assess trainees’ perceptions of the importance of social justice in counseling psychology curricula, as well as the extent to which such a focus is present in their programs, participants responded to two items: “Please rate the extent to which you feel social justice should be included in the training and practice of counseling psychology” and “Please rate the extent to which you feel social justice is included in your current training program.” Responses were on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (included in all aspects). Personal variables. The Spirituality Assessment Scale (SAS; Howden, 1993) was chosen as a broad measure of morality and inner strength. The SAS includes 28 items and comprises four subscales: Purpose and Meaning in Life (e.g., “There is fulfillment in my life”), Innerness or Inner Resources (e.g., “I rely on an inner strength in hard times”), Unifying Interconnectedness (e.g., “I have a general sense of belonging”), and Transcendence (e.g., “I have experienced moments of peace in a devastating event”). The SAS employs a Likert-type response format ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 6 (strongly disagree). A principal-components analysis provided initial support for the scale structure of the SAS (Howden, 1993). Furthermore, previous research indicated that the SAS was not significantly related to reports of religiousness or attendance at religious events, supporting the SAS as measuring a
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD
124
construct distinct from religiosity. In prior research among nursing professionals and low-income women, internal consistency estimates were adequate: ␣ ⫽ .92–.93 for the total scale (Gill, Barrio Minton, & Myers, 2010; Howden, 1993). In the current study, internal consistency estimates also were acceptable: ␣ ⫽ .89 for the total scale. On the basis of previous psychometric support for the total scale score, we used the total, rather than subscale scores, in the present investigation. Furthermore, total scores represented a holistic sense of spirituality and were parsimonious.
Qualitative Methodology Our purpose in the interview portion of the study was to gather in-depth qualitative data regarding the personal and professional experiences of a subsample of counseling psychology trainees demonstrating high commitments to social justice. We expected variability in social justice commitments among counseling psychology trainees. Thus, we purposefully focused on students with high commitments to social justice to gain a deeper understanding of the personal and professional factors that was linked to their activism. This information has the potential to inform future social justice training in the field of counseling psychology. Consistent with mixed methods data analysis strategies (Caracelli & Greene, 1993) and qualitative purposeful sampling strategies (Patton, 2002), we identified extreme cases (i.e., trainees with high commitments to social justice) from quantitative findings with the expectation that such cases would provide rich and meaningful qualitative data regarding social justice commitments. Researchers. As recommended by qualitative methodologists (Morrow, 2005), brief information is provided about the authors and their value stances to situate the researchers in the context of the project. The first three authors identify as White women and the fourth identifies as a White man; each is committed to diversity, equity, and social justice. The lead author, an instructor and practitioner of counseling psychology, espouses a multicultural–feminist orientation in her clinical work; engages in teaching, outreach, and university/community service aimed at increasing student and staff awareness of injustice and behaviors that promote social justice. The second author, an associate professor of counseling psychology, conducts antiracism research and trains graduate students in her research lab and through multicul-
tural counseling courses. The third author is a scholar–practitioner in the domains of social science methodology and program evaluation. Her work focuses on how to defensibly advance democratic values of equity and social justice in empirical research and evaluation. She has written extensively on mixed methods in the social sciences. The fourth author, an assistant professor of clinical/community psychology, conducts research related to religious organizations and social justice using quantitative and qualitative methods. Interview participants and procedures. To ascertain information about the phenomenon of interest (i.e., counseling psychology trainees’ commitments to social justice), we purposefully selected participants who scored high on measures of social justice commitment. Following guidelines for mixed methods and qualitative research (Caracelli & Greene, 1993; Patton, 2002), we did not prespecify the number of interviewees. Instead, we set specific inclusion criteria to identify interviewees. Because doctoral programs were the primary sites of interest, we sought interviewees who identified as doctoral trainees. Additionally, inclusion criteria included high levels of social justice activism (e.g., survey scores in the upper quartile for activism orientation and the upper third on confronting discrimination). Initially, 28 survey participants indicated willingness to be contacted for a follow-up interview and met the criteria for interview participation. We selected 25 among the 28 who provided thorough responses to open-ended items. We tried to include participants who represented various demographic characteristics and training programs (i.e., no more than two participants per training program). This process resulted in nine potential interview candidates. We contacted each and requested his or her participation in a 60-min, audio-recorded telephone interview. Eight of the nine candidates indicated willingness to participate and completed the semistructured interview. Due to technical difficulties, one of the interview recordings was inaudible, and thus a total of seven interview participants was included in the present research. See Table 1 for interview participant demographics. Each participant received $20 compensation. Interview protocol. We designed the semistructured interview to expand on quantitative data and to deepen our understanding of trainees with strong social justice commitments. Consistent with our mixed methods design, quantitative survey
Table 1 Interview Participant Demographic Information (N ⫽ 7) Participant code Characteristic
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
Age Gender Race/ethnicity
26 Male White
29 Female White
29 Female Biracial
29 Female White
28 Male White
28 Male White
Sexual orientation Social class Religious affiliation Political affiliation Year in program
Heterosexual Middle class None reported Democrat 2
Heterosexual Middle class Buddhist Democrat 2
Bisexual Working class Wiccan Democrat 3
Heterosexual Working class Agnostic Democrat 3
Heterosexual Middle class Atheist Independent 5
Heterosexual Middle class Christian Democrat 3
A7 42 Female Native American Heterosexual Poor Native tradition Democrat 3
Note. For participant code, the letter A denotes activist participant and is followed by the respondent’s research identification number. Age is in years. Native tradition is an abbreviation for “Native American tradition” as reported by participant.
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
data were used to inform the interview protocol. For example, the interviewer asked, “In my preliminary analysis commitment to social justice was positively correlated with political interest. . . I would like to hear your perspective regarding this finding.” In addition, participants were asked to describe personal and professional meanings of social justice, as well as their own social justice activities. Please contact the first author for complete protocol. Qualitative analysis procedure. Given our constructivist– interpretivist approach, phenomenological analysis was utilized in the qualitative portion of the study (Mertens, 2005). A trained undergraduate assistant transcribed all interviews verbatim and removed identifying information. The first author reviewed each transcript for accuracy. Next, the first author analyzed the data using an eight-step procedure derived from the interpretative phenomenological analysis approach (IPA; Smith & Osborn, 2003) as well as more general qualitative research models (Morrow, 2005; Tesch, 1990; Wertz, 2005). Given that IPA is an approach rather than a specific methodology, in order to maximize consistency and trustworthiness of our qualitative data, we incorporated specific methods for validating or revising themes (Tesch, 1990), providing written descriptions of themes (Wertz, 2005), and utilizing member checks (Morrow, 2005). The method comprised the following steps. The primary author (a) thoroughly read and reread each transcript to identify key ideas and generated a list of tentative labels to capture the essence of expressed ideas within each transcript; (b) divided each transcript protocol into units that represented independent meanings and assigned a tentative label to each unit of text; (c) grouped ideas (i.e., labels) into themes based on similarities and differences, both within and across transcripts; (d) created broad categories to organize themes; (e) referred to the original transcripts to validate themes, making revisions as appropriate; (f) created written descriptions of all themes, attempting to include all nuances and related details emerging from the data; (g) collaborated with co-investigators who reviewed and audited (i.e., evaluated consistency with raw data); and (h) invited interviewees to review the written descriptions to provide general feedback and assess whether or not their experiences were represented accurately. Trustworthiness of qualitative research. We took multiple steps to promote trustworthy collection, evaluation, and presentation of interview data, following the guidelines offered by Lincoln and Guba (1985) and Morrow (2005). We acknowledged the subjective nature and importance of the current investigation, given the goal of eliciting voice for the consumers of training practices (i.e., graduate students), thus supporting the social validity of the study. We identified and acknowledged our assumptions and predispositions regarding the research and subsequent data and consistently worked to bracket or set aside our own assumptions and biases. Consistent with guidelines for establishing credibility and confirmability, we engaged in peer debriefing with student and faculty colleagues to increase our awareness of our own interpretations and elicit alternative perspectives. Furthermore, we included multiple participant checks throughout the interview procedure. In addition to inviting participant feedback during various steps of data collection and analyses, we sent the final results to all interview participants and requested their feedback regarding the accuracy of our interpretation. Four of the seven interviewees responded to the invitation and all reported that the written de-
125
scriptions were congruent with their recollections of the interview and their reports. Finally, we addressed interpretation adequacy by providing thick description (i.e., a detailed account of the context and dynamics surrounding the data collection and analysis procedures) of the interpretation process.
Results Below, we report the results by research question. We describe the process of integrating quantitative and qualitative data to answer each question.
How Do Counseling Psychology Trainees Rate and Describe Their Own and Their Training Programs’ Commitments to Social Justice Work? (Research Question 1) To ascertain trainees’ level of social justice commitment, we examined descriptive statistics of quantitative survey responses. Participant scores on the three measures of social justice commitment approached upper bounds for each scale: Activism Orientation (M ⫽ 1.58, SD ⫽ 0.55, possible range ⫽ 0 –3), Confronting Discrimination (M ⫽ 4.55, SD ⫽ 0.48, possible range ⫽ 1–5), and Ideal Level of Social Justice Training (M ⫽ 2.19, SD ⫽ 0.81, possible range ⫽ 0 –3). A dependent-samples t test revealed that participants rated their training programs’ commitment to social justice training (M ⫽ 1.21, SD ⫽ 0.76, possible range ⫽ 0 –3) significantly lower than their rating of their ideal level of social justice training (M ⫽ 2.19, SD ⫽ 0.81, possible range ⫽ 0 –3), t(1,258) ⫽ 16.14, p ⬍ .001. To further describe and locate our respondents’ scores on measures of social justice commitment, we compared these scores to descriptive statistics from previous studies (Corning & Myers, 2002; Nilsson et al., 2009). The current sample of counseling psychology graduate students (M ⫽ 1.58, SD ⫽ 0.55, possible range ⫽ 0 –3) scored most similarly on Activism Orientation to a previous sample of graduate and undergraduate students in women’s studies (M ⫽ 1.57). Additionally, the current sample scored below activist samples (e.g., graduate student labor union) and above samples of undergraduate students on Activism Orientation (Corning & Myers, 2002). With regard to Confronting Discrimination, the current sample (M ⫽ 4.55, SD ⫽ 0.48, possible range ⫽ 1–5) scored similarly to a previous sample of graduate students (n ⫽ 278, M ⫽ 4.13, SD ⫽ 0.78) from a range of degree programs (i.e., counseling, education, nursing; Nilsson et al., 2009). See Table 2 for descriptive statistics and intercorrelations.
What Can We Learn About the Development of Social Justice Commitment From Activist Trainees? (Research Question 2) We examined qualitative interview data to answer our second research question. Interview participants provided rich and varied information about their social justice commitments that reflected four broad categories: nature of social justice, motivation for activism, role of training, and personal and professional integration. All themes in these categories are described below and are accompanied by illustrative quotations. The letter A denotes activ-
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD
126
Table 2 Intercorrelations From Survey Data Variable 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Activism Orientation Confronting Discrimination Ideal SJ Training Perceived SJ Training Perceptions of training environment Spirituality
N M SD Range of observed scores Scale range
1
2
3
4
5
.46ⴱⴱ .37ⴱⴱ .04 .09 .22ⴱⴱ
.42ⴱⴱ .12 .28ⴱⴱ .29ⴱⴱ
.25ⴱⴱ .04 .18ⴱ
.36ⴱⴱ .00
.19ⴱ
260 1.58 0.55 .09–3 0–3
259 4.55 0.48 3–5 1–5
259 2.19 0.81 0–3 0–3
258 1.21 0.75 0–3 0–3
260 3.83 0.61 1.64–5 1–5
6
260 4.90 0.48 3.29–5.89 1–6
Note. SJ ⫽ social justice; SD ⫽ standard deviation. ⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001.
ist participant and is followed by the respondent’s research identification number. Nature of social justice. Interview participants’ collective responses revealed a number of themes regarding the defining characteristics or nature of social justice work. Three themes represented their perspectives: necessarily political, voice and confrontation, and struggle. Necessarily political. This theme reflected interviewees’ sentiments that social justice work is inherently political. All agreed with the survey finding that political interest and social justice were correlated positively. Participants’ responses centered around the necessity and/or utility of politics as a venue for social action, regardless of personal attitudes toward politics. A number of participants named politics as the venue for engaging in social action and creating societal change. For example, in discussing his long-standing values for social justice and how he had acted on these values throughout his life, one participant reported “realizing as I got older that . . . the playing field for social justice and activism and all that stuff is really in political organization and in the political elements of our culture” (A5). Others explained that they engaged in social justice activities, such as public protests or political campaigns. Four out of seven of the participants clearly identified political organizations, events, and/or activities in which they were engaged. Although all participants emphasized the importance of politics in creating social change, some respondents expressed their disinterest in or frustration with politics. For example, one interviewee stated, “The political system sometimes is just so aggravating” (A6). He expressed frustration that politicians, who should be representing his voice in Congress, often supported views and policies in opposition to his beliefs (e.g., money and industry vs. social responsibility toward people and the environment). Even among participants who expressed frustration or disinterest in politics, all reported engagement in activity addressing political or social issues, as illustrated in the following quote: I’m really not interested in politics but I am interested in social justice, if that makes sense, you know like standing up for wrongs . . . I can’t say I’m the most versed on who’s running for office or even when we’re supposed to vote . . . Certain things in politics don’t interest me but when I do see injustice I definitely speak out. (A3)
Voice and confrontation. Participants emphasized the importance of confronting social injustice as essential to the nature of social justice. Voice includes both spoken and written statements aimed at alerting others of an existing injustice. Some participants reported regularly confronting friends, family, and classmates regarding their socially unjust language and/or behavior. One activist trainee spoke about engaging in open dialogue with friends in order to confront their use of racial slurs and/or comments because he would “rather talk about it than just let it slide” (A6). Another respondent described confronting injustice with regard to his public response to an anti-LGBT (pro-reparative therapy) group that was forming on his campus. He stated, “I really tried to bring that issue to awareness at the school I was at and . . . brought it up at meetings and so forth, worked with people at the counseling center and in my program to write a response [that was published in school newspaper]” (A5). Finally, one participant described her activist work through performing in a political play, the Vagina Monologues. She emphasized the importance of speaking out against injustice for the victims of rape and sexual violence that she works with clinically, stating, “It’s not like I can go out and prosecute people but I can go get on stage and scream about how wrong it is” (A3). Struggle. Activist interviewees consistently spoke of the challenging nature of social justice work. Struggle took the form of personal perseverance and lack of support from others. For example, some spoke of others minimizing or disagreeing with their committed work toward social justice. With regard to a social justice campaign against hate, one activist trainee explained the struggles she and her classmates faced when they encountered individuals who did not have positive things to say about stopping hate and/or would joke about the very issues to which they were dedicating their time and energy. Another participant explained, “I think that’s the hardest part about sustaining a commitment to [social justice], is how many times you have to bang your head against the wall before there’s like a little, tiny dent” (A5). Although a number of participants explained that struggle was essential to the nature of social justice, many also noted that such struggle/obstacles/challenges did not deter them from their overall commitment to social justice activism. Instead, they emphasized that these struggles were part of their journey and, at times, limited
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
the amount of social justice work one could engage in. For example, one activist trainee said, “I can’t do that [confront others’ socially unjust attitudes and behaviors] all the time. I feel like sometimes it’s just exhausting to me, you know” (A6). Another participant referred to the challenges of therapeutic work aimed at confronting social justice: “You can’t work with trauma survivors day in and day out if you don’t have support. You’ll burn out too fast” (A3). Motivation for activism. The second broad category, motivation for activism, encompassed the depth and insight of participants’ responses regarding the influence of personal variables on their social justice work. Participants expressed four primary themes that reflected their motivation for activism: spirit, contact, empowerment, and witnessing change. Spirit. The spirit theme captured an energy or connection that motivated participants’ commitments to social justice work. For some, spirit was expressed through reference to their spirituality in relation to religion, but for most, spirit represented their strong emotions or an internal drive in relation to social justice. This theme also encompassed the optimistic outlook in approaching social justice that was expressed across many participants. The relationship between religion and spirituality differed among participants. Some participants spoke of the personal meaning of religion in regard to their spirituality and motivation for social justice work, as in the following example: “I think for me, in a way it is sort of a religion, the idea of changing people’s attitudes and helping make the world a better place in general, I mean that’s a huge value of mine I would definitely consider to be a part of my spirituality” (A4). One respondent explained: I find that my own spirituality, especially when I think of doing rape crisis work, because it became so salient in that work, my spiritual base kind of gave me a safe place to go with all this horrible stuff that I saw, so even though these horrible things were happening in the world, and I knew they were out of my control, I . . . have a feeling of a higher power, I guess. (A3)
In addition, two participants referred to the potential negative impact that religion could have on motivating social justice action. One participant presented an explicit example of a widely known religious and political figure whom he viewed as anti-social justice, stating, “I think of a Jerry Falwell type or somebody, that where here’s a guy who’s profoundly committed to his faith, and would blow off the charts on spirituality but also represents the whole section of people that I think would actually be working against my view of what social justice is” (A5). As defined above, spirit primarily represented participants’ expressions of an innate or internal motivation toward social justice, which some described as an aspect of their personality. For example, one interviewee stated, “For some reason these [social justice] issues really appeal to me, and I hope to understand someday why . . . I feel very intrinsically compelled to be part of them” (A5). This internal motivation was also described as a sense of optimism among some participants, as illustrated in the following quotation: For some people, it might be their pessimism that drives them to change their society. For me, it’s my optimism and belief that it can happen that drives me to try and change, because without it I would feel paralyzed. (A2)
127
Contact. Another theme that reflected trainees’ motivation for activism involved contact with people or events that facilitated change-seeking behavior. Interviewees expanded on the notion of contact through their descriptions of life experiences that influenced their understanding, empathy, and subsequent action regarding social issues. For example, one straight male trainee identified his previous job as an undercover investigator of housing discrimination as fostering his current commitment to LGBT advocacy: Putting myself in a role that’s just for a temporary amount of time, of being part of a minority group, I guess having that self-awareness, I think it’s been an effective use of my being able to . . . empathize more with those from a minority group. . . For a temporary amount of time I lost my heterosexual privilege, playing the role of a gay man essentially. (A1)
Participants also identified contact with activist role models and specific social environments as important motivating forces for their commitments to social justice. Participants pointed to family members, friends, mentors/professors, and so forth while describing relationships that were influential to their activism behaviors. For example, one trainee stated, And so it was definitely a value of my mom’s too, to try to help other people. She was a social worker. And my brother is in the Peace Corps, and my other brother’s a teacher so [laughter] . . . I mean we gravitate towards those type of careers, and like I said it’s a big family value, my immediate family at least, and we just carry it [social justice] out in our lives. (A4)
This illustrative quotation reflects the important role of likeminded family members in trainees’ motivations for activism. Another spoke of her high school social relationships that supported a focus on equality, an attribute important to her idea of social justice: It was about empowering women, and it was very diverse ethnically and racially, and it was maybe 25% White, 25% Black, 25% Latino. We had Vietnamese, Muslim, all sorts of different cultures and that was such a great experience and it really motivated me through my life to see that community and that kind of equality as necessary rather than optional. (A4)
Notably, several participants spoke of the motivational impact of professors as social justice role models. Given the overlap of this finding with the role of training category, we present results regarding faculty role models in the upcoming section. Finally, a number of interviewees noted that contact with negative events or injustices (e.g., hate crimes, cultural oppression) fostered their motivation for social justice behavior. Some activist trainees experienced injustices firsthand, whereas others were not aimed at them or their community One participant, for instance, referred to discrimination faced by people of her cultural heritage (i.e., American Indians) and the trauma that her family had endured as a result. She referenced the revolving nature of the historical oppression faced by her community as she explained her motivation for ongoing social justice engagement aimed at change for her community. Others described a particular event that threatened the rights of a social group and triggered a personal or collective (i.e., teaming with others) response aimed at justice. One trainee described the origins of a “stop hate” campaign on her campus:
128
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD There had been several racial incidents on campus where there had been some racial slurs against people who were African American and people who were Muslim, particularly the Muslim women, and so it was . . . a big issue on campus, and we thought it would be really good if we could start discussions about that on campus. (A4)
As demonstrated, participants identified contact with models of social justice as well as injustice as influential to their current commitments to social justice. Participants noted the importance of such contact in facilitating their awareness of injustice and empathy for oppressed groups, which subsequently motivated their actions toward change. Empowerment. Interview respondents spoke about the importance of empowering oppressed groups as a motivational force for social justice engagement. One participant named empowerment as central to her beliefs of social justice, stating “I guess that’s really the core in my beliefs in social justice . . . empowering people” (A2), and described her goal, both as a counselor and a volunteer, to support people in realizing their rights to make choices in their lives. Consistent with other participants, this interviewee focused on the empowerment of those from oppressed groups as an important and inherent component of her social justice work. Describing a social justice volunteer experience working with “at risk youth” she stated, “The other thing that was really profound about that experience as I was thinking about it is that it was all girls and trying to empower them as women . . . expanding their choices in their lives” (A2). Participants often referred to the motivational nature of empowering members of specific underrepresented or marginalized groups (e.g., racial and ethnic minorities, gay and lesbian individuals, persons with disabilities). One activist trainee described empowerment as central to her formation of a society for female members of her own oppressed ethnic group. Another respondent spoke of her own empowerment through engaging in activism work addressing racism: That was just amazing to see the campus-wide excitement about this issue and to realize there were so many, even though some people will make inappropriate racial comments, there are so many people who don’t agree with that [inappropriate racial comments]. And to hear that on the college campus, and [Midwest university] is a pretty conservative campus . . . it was really empowering to do that. (A4)
Witnessing change. Many trainees explained that witnessing change motivated them to engage in social action. Furthermore, participants emphasized how small initiatives could result in large change. In speaking of recent media coverage and court proceedings related to her work as an advocate for uranium mine workers, one participant noted, “It’s kind of interesting to see how one little tiny individual can make a big difference as long as they’re heard” (A7). Another stated, “It didn’t really take that much work and felt like it made a big impact” (A5), referring to his letter writing initiative in response to the formation of an anti-LGBT student organization. When speaking of their roles in helping to create change related to social justice, participants often highlighted the significance or magnitude of their work, even when acknowledging the limited impact of a single event. The role of training. The third broad category, the role of training, highlights the various ways that participants noted links between their graduate training and social justice activities. Three
themes emerged in this category: curriculum, supportive environment, and professional barriers. Curriculum. All interview participants referred to aspects of the counseling psychology curriculum as advancing their understanding of social justice. Most trainees highlighted the role of courses and programmatic opportunities in promoting their knowledge of and engagement in social justice work. While describing a graduate course, one activist trainee explained, “We learned a lot about social justice issues and how to take action and all the issues that go along with that and you know all the struggles of doing social justice work” (A4). Other participants referred to the existence of unique opportunities for social activism practica and study abroad in their programs. In particular, they highlighted opportunities that fostered engagement in macro-level work with oppressed groups. One trainee stated, “We actually have an annual South African trip, and I know the folks who go on that trip end up doing some outreach work for those people who have historically been affected by problems from apartheid” (A1). Although most participants supported social justice as a curriculum requirement, some spoke of a perceived cost to mandating this work. For example, one trainee declared, I’m kind of torn [about mandating social justice] because I wouldn’t want something that has, you know, intrinsic motivation for me to become less intrinsically motivated and then become less rewarding, but I think it’s important for everyone to have an experience with it [social justice work]. (A2)
Finally, several students referred to the issue of naming (or not naming) social justice as a specific component in their training curriculum. Students spoke of the existence of social justice training components that are not necessarily named as such. The following quote demonstrates this finding: I know from my department, I feel like we’ve got a big strong commitment to social justice. A few of my professors don’t call it social justice. I think that, some professors will call it advocacy or some professors will do it in their personal time rather than professionally. (A4)
Supportive training environment. This theme refers to the ways in which the training environment facilitated social justice work. Most activist trainees reported that they felt supported and encouraged in social justice endeavors. Interestingly, among this group of activist trainees, many disagreed with the survey finding that participant saw themselves as more committed to social justice than were their training programs. One explained, “I would speak very positively of my experience at my program and would disagree and say that, I think theirs [program’s commitment to social justice] was on the same level as mine [commitment to social justice]” (A5). In addition, participants referenced the important role of their program’s values in promoting social justice work. One interviewee expressed pride, stating “[the students] really think social justice is a value of our department” (A4). Overall, interview participants emphasized the importance of faculty members serving as sources of support and role models in creating an environment supportive of social justice. One participant spoke about a faculty member as follows: “He’s really taught me a lot about how advocacy is part of counseling psychology and that it’s a value and it’s something that we can embrace and we can challenge ourselves to keep doing” (A4). Another example of the
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
importance of faculty inspiration of social justice behavior was reported as follows: “Having professors who’ve been heavily involved in social justice has inspired me . . . to become involved in social justice issues. We have a number of faculty who are very active in different activist related activities” (A1). Professional barriers to social justice. Despite the examples of trainees’ perceptions of support in their training programs, as illustrated above, trainees also spoke of barriers or limitations within their training program, department, university, or academia in general, in working toward a social justice agenda. For example, one interviewee stated, “There’s too much politics in departments . . . and they’re prioritizing education rather than activism” (A2). Furthermore, one interviewee critiqued the traditional documentation of assessment and intervention hours. She stated, “I think traditionally counseling psych[ology] hasn’t necessarily given students credit for doing social justice work or practicums or anything like that. It’s more like individual counseling is where we get our hours” (A4). Other participants spoke of how the demands of graduate training forced them to put social justice endeavors on hold to engage in mandated educational requirements. For example, one explained, “I’d like to be more involved but I just need to get through grad school” (A4), and another revealed, “I can’t really do much . . . my hands are tied, because I have to really focus on my dissertation” (A7). Finally, the Native American interviewee felt misunderstood in her graduate training. She stated, “A lot of the projects that I do are Native American related and sometimes you see the professors looking at you like, ‘Where is she coming from?’ you know?” (A7). Although only one interviewee critiqued training in this way, her example is noteworthy because she was the only participant who spoke extensively of her own identity as a member of an oppressed group. Her experience of oppression is especially relevant to the focus of the study to address social justice and raise the voices of graduate trainees. Personal and professional integration. The fourth and final category, personal and professional integration, illustrated the inseparable nature of participants’ personal and professional commitments to social justice. Because all participants spoke to this inseparability, a singular theme of personal and professional integration composes this final category. This theme was clearly expressed in one interviewee’s remark: “I don’t know if I can separate it, but I think there is an integration . . . I would be personally motivated to do something in my professional life because [of] my personal beliefs” (A7). Another explained, I get to use the things that I believe morally and ethically to be true in every area of my life. I can use it with clients, to help women understand that it wasn’t their fault what they’ve been through. I can use it in the world in social justice out in the community, like the Vagina Monologues. . . I use it with my family. . . I definitely have some family who don’t believe the things that I believe. So . . . it’s infused in every aspect of my life, this commitment to stand up for wrong, you know, whether somebody [is] being racist or sexist or . . . afraid of different sexualities. It gets to be in every part of my life, and I love that. (A3)
Participants’ responses revealed how their personal and professional values and beliefs for social justice related to one another. For example, one participant expressed how his history of social justice commitments and activism in his personal life eventually
129
became infused with his professional identity. He spoke of his realization that his professional training contributed to his credibility and power in influencing social change: I feel like a lot of my actions or interest in [social justice activism] was really more outside of the program and . . . I’ve learned since, that, as a psychologist, there is a real venue and a real credibility you can bring to these kinds of issues. (A5)
Thus, participants illustrated that their professional experience can enhance personal characteristics and provide an opportunity to integrate their identities.
To What Extent Are Personal and Training Variables Related to Trainees’ Professional Commitments to Social Justice? (Research Question 3) To examine potential personal and training predictors of trainees’ commitments to social justice among the larger sample, we initially used hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) because trainees were nested in training programs. Given our mixed methods approach, we used extant literature, qualitative interview results, and preliminary quantitative data to inform our analysis. This approach is consistent with the accepted use of theory, observation, intuition, and close inspection of statistical relationships among variables to inform the selection of independent variables for analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Grounded on the extant scholarship and the interview findings, general activist orientation, spirituality, and perceptions of training program were selected as predictors of the outcome variable, confronting discrimination. We selected confronting discrimination as the outcome variable because it represents a professional commitment to social justice specific to counseling psychology. Preliminary HLM data analyses showed the intraclass correlation (ICC) for the confronting discrimination outcome variable to be less than .01, indicating that variation was small across training programs and that nesting did not result in dependence. Predictor variables also displayed minimal variation across training programs (activist orientation ICC ⬍ .01, spirituality ICC ⫽ .01, and perceptions of training environment ICC ⫽ .04). Small intraclass correlations indicate that ordinary least squares regression is appropriate for analysis and that HLM is not necessary to account for dependence (Kahn, 2011; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002; Snijders & Bosker, 1999); thus, we used ordinary least squares regression for study analyses. We examined all relevant variables and confirmed that they complied with assumptions of regression analysis (e.g., linearity, homoscedasticity, normality of errors). Because preliminary analysis revealed significant differences between men and women on confronting discrimination, we controlled for gender in the analyses. We used effect coding to enter gender into the first step of the prediction equation as a predetermined and potential control variable. We also entered activist orientation into the first step of the prediction equation to control for participants’ general orientation to social justice and activism. In the second step, we entered spirituality as a personal predictor of social justice commitment. In the third step of the equation, we entered perceptions of training environment as a training variable predictive of professional commitment to social justice, as measured by the criterion variable of confronting discrimination. We conducted a fourth step, in which
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD
130
justice commitments. Among the survey participants, gender was the only group identity variable that was correlated statistically with social justice commitment and was correlated only with our measure of professional social justice commitment (i.e., confronting discrimination). Upon further analysis, we also found that gender did not interact with significant associations between predictor variables of interest (i.e., activism orientation, training environment, and spirituality) and confronting discrimination. Thus, we found minimal evidence for the role of social identity variables in predicting or moderating social justice commitment among the survey sample. Qualitative inquiry with high activist trainees provided new and important information that could not be gained from the larger, more representative sample. Among this select group, we found that social identity was associated in various ways with high activist trainees’ social justice commitments. Participants discussed how their own marginalized identities (e.g., female, racial or ethnic minority) or close relationships with those in minority groups allowed them to empathize with targets of oppression and thus become concerned about social justice issues. Furthermore, white male participants emphasized the importance of understanding and using their privileged group status to foster social justice change. Future research should address the role of social identity, intersecting identities, and experiences of oppression when considering development of social justice commitments.
we examined interaction terms to determine whether gender moderated the associations between the above-mentioned variables and confronting discrimination. Because none of the interaction terms were significant, we report only the first three steps for the sake of parsimony. In the first step, the control variables of gender and activist orientation accounted for a significant amount of variance in confronting discrimination, R2 ⫽ .22, F(2, 256) ⫽ 36.30, p ⬍ .001, with women scoring higher than men. In the second step, results indicated that spirituality predicted confronting discrimination after controlling for gender and activist orientation, R2 ⫽ .25, ⌬R2 ⫽ .03, F(1, 255) ⫽ 28.80, p ⬍ .001. In the final step, we found that perceptions of training environment accounted for significant additional variance in confronting discrimination above and beyond the role of spirituality, R2 ⫽ .29, ⌬R2 ⫽ .04, F(1, 254) ⫽ 26.44, p ⬍ .001. Activism orientation was the strongest predictor of confronting discrimination ( ⫽ .40), followed by perceptions of training environment ( ⫽ .21), and spirituality ( ⫽ .15). See Table 3.
Discussion The current mixed methods investigation offers evidence to help understand and foster counseling psychology trainees’ commitments to social justice, a core value in the profession. In addition to extending the literature on personal and training predictors of students’ social justice commitment, the current study exemplifies the utility of mixed methods research for the field of counseling psychology. Below, we illustrate how the rich content of qualitative data provided contextual meaning that both enhanced understanding of quantitative findings and provided new and nuanced information about the phenomenon of trainees’ social justice commitments.
Spirituality For the purposes of the current study, we defined and operationalized spirituality as a personal trait that incorporates the variables of inner strength, moral imperative, and compassion. Our quantitative finding that spirituality was a significant predictor of professional social justice commitment is consistent with previous theoretical and empirical literature (e.g., Arredondo & Perez, 2003; Caldwell & Vera, 2010; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011). Our use of a comprehensive measure of spirituality allowed us to support and extend prior empirical evi-
Social Group Identity Our mixed methods design provided meaningful information regarding the role of social group identities as they relate to social
Table 3 Hierarchical Regression Analysis Predicting Confronting Discrimination Predictor Step 1 Gender Activism orientation Step 2 Gender Activism orientation Spirituality Step 3 Gender Activism orientation Spirituality Perceptions of training environment
B
SE B

.06 .40
.04 .05
.09 .45ⴱⴱ
.05 .36 .19
.04 .05 .06
.07 .42ⴱⴱ .19ⴱⴱ
.05 .35 .15 .16
.03 .05 .06 .04
.08 .40ⴱⴱ .15ⴱ .21ⴱⴱ
R2 .22ⴱⴱ .03ⴱⴱ
.04ⴱⴱ
Note. N ⫽ 259. Activism orientation, measured with the Activism Orientation Scale (AOS), represents participants’ propensity for general activist behavior. Spirituality, assessed with the Spirituality Assessment Scale (SAS), is a broad measure of morality and inner strength. Perceptions of training environment represents participants’ ratings of their training program’s environment relevant to social justice, as measured by the Climate and Comfort subscale of the Multicultural Environmental Inventory—Revised. ⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱ p ⱕ .001.
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
dence of a relationship between moral imperative and social justice commitment (Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011) and the qualitative finding that religion/spirituality was one of many critical incidents in the development of a social justice orientation (Caldwell & Vera, 2010). Among our interview sample of high activist trainee informants, the theme of spirit emerged as a concept related to yet distinct from spirituality. Interviewees specifically emphasized inner strength, rather than a religious imperative, consistent with prior conceptual notions (Arredondo & Perez, 2003; Vera & Speight, 2003). Moreover, interviewees emphasized the importance of spirit as an energy or drive that helped them remain hopeful and positive in lieu of barriers to social justice. Thus, our qualitative findings augment the literature by adding complexity and nuance to the concept of spirituality in the counseling psychology social justice literature.
Perceptions of Training Environment Findings from the current investigation extend previous conceptual literature (e.g., Arredondo & Perez, 2003; Collison et al., 1998; Goodman et al., 2004) and empirical research (Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011; Singh et al. 2010) regarding the association between students’ perceptions of their training environment and their personal commitments to social justice. In particular, quantitative findings indicated that perceptions of training environment as supportive of social justice predicted trainees’ professional social justice commitment over and above their general activist orientation. Furthermore, although quantitative findings indicated that trainees perceived significantly less incorporation of social justice in their training than they desired, our select group of activist students expressed positive and powerful social justice training experiences. As highlighted in the personal and professional integration theme of our qualitative results, most activist interviewees reported that they entered their programs with some prior sense of commitment to social justice. Importantly, aspects of their training environment (e.g., mentors, curriculum, supportive environment) enhanced and advanced their social justice commitments. Thus, both quantitative and qualitative findings in the current research suggest that training environment can play an essential role in the development of social justice commitment, beyond preexisting personal variables. Further research is needed to understand the role of a training environment supportive of social justice for students who enter with no or minimal commitments to social justice work.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research This mixed methods investigation advances the empirical study of social justice in the field of counseling psychology, but it is not without limitations. The current study improves on previous research by surveying a national sample of trainees, across training programs, and conducting qualitative interviews with highly activist participants. It must be noted, however, that selection bias might exist among the current sample of participants who completed the survey. The recruitment e-mail distributed to potential participants clearly stated that the study focused on the topic of social justice. Thus, it is possible that those participating were biased toward interest in the topic of social justice, which may have affected the overwhelmingly supportive response in regard to
131
social justice commitment. Furthermore, the minimal variation in social justice attitudes across programs could be a function of selection bias, where students similar in social justice awareness were more likely to respond. Future research should obtain participants across a larger number of counseling training programs, as well as expand to include clinical or other related training programs, in order to obtain greater variation regarding social justice attitudes and commitments. The present sample, though similar to national statistics for clinical and counseling psychology programs (American Psychological Association, 2010), is somewhat limited with regard to particular demographic characteristics. Our survey participants consisted of 83.5% women compared to 77% nationally, and 29% of our participants self-identified as racial or ethnic minorities, compared to 31.5% nationally. Despite this similarity to national data for clinical and counseling psychology programs, future research must oversample racial minorities and white men to gain a fuller understanding of trainees’ social justice commitments. Although sample representativeness and generalizability are not considerations of qualitative research (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), we noted the unique perspective of the one Native American interview participant. Additional research on students of color would elucidate meanings of social justice for trainees who may deal with oppression on a daily basis. Last, although we sought to understand trainees who demonstrated high commitments to social justice, future research might examine counseling psychology students more broadly to learn about barriers from those trainees who do not espouse any commitment to social justice. The current investigation improved on previous research by employing current, quantitative measures, some with good psychometric support. However, this study highlights the need for improvements in quantitative measures of social justice commitments and training. The Climate and Comfort subscale was the only multi-item validated measure available to assess proposed social justice training variables. Notably, since the completion of data collection for this study, Miller and colleagues (Miller et al., 2009; Miller & Sendrowitz, 2011) have published two articles supporting initial validation of the Social Issues Questionnaire (Miller et al., 2007), which assesses social supports and barriers influencing social justice commitment. This newly identified measure is an important contribution to the extant literature and is consistent with the support and barrier themes highlighted by activist interviewees in the current investigation. Furthermore, results from the hierarchical regression models in the present research revealed that additional variance remains to be accounted for in predicting commitments to social justice. Quantitative measures must be created and validated in order to predict and evaluate the association of important training variables (i.e., a social justice curriculum, macro-level skills, opportunities for applied experience) to students’ social justice commitments. Finally, longitudinal research is needed to track and understand the various outcomes of implementing social justice training variables in counseling psychology programs.
Implications for Training Although the extant literature implies that counseling psychologists will have to take their professional responsibilities beyond the office or therapy room to engage in social justice in all aspects
BEER, SPANIERMAN, GREENE, AND TODD
132
of their lives (e.g., Helms, 2003; Vera & Speight, 2003), findings from the current research illustrate the importance of bringing counseling psychologists’ and trainees’ personal values and orientations into the professional world. In other words, results highlight the importance of supporting students’ preexisting social justice values and behaviors. Interestingly, although students’ political and spiritual values may be especially important in influencing social justice commitments, psychology disciplines traditionally have striven to be apolitical and avoidant of spirituality (Fox & Prilleltensky, 1997; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). Given the association between trainees’ general activist orientation and commitments to social justice specific to counseling psychology, the current research lends support to counseling psychology programs across the nation following the example of training programs that espouse a social justice advocacy stance. Furthermore, the current research suggests that programs may benefit from supporting and modeling elements of spirituality, such as inner drive, resiliency, and optimism, in maintaining a commitment to social justice. In addition to emphasizing the role of counseling psychology trainees’ personal values and strengths, the current research highlights the importance of trainees’ perceptions of the training environment in influencing their commitments to social justice. Although scholars emphasize the difficulties in restructuring training programs to include curriculum and opportunities consistent with social justice, what appeared most prevalent for trainees was whether they perceived that their training environment promoted and supported social justice. Thus, immediate changes in the training environment (e.g., dialogue opportunities, town hall meetings focused on social justice, publicity and encouragement toward research or volunteer work involving social justice) may be a realistic short-term goal. Finally, training programs’ actions toward recruitment, representation, and empowerment of faculty and trainees from oppressed social groups are essential components of social justice commitment. Recruitment and representation alone are necessary but insufficient actions of social justice commitment. The current research as well as previous evidence of trainees’ feelings of oppression within their own training programs (Baluch et al., 2004) illustrate the crucial role of training directors’ and faculties’ attention to the climate of the training environment relevant to social justice.
References American Psychological Association. (2010). 2010 doctoral student demographics: Clinical & counseling psychology programs [Table]. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/about/research/clinicalcounseling-table.pdf Arredondo, P., & Perez, P. (2003). Expanding multicultural competence through social justice leadership. Counseling Psychologist, 31, 282–289. doi:10.1177/0011000003031003003 Baluch, S. P., Pieterse, A. L., & Bolden, M. A. (2004). Counseling psychology and social justice: Houston . . . we have a problem. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 89 –98. doi:10.1177/0011000003260065 Beer, A. (2006, February). Social justice and counseling psychology training: Emerging themes and future directions. Poster presented at the annual Winter Roundtable Conference, Teachers College, New York, NY. Bemak, F., & Chung, R. C. (2007). Training counselors in social justice. In C. C. Lee (Ed.), Counseling for social justice (2nd ed., pp. 239 –257). Greensboro, NC: American Counseling Association.
Caldwell, J. C., & Vera, E. M. (2010). Critical incidents in counseling psychology professionals’ and trainees’ social justice orientation development. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 4, 163– 176. doi:10.1037/a0019093 Caracelli, V. J., & Greene, J. C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 195–207. Collison, B. B., Osborne, J. L., Gray, L. A., House, R. M., Firth, J., & Lou, M. (1998). Preparing counselors for social action. In C. G. Lee & G. R. Walz (Eds.), Social action: A mandate for counselors (pp. 263–277). Greensboro, NC: American Counseling Association. Corning, A. F., & Myers, D. J. (2002). Individual orientation toward engagement in social action. Political Psychology, 23, 703–729. doi: 10.1111/0162-895X.00304 Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Dickson, G. L., & Jepsen, D. A. (2007). Multicultural training experiences as predictors of multicultural competencies: Students’ perspectives. Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 76 –95. Douce, L. A. (2004). Society of Counseling Psychology, Presidential Address 2003: Globalization of counseling psychology. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 142–152. doi:10.1177/0011000003260009 Fouad, N. A., Gerstein, L. H., & Toporek, R. L. (2006). Social justice and counseling psychology in context. In R. L. Toporek, L. H. Gerstein, N. A. Fouad, G. Roysircar, & T. Israel (Eds.), Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology: Leadership, vision, and action (pp. 44 –58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fouad, N. A., McPherson, R., Gerstein, L., Blustein, D. L., Elman, N., Helledy, K. I., & Metz, A. J. (2004). Houston, 2001: Context and legacy. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 15–77. doi:10.1177/0011000003259943 Fox, D., & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds.). (1997). Critical psychology: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gill, C. S., Barrio Minton, C. A., & Myers, J. E. (2010). Spirituality and religiosity: Factors affecting wellness among low-income, rural women. Journal of Counseling & Development, 88, 293–302. Goodman, L. A., Liang, B., Helms, J. E., Latta, R. E., Sparks, E., & Weintraub, S. R. (2004). Training counseling psychologists as social justice agents: Feminist and multicultural principles in action. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 793– 837. doi:10.1177/0011000004268802 Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (Eds.). (1997). Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V., & Graham, W. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255–274. Hanson, W. E., Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. P., Petska, K. S., & Creswell, J. D. (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 224 –235. doi:10.1037/00220167.52.2.224 Helms, J. E. (2003). A pragmatic view of social justice. Counseling Psychologist, 31, 305–313. doi:10.1177/0011000003031003006 Howden, J. W. (1993). Development and psychometric characteristics of the Spirituality Assessment Scale (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas Women’s University. Hurtado, S., Engberg, M. E., Ponjuan, L., & Landreman, L. (2002). Students’ precollege preparation for participation in a diverse democracy. Research in Higher Education, 43, 163–186. doi:10.1023/A: 1014467607253 Kahn, J. H. (2011). Multilevel modeling: Overview and applications to research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 257–271. doi:10.1037/a0022680 Kiselica, M. S., & Robinson, M. (2001). Bringing advocacy counseling to
TRAINEES’ COMMITMENTS TO SOCIAL JUSTICE life: The history, issues, and human dramas of social justice work in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79, 387–397. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. McWhirter, B. T., & McWhirter, E. H. (2007). Toward an emancipatory communitarian approach to the practice of psychology training. In E. Aldarondo (Ed.), Advancing social justice through clinical practice (pp. 391– 416). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Miller, M. J., & Sendrowitz, K. (2011). Counseling psychology trainees’ social justice interest and commitment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 159 –169. doi:10.1037/a0022663 Miller, M. J., Sendrowitz, K., Connacher, C., Blanco, S., Mun˜iz de la Pen˜a, C., Bernardi, S., & Morere, L. (2007). Development of the SIQ. Unpublished manuscript. Miller, M. J., Sendrowitz, K., Connacher, C., Blanco, S., Mun˜iz de la Pen˜a, C., Bernardi, S., & Morere, L. (2009). College students’ social justice interest and commitment: A social cognitive approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 495–507. doi:10.1037/a0017220 Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 250 – 260. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.250 Nilsson, J. E., Marszalek, J., Linnemeyer, R., Bahner, A., & Hansen, L. (2009). Development and assessment of the Social Issues Advocacy Scale (SIAS). Unpublished manuscript. Nilsson, J. E., Marszalek, J., Linnemeyer, R., Bahner, A., & Misialek, L. H. (2011). Development and assessment of the Social Issues Advocacy Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 258 –275. doi: 10.1177/0013164410391581 Nilsson, J. E., & Schmidt, C. K. (2005). Social justice advocacy among graduate students in counseling: An initial exploration. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 267–279. doi:10.1353/csd.2005.0030 Palmer, L. K. (2004). The call to social justice: A multidiscipline agenda. Counseling Psychologist, 32, 879–885. doi:10.1177/0011000004269278 Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pieterse, A. L., Evans, S. A., Risner-Butner, A., Collins, N. M., & Mason, L. B. (2009). Multicultural and social justice training in counseling psychology and counselor education: A review and analysis of a sample of course syllabi. Counseling Psychologist, 37, 93–115. doi:10.1177/ 0011000008319986 Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 126 –136. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.126
133
Pope-Davis, D. B., Liu, W. M., Nevitt, J., & Toporek, R. L. (2000). The development and initial validation of the Multicultural Environmental Inventory: A preliminary investigation. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 6, 57– 64. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.6.1.57 Prilleltensky, I., & Nelson, G. (2002). Doing psychology critically: Making a difference in diverse settings. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Singh, A. A., Hofsess, C. D., Boyer, E. M., Kwong, A., Lau, A. S. M., McLain, M., & Haggins, K. L. (2010). Social justice and counseling psychology: Listening to the voices of doctoral trainees. Counseling Psychologist, 38, 766 –795. doi:10.1177/0011000010362559 Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to methods (pp. 51– 80). London, England: Sage. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Talleyrand, R. M., Chung, R. C., & Bemak, F. (2005). Incorporating social justice in counselor training programs: A case study example. In R. L. Toporek, L. H. Gerstein, N. A. Fouad, G. Roysircar, & T. Israel (Eds.), Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology: Leadership, vision, and action (pp. 44 –58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press. Toporek, R., Gerstein, L., Fouad, N., Roysircar, G., & Israel, T. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology: Leadership, vision, and action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Toporek, R. L., Liu, W. M., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2003). Evaluating the multicultural training and educational environment: Updating the psychometric properties of the Multicultural Environment Inventory— Revised (MEI–R). In D. B. Pope-Davis, H. L. K. Coleman, W. M. Liu, & R. L. Toporek (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural competence for counseling and psychology (pp. 183–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Vera, E. M., & Speight, S. L. (2003). Multicultural competence, social justice, and counseling psychology: Expanding our roles. Counseling Psychologist, 31, 253–272. doi:10.1177/0011000003031003001 Wertz, F. J. (2005). Phenomenological research methods for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 167–177. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.167
Received July 6, 2011 Revision received October 13, 2011 Accepted October 14, 2011 䡲
E-Mail Notification of Your Latest Issue Online! Would you like to know when the next issue of your favorite APA journal will be available online? This service is now available to you. Sign up at http://notify.apa.org/ and you will be notified by e-mail when issues of interest to you become available!
