Over the past decade, the surging cultural diversity in the composition of the US population has heightened the importance for school psychologists to provide culturally responsive services to students from racial or ethnic minority backgrounds. These shifting demographics are reflected in the current statistics for the US population growth, with one-half of children under 18 years old identifying as students from racial or ethnic minority backgrounds in 2020 (Malone and Ishmail 2020). Although the field of school psychology has pushed towards multiculturally responsive practice via knowledge of biases, self-reflection, and professional skill development to promote more equitable student and school outcomes, gaps in outcomes between individuals from majority and minority backgrounds persist (Johnson et al. 2019). Without a corresponding increase in multicultural competencies in school psychologists serving these populations, leaders in the field warn against the dangers of inaccurately diagnosing, treating, or assuming students’ challenges or strengths based on cultural misunderstanding (Davies et al. 2015; Vega et al. 2015).

Multicultural Competence of School Mental Health Providers

Given the demographic shifts that are apparent in the educational system, school psychologists are posed with the important task of providing culturally appropriate services to an increasingly diverse student population. With rising school enrollments and an increasingly diverse school population, the demand for well-trained, culturally responsive school psychologists is critical. The heightened need for school psychologists to engage in culturally responsive practices when working with diverse populations has encouraged closer study on the historic models of multicultural training and measurement of multicultural competence in graduate trainees (Malone et al. 2016; Newell et al. 2010; Sue et al. 1992; Tao et al. 2015).

Multicultural competencies in school psychology emphasize the role of cultural identity on psychosocial adjustment, encouraging school psychologists to provide assessment, counseling, and consultation services that effectively blend culturally based skills and awareness (Jones 2009). Sue et al. (1982) introduced the tripartite model of multicultural competence in counseling psychology, consisting of three essential domains of professional standards for providing culturally competent services. The first domain is awareness, which emphasizes increasing the psychologist’s self-awareness of their own worldview and behavior as products of their culture. This domain includes identification of how their own culture impacts their work with individuals from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds. The second domain, knowledge, describes the psychologist’s duty to acquire knowledge about an individual’s culture and integrate cultural variables as a critical element for appropriate assessment and treatment. The third domain of the tripartite model addresses the clinician’s skills to deliver culturally responsive intervention techniques that are adapted to the specific needs of students and staff from different cultures. The research literature on the conceptualization of multicultural competence has expanded beyond its original focus on racial and ethnic minority identities to include dimensions such as age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and ability (Hays 2008).

School psychologists engage multicultural competencies through awareness of the unique resilience and risks that threaten the well-being of ethnic minority students, increasing the likelihood appropriate intervention strategies to strengthen well-being and address challenges. Further, US born ethnic minority students also face unique emotional challenges associated with experiences with discrimination and inequity in the educational system (Jones et al. 2018). If school psychologists are unable to adapt their awareness, knowledge, and skills to meet the needs of racial and ethnic minority students in the context of their unique cultural backgrounds, school will be less likely to offer culturally appropriate interventions to the students in the schools.

Multicultural competencies are imperative as they provide psychologists the appropriate context to evaluate the client’s presenting challenges and deliver tailored and equitable services (Chu 2007; Gonzalez-Prendes et al. 2011; Gonzalez-Prendes and Thomas 2009; Hwang 2009; Wood et al. 2008). From an ecological perspective, a student’s culture comprises numerous factors (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, etc.) that influence the student’s interaction with the school and community, shaping belief systems and behaviors (Bronfenbrenner 1979; APA 2017). Within the assessment and intervention contexts, knowing how a student’s culture affects their experience of everyday life helps school psychologists understand the underlying forces that drive academic or socioemotional development. In order to understand a student’s experiences with racism, school psychologists must be knowledgeable about the historical and sociopolitical factors associated with social and educational capital. Failure to acknowledge and attend to the students’ cultural background increases the risk of omitting salient information or erroneous interpretation of the roots and developmental course of a student’s difficulties.

Multicultural Competence in Graduate Training

Professional organizations in school psychology have recognized the critical importance to equip professionals with essential cross-cultural skillsets as part of their graduate training. In particular, both the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) and American Psychological Association (APA) have dedicated efforts to the development of standards and guidelines on adopting multicultural competency in training curriculum and professional practices of psychologists (APA 2002, 2017; NASP 2009). Historically, school psychology has sought to increase capacities to understand and identify cultural differences in presentation and intervention. The development of guidelines and standards by the professional organizations compelled graduate training programs to change their practices and operationalize the ways in which trainees are developing multicultural competence.

Effective implementation of multicultural competency training in school psychology graduate programs continues to be challenging (Lopez and Bursztyn 2013). Some programs have responded to accreditation requirements by adding a separate (or “stand alone”) course that focuses on multiculturalism. Other programs have applied an integration model (LaFromboise and Foster 1992) of multicultural training where content is infused in each course throughout the curriculum. Some school psychology programs have developed specialties or areas of concentration (Duren Green et al. 2009) that focus on multicultural competency in a specific domain of practice such as assessment, consultation, or intervention. Ultimately, research has shown that among the implementation models of multicultural training, the best evidence supports an integration-separate course model of multicultural training (Newell et al. 2010; Rogers 2006). This approach includes integrating multicultural competency training throughout the curriculum and offering a separate course on multicultural competence where there is a concentrated focus on multiculturalism. This study was completed within a program that adopted the integration-separate course model of multicultural training.

Assessing Multicultural Competency

One of the most common approaches for delivering multicultural competency training is through the use of the single-course model. Most school and counseling psychology programs offer at least one multicultural competency course to students as a core requirement (Constantine et al. 1996; Rogers et al. 1998). When assessing the effects of multicultural competency courses, previous research studies have extensively used self-report questionnaires to measure the effects of multicultural competency training on trainees’ perceptions of multicultural competency (Malone et al. 2016; Malott 2010; Ponterotto et al. 1994).

Several self-report multicultural competency measures have been used for studies on assessment of multicultural competency training in school psychology programs. A sampling of these measures includes the Cross-Cultural Counseling Inventory-Revised (CCCI-R; LaFromboise et al. 1991), Multicultural Awareness Knowledge Skills Survey (MAKSS; D’Andrea et al. 1991), Multicultural Counseling Inventory (MCI; Sodowsky et al. 1994), Multicultural School Psychology Counseling Competency Scale (MSPCCS; Rogers and Ponterotto 1997), Multicultural Counseling Knowledge and Awareness Scale (MCKAS; Ponterotto et al. 2002), and the School Psychology Multicultural Competence Scale (SPMCS) (Malone et al. 2016). These self-report measures share the theoretical foundation of multicultural counseling competency established by Sue et al. (1982), and they all include measurement of awareness, knowledge, and skills.

Reliability and Validity of Self-Report Measures

To assess the validity and reliability of self-reported measures in estimating graduate students’ level of multicultural competency, some research literature has reviewed their psychometric properties with mixed to positive results (Ponterotto et al. 1994; Pope-Davis and Dings 1995). Some studies specifically demonstrated that individuals with more professional experience working with culturally diverse populations exhibited higher levels of self-assessed multicultural competency. Additionally, some studies showed an increase in scores on self-report multicultural competency measures after participation in multicultural competency training. Previous studies suggested moderate relationships between increases in self-perceived multicultural competency and positive outcomes of other relevant cultural variables, including White privilege attitudes (Mindrup et al. 2011), racial identity (Neville et al. 1996; Ottavi et al. 1994), color-blind racial attitudes (Johnson and Williams 2015), and clinical prejudice (Katz and Hoyt 2014).

On the other hand, the critique of self-report multicultural competency measures mostly targets the effectiveness of measures to accurately reflect an individual’s demonstrated competence rather than perceived competence, which may be attributed to an individual’s tendency to respond in a socially desirable fashion (Constantine et al. 2002). In addition, the discrepancy in factor structure and content among self-report measures has raised concerns and calls for reconceptualizing the complex theoretical construct of multicultural competency (Constantine et al. 2002; Kitaoka 2005).

Despite the limitations, self-report measures of multicultural competency can be a cost-effective and direct tool to gain insights into an individual’s belief in their ability to engage culturally responsive practices with students from diverse backgrounds. For example, self-reported multicultural counseling competency has been linked to multicultural counseling self-efficacy, including school psychologists’ confidence in their ability to engage in responsive interventions with students from different cultural backgrounds than their own (Barden and Greene 2015). Previous research has described preparing students’ self-efficacy in counseling as a primary goal in training programs since it has shown to be a precursor for engaging in demanding clinical practices (Barden and Greene 2015). Overall, self-assessment of multicultural competencies provides valuable but limited information about the effects of multicultural training.

Present Study

The primary purpose of the current study is to evaluate the effects of a standalone course as a foundation for preparing school psychologists to be culturally responsive practitioners. The current study has two aims: to determine whether the duration of the standalone course in the current study was sufficient (10 weeks vs 16 weeks as in other studies) to demonstrate a significant change in cultural competency development in school psychology trainees. Second, we aim to determine whether cohort effects were present based on the demographic composition of trainees in the cohort.

Method

Setting

Previous research literature has delineated components that may serve as guidelines for graduate programs in structuring their training model in multicultural competency for psychologists (Ponterotto et al. 1995; Rogers 2006). Studies have attested to the vital impact of offering student’s exposure to diverse cultural values, eliciting students’ self-examination of assumptions and biases, and providing clinical opportunities to work with diverse populations (Constantine et al. 1996; Holcomb-McCoy and Myers 1999; Jones et al. 2013; Newell et al. 2010; Rogers et al. 1992). In many programs, it was common for trainees to feel ill-prepared for applying what they learned in multicultural courses into long-term professional practice when their training program did not adequately design their training environment for enhancing students’ multicultural competency.

The training environment for this study included a program that applied the integration-separate course model of multicultural training where the separate course was the foundation for the integration of cultural content throughout the remaining years of the program. Additional multicultural training was integrated through advanced courses, practicum, and research milestones focusing on evidence-based approaches for assessing, developing, and adapting interventions to better meet the needs of students from diverse gender, sexuality, (dis)ability, linguistic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. The broader graduate program chronology focused on theoretical foundations in the first year; practicum, clinical skills, and professional competency development in the second year; and a precertification internship in the third year. The standalone multicultural course occurred during the spring quarter of the first year of the training program.

Participants

Participants included five independent samples across 5 years of training—a total of 51 graduate students who were enrolled in a 10-week course on multicultural issues in school psychology. The multicultural issues course was required for all first year specialist- and doctoral-level students in the school psychology program. Table 1 shows the demographic makeup of the participants across the five cohorts. To increase anonymity of the participants, the cohort characteristics are described in percentages rather than by individual numbers.

Table 1 Percent of cohort members by gender and diversity indicators
Full size table

Measure

An adapted version of the Self-Assessment of Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, and Skill (SAMAKS; Pederson 2004) was used to evaluate the status of their multicultural competencies. This measure was selected for its alignment with the tripartite model of multicultural training (Sue et al. 1992), the inclusion of “skills” items that were differentiated from Knowledge items (as compared to MCKAS), and the reduced focus on counseling. This version of the SAMAKS was adapted from having both open- and closed-ended questions to indicating “how well” a person is familiar with or able to apply a particular construct. Thus, the adapted measure allowed for quantitative analysis and responses that produced continuous scores.

The SAMAKS measure is an 80-item self-report survey, and each item is scored on a Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very well), with higher scores indicative of greater level of self-assessed competency. The SAMAKS has three subscales that align with the tripartite model: Awareness, Knowledge, and Skills. The Awareness scale has 19 items which assess the capability to perceive one’s own cultural worldviews and biases, as well as understanding of how self-attitudes affect therapeutic interaction with students from diverse cultures (e.g., “How well do you know how your culturally different clients feel about your natural communication style?”). Twenty-seven Knowledge items assessed the breadth of knowledge about the culture of their students and the ability to analyze the student’s experiences and concerns in relation to their sociopolitical and historical contexts (e.g., “How well can you intelligently discuss sociopolitical issues that influence the quality of life of your clients?”). The Skills scale included 34 items that assessed the quality of effort on incorporating culturally responsive principles into assessment and counseling practices (e.g., How well do you incorporate information about your client’s indigenous family structure into your counseling interviews?”).

For the entire sample, each scale revealed high Cronbach’s Alpha levels both at before and after the class: (1) Awareness scale on week 1 (α = .87; week 10, α = .87), (2) Knowledge scale (week 1, α = .92; week 10, α = .93), and (3) Skill week 1, α = .97; week 10, α = .96) suggested adequate reliability for subsequent analyses.

To determine the demographic composition of the cohorts, two optional questions were asked at the end of the second survey. For the first item, students were asked to select a box identifying their gender (female, male, or nonbinary). The second item asked students to indicate whether they identify as a member of a cultural or linguistically diverse community (yes/no). Both items were optional so that each student could choose to leave either item blank. Since each cohort was small, the demographic items were intentionally broad to eliminate our ability to identify subgroups of diverse populations (e.g., race).

Procedures

“Multicultural Issues in School Psychology” was a required course offered in the spring quarter of the first year in the training program. Course and performance outcomes focused on Sue et al.’s (1982) three domains of multicultural competence, including increasing awareness of one’s culture on attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors; increasing knowledge of ethical standards and differences related to ethnicity, cultural background, gender, and sexual orientation; increasing familiarity with practice standards related to multicultural service delivery designed by APA and NASP; and developing sensitivity to ethnic minority issues impacting diagnostic impression and clinical interventions. The instructor designed a series of activities throughout the quarter for students to engage in intensive learning experiences in each of the three domains. The same instructor, a school psychologist from an ethnic minority background, taught the course over the 5 years.

During the self-awareness phase of the course, students focused on their own sociocultural histories and learned about concepts such as implicit bias, microaggressions, ethnic identity development, oppression, and colorblind racism. Through journal entries and experiential activities, students were guided into new perspectives by uncovering their own blind spots regarding other identities. During the cultural literacy phase of the course, students worked together in small groups to learn about one of eight diverse cultural groups. Through small group projects and presentations, students learned the history of oppression between and among racially diverse populations; they identified traditional cultural norms, the strengths and coping styles of the population, and important considerations for building relationships across cultures. During the final phase of the course, students learned about how to apply their cultural knowledge to school psychology practices in schools. Throughout the course, students were engaged in activities that invoked emotional processing along with the intellectual engagement with the material. Course content was delivered through lectures, experiential activities, class discussions, cross-cultural experiences, personal reflection journals, cultural literacy presentations, and population-specific papers. Although course content was supplemented to meet the training needs of each cohort, the course objectives and requirements remained consistent throughout the duration of this study. The students in the course met once a week for 2 h and 20 min for 10 weeks.

The SAMAKS survey was administered online during the first class meeting (pretest). Students were asked to complete an online survey that invited students to self-evaluate the current status of their multicultural competency. Survey ID numbers were written on the top corner of printed copies of the course syllabus and placed on a table in the center of the room for students to pick up a copy. This resulted in survey ID numbers being randomly assigned to students and allowing responses to be completed anonymously. The students were informed that their answers would not be used for individual evaluations, bear on their class performance or progress in the program, nor serve as identifiable units of analysis (i.e., group differences rather than individual student differences would be explored). Students were informed that the intent of the survey was similar to a course evaluation—one that could be used to determine areas that need to be adapted and strengthened in the course each year. The instructor communicated that the goal of the first day anonymous survey was to provide information on student’s baseline multicultural competencies before engaging in course content. During the last class meeting (posttest), the students were then asked to enter their assigned survey ID number again and self-assess their level of multicultural competency after completion of the course.

Data Analyses

Before investigating the effect of the multicultural course on students’ self-assessed level of multicultural competency, we explored the reliability of the three scales at the beginning of the class and at the end of the class. Combining all students across the five cohorts, we tested the course effect on students’ self-assessed level of multicultural competency with a mixed between-within participants analysis of variance (ANOVA). Specifically, using data from the five cohorts (n = 62), we examined within-participant effects by comparing the pretest and posttest results on all three subscales of multicultural competency and between-subjects effect of cohort status. Further, we tested for an interaction effect that could identify differences between cohorts over time.

Results

A mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance (ANOVA) was completed to explore the changes in multicultural competency over time and across the five cohorts. Table 2 provides the descriptive statistics across the five cohorts on the three primary variables over time. On the multicultural Awareness domain, there was no significant interaction between cohorts and time, Wilks’ Lambda = .90, F (4, 57) = 1.65, p = .18. There was a substantial main effect for time, Wilks Lambda = .40, F (1, 57) = 84.46, p < .001, partial eta squared = .60, with all five cohorts showing an increase in multicultural awareness at the end of the course. Table 3 shows the effects on each of the multicultural domains. As shown in Fig. 1, post hoc analysis of the change in means by cohort shows that cohort 1 showed the greatest increase from pre to post with a 38% increase in multicultural awareness. Cohort 2 showed a 24% increase in awareness mean score, and cohort 5 showed a 30% increase in awareness score. Cohorts 3 and cohort 4 demonstrated more modest increases at 22% and 15%, respectively. According to a paired samples t test sorted by cohort, all changes in scores were statistically significant. The main effect comparing the five cohorts to one another was not significant, F (4, 57) = 1.75, p = .15, partial eta squared =. 11, suggesting that no differences were apparent between groups and that awareness scores increased over time regardless of the cohort.

Table 2 Pre- and post-multicultural awareness scores across cohorts
Full size table
Table 3 Mixed ANOVA table for awareness, knowledge, and skills
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

Percent increase in self-assessed multicultural competency by cohort. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, ****p < .0001

Full size image

On the multicultural Knowledge domain, there was a substantial main effect for time, Wilks’ Lambda = .26, F (1, 57) = 160.76, p < .001, partial eta squared = .74, with all five cohorts showing an increase in multicultural knowledge at the end of the course. However, there was no significant interaction between cohort and time, Wilks’ Lambda = .98, F (4, 57) = .37, p = .83. Table 2 provides the mean and standard deviation values for the knowledge domain by cohort. As shown in Fig. 1, post hoc analyses of the change in means reveal that both cohorts 1 and 2 showed the greatest increase in knowledge (48%), while cohorts 3 through 5 showed percentage increases of 41%, 46.5%, and 41%, respectively, on the knowledge domain. All change values were statistically significant. The main effect comparing the five cohorts to one another was also significant, F (4, 57) = 4.62, p < .01, partial eta squared =. 25, indicating there was a large effect with differences between groups such that knowledge scores increased more over time depending upon the cohort. As shown in Fig. 2, post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that cohort 3’s mean score at the end of the course was significantly higher than cohort 2 (p < .001). No other cohort score post hoc comparisons were statistically significant.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Cultural knowledge score changes from week 1 to week 10

Full size image

On the domain of multicultural Skills, there was no significant interaction between cohorts and time, Wilks’ Lambda = .95, F (4, 57) = .78, p = .54. There was, however, a substantial main effect for time, Wilks’ Lambda = .34, F (1, 47) = 108.97, p < .001, partial eta squared = .66, with all five cohorts showing an increase in multicultural skills at the end of the course. The mixed ANOVA results for the multicultural skills domain can be found in Table 3. As shown in Fig. 1, cohorts 1 and 4 had very large increases in mean scores where cohort 1 increased by 61% and cohort 4 increased by 65%. Cohort 2 showed similar growth with an increase in skills score by 59% after 10 weeks in the course. Cohort 3 had the smallest but still significant increase in skills score of 29%. All change values were statistically significant. The main effect comparing the five cohorts to one another was also significant, F (4, 57) = 4.14, p < .01, partial eta squared =. 23, indicating there was a large effect for differences between groups such that skills scores increased more over time depending upon the cohort. Figure 3 provides a chart of the growth in skill by cohort. Post hoc between-group comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that cohort 3’s mean score at the end of the course was significantly lower than cohort 2 (p < .01) and 4 (p < .05).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Cultural skill score changes from week 1 to week 10

Full size image

Discussion

The current study used a pretest-posttest design to investigate the effects of a 10-week standalone multicultural issues course in school psychology to improve students’ self-assessed multicultural competency. Reliability analyses suggested that the self-assessment tool, Self-Assessment of Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, and Skill (SAMAKS; Pederson 2004) demonstrated good internal consistency within each of the three subscales during pretest and posttest. When analyzing pretest-posttest differences on each domain, the current findings showed that trainees displayed an increase in self-assessed multicultural competency on all three subscales with large effect sizes at the completion of the course. This result suggested that students perceived their ability to work competently with culturally diverse students and staff can be significantly improved, even within a relatively brief time period (Malott 2010).

The multicultural course in this study was offered during the first year of a school psychology graduate program as part of the “foundations” series of coursework. The standalone course was designed to provide a deep dive into issues of diversity with 3 weeks addressing self-awareness, 5 weeks on increasing cultural literacy and learning about different populations of people, and 2 weeks on culturally responsive assessment and counseling. This initial exposure encouraged foundational knowledge in culturally responsive practice before students began their practicum and intervention training. The survey ratings indicate not only a student’s perceptions of competence but also their confidence in working with diverse student populations in the future. The results suggested that students perceived themselves as having greater abilities to consider individual differences in their work with youth in schools.

Development of Cultural Awareness

Unexpected patterns were apparent when comparing the growth of cohorts on each of the domains. Cohorts 3 and 4 included the greatest proportion of culturally and linguistically diverse trainees, and both of these groups showed the smallest proportional growth in cultural awareness. These results suggest that students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds have a keen awareness of their racial and ethnic differences and lived experiences that include coping with race-based micro- or macro-aggressions from others who do not share their same identity. As a result, it seems that the cohorts with more diverse students may have been affected by the student’s pretest level of multicultural competence, which remained somewhat steady throughout the quarter. The cohort with the least diversity among trainees showed the largest increase in cultural awareness.

Development of Cultural Knowledge

In terms of cultural knowledge, growth in knowledge was relatively consistent across the five cohorts of trainees. Percentage increases in growth ranged from 48 to 40%, appearing to be consistent regardless of the diversity of the trainees within the cohort. Students regularly reported that the opportunity to learn about the histories of other groups was novel. They indicated that the activities within the class provided structure, guidance, information, and ideas for connecting with populations outside of their familiar social circles. Activities that included making contact and building a relationship with a person that is culturally different proved to be one that facilitated growth consistently across cohorts.

Development of Cultural Skills

For four out of five cohorts, the greatest percentage increase in competency scores was on the skill domain. Increases ranged from 52 to 65% for those four groups. The only cohort that did not show such a high percentage increase was cohort 3, the cohort that included 73% percent of culturally diverse trainees. Students who identify as culturally diverse are often the minority in most of their professional, educational, and social spaces. Therefore, they must practice using cross-cultural skills every day. Despite the smaller percent increase for the diverse group, the change in score was still statistically significant.

As recommended by Jones et al. (2013), the course instructor incorporated a variety of approaches to engage trainees in the multicultural content (e.g., videos, creative group activities, experiential assignments). The broader graduate program’s integration-separate course model of multicultural training included both the standalone course described in this study and embedded cultural content throughout the duration of the program. Although conclusions about the effects of integration-separate course models in comparison to other training models cannot be drawn from methodologies used in this study, the current results suggest that the standalone course format is viable for teaching multicultural issues effectively within a school psychology graduate program.

Limitations and Future Directions

Several key limitations on the study should be noted for the interpretation of the study results. First, the measurement of change with a small sample size (n = 62) divided into five cohorts limited generalizability of the findings. To preserve anonymity, interactions with the racial/ethnic minority identity were not able to be studied in this design. Similarly, academic instruction was standardized as much as possible, but variations between years were likely. The design of this study assumed that each cohort was, at minimum, exposed to the same curriculum and activities each year. Having the same instructor for the course all 5 years decreased some of the variability with the course content, but there were likely differences based on current events and emerging research.

Another limitation of the study was the lack of a comparison group to control for influences from extraneous variables. Future studies with control groups and greater representation of minority and non-minority students may provide insight for ruling out alternative explanations for changes in self-assessed levels of multicultural competency, such as maturation or development typical for graduate programs. This comparison group could be comprised of students newly enrolled in the program or even students farther along in the program to test for differences based on exposure to the integration of multicultural competency in training during years 2–5 of the program.

Lastly, the study’s reliance on quantitative, self-report measures of multicultural competency may be inadequate for measuring actual changes in assessment or intervention practices with culturally diverse students. Social desirability is the greatest concern when reporting self-assessment results. This is also magnified by the fact that the trainees were enrolled in a course for their career development. Even though the survey was anonymous, trainees may have been motivated to respond more positively to the instructor of the course, rather than as a true indicator of their abilities.

This course was embedded in a year focusing on theoretical foundations. As clinical skill development is emphasized in the second year of the program, students in this first-year course were exposed to multicultural competency frameworks and professional dispositions more so than actively engaging in multicultural skill development. As such, while the self-report methodology used in this study may be impacted by the aforementioned shortcomings of social desirability bias, it nevertheless lends insight into the extent to which students believe they have acquired multicultural competencies before engaging in practicum and field experiences in subsequent years of the program. In future studies, direct observations of behavior and supervisor ratings of trainee competence may be helpful in determining the impact of multicultural training.

The current study adopted an anonymous survey format in order to encourage candid reflections of perceived changes in multicultural competencies. In multicultural courses focusing on both theoretical and clinical skill development, a mixed method approach including qualitative interview and behavioral observations (Constantine et al. 2002; Malott 2010; Tomlinson-Clarke 2000) may also be used to elicit school psychologists’ perspectives on the ways in which different components of the course interact with the domains of multicultural competency. Some authors critique multicultural competency frameworks, suggesting a hyperfocus on differences between racial groups and upward, linear development towards a fabled “multiculturally competent” status (Kirmayer 2012). Newly emerging cultural humility frameworks reframe key concepts in multicultural competence with additional emphases on power, privilege, and social justice (Fisher 2020). Future studies may wish to integrate cultural humility frameworks in the design, delivery, and assessment of multicultural skill development. The results of this study suggested that, after a 10-week course, trainees felt more equipped to work with clients from diverse backgrounds. Future related projects will focus on the long-term effects of the course and assessing growth trajectories of trainees in the program. The expanded approach to this research will provide further support for the integration-separate course model of multicultural training as identified in Newell et al. (2010).