In this article, a diverse group of early, mid, and advanced career scholars call for counseling psychology to continue to evolve in our integration of social justice action in our field. In doing so, we first consider our history as proponents and enactors of social justice, highlighting the ways in which counseling psychologists have served as social justice leaders in psychology. We then discuss our field’s contemporary challenges to, and opportunities for, social justice progress as we work toward equity and justice. Finally, we offer recommendations for counseling psychologists individually and as a field to move forward in our social justice action. Given our longstanding social justice values and our unique training as counseling psychologists, if we aim with intentionality to use our skills toward systems change, counseling psychologists are poised to have a strong and proactive role as social change agents within psychology and society at large.

Nationwide, the student debt crisis has been worsening, exacerbated by gradual changes to higher education funding since the 1980s. Recent studies (e.g., Kurz, Li, & Vine, 2018) have demonstrated that Millennials are the most educated, most student loan-indebted, and poorest (in income and wealth) generation to date. Doran, Kraha, Marks, Ameen, and El-Ghoroury (2016) similarly demonstrated that student loan debt in graduate psychology is substantial. However, Doran and colleagues' results diverged from the extant literature in observing no between-groups demographic differences in borrowing. Thus, first, the present study sought to provide an updated view of student loan debt in graduate psychology education, and to examine changes in student loan borrowing over time. Second, we sought to expand understanding from a focus solely on cumulative debt to include financial stressors. Finally, we sought to address the discrepancies between Doran and colleagues' study and the extant literature by examining whether psychology trainees and professionals from marginalized backgrounds are disproportionately affected by student loan debt and financial stressors. Consistent with most extant literature and contrary to Doran and colleagues, Black/African American participants and participants with lower socioeconomic status reported borrowing more, though no differences were observed by sex. Participants with lower socioeconomic status, as well as students and early career psychologists (those who received their doctorates within the last 10 years), also reported greater financial distress, and greater impacts on their personal and professional lives. Finally, student loan borrowing was shown to increase over time, even adjusting for inflation. Results and implications will be discussed.

This study was a social dominance theory-driven multimethod investigation of multicultural competence. Given the concerns with self-report, we examined the relationship between study variables and both self-report and performance-based multicultural competence. We also tested competing hypotheses regarding the relationship between the multicultural competence measures. We examined two samples: one of counselor trainees ( N = 93), and one of practicing therapists ( N = 107). The overwhelming performance floor effect in the context of self-report ceiling effects was striking and unexpected in its severity. Awareness of privilege was the most consistent predictor, and the only variable related to most multicultural competence measures. Results related to social dominance orientation, just-world beliefs, and empathy differed by sample. A key finding was the failure by a substantial proportion of participants in both samples to even minimally address clients’ sociocultural context. Thus, we focus our discussion on the implications of this result.

When Tervalon and Murray-Garcia (1998), both renowned physicians, educators and activists (e.g., melanietervalon.com), first introduced the term, cultural humility, into the literature approximately 25 years ago (Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998), they may well not have realised how impactful and far reaching their new concept would become. What was then new has now become a vital and integral part of a general ethic and culture of care (Foronda, 2020;Hook et al., 2017), increasingly recognised by, and practice affecting, across a host of varied professions and disciplines, including medicine, nursing, the allied health professions, business/management and religion/spirituality (Davis et al., 2020). That effect has been equally and powerfully felt in the areas of psychotherapy and clinical supervision as well.Cultural humility has emerged as part of the broader study of humility, which has seemingly exploded across this past decade (e.g., Worthington & Allison, 2018). Although a host of possible forms of humility have been proposed, three have been most consistently identified and researched: relational, intellectual, and cultural.