Establishing the Validity of the Affirmative Training Inventory: Assessing the Relationship between Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Affirmative Training and Students’ Clinical Competence

Abstract

This study established the validity and factor structure of the Affirmative Training Inventory (ATI; T. S. Carlson, C. R. McGeorge & M. Rock, unpublished) as a measure of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) affirmative clinical training. Additionally, this study examined the latent associations among the subscales of the ATI and the Sexual Orientation Counselor Competency Scale (Bidell, 2005) utilizing a sample of 248 master’s and doctoral couple and family therapy students. The findings from this study provide empirical support for the relationship between specific classroom‐related content associated with LGB affirmative therapy and students’ perceptions of their own ability to work competently with LGB clients. This study also found a positive association between the degree to which couple and family therapy programs adopt a LGB‐affirmative stance and students’ beliefs, knowledge, and skills associated with competent therapy with LGB clients.

Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Supervisees’ Experiences of LGB-Affirmative and Non-Affirmative Supervision in COAMFTE-Accredited Training Programs

“…A review of the literature indicates that: (a) supervision is often considered one of the most important mediums through which therapy is taught to trainees; (b) LGB issues are not adequately being addressed within supervision; and, (c) there is a dearth of empirical studies that assess the extent to which marriage and family therapy (MFT) faculty and supervisors are attending to LGB issues within clinical training and supervision (Carlson et al, 2012;Rock et al, 2010), and specifically to the ways in which these issues relate to the experiences of LGB supervisees (e.g., Charlés, Thomas, & Thornton, 2005; Hernandez & Rankin, 2008;Long & Serovich, 2003).…”

“…Unfortunately, there are few empirical studies that specifically address the experience of LGB supervisees (Burkard et al, 2009). The few that do exist, however, highlight the importance of creatingLGB-affirming environments for LGB supervisees (e.g., Burkard et al, 2009;Lark & Croteau, 1998) and for supervisees working with LGB clients (e.g., Aducci & Baptist, 2011;Bahr, Brish, & Croteau, 2000;Carlson, McGeorge, & Toomey, 2012;Long, 2002;Rock, Carlson, & McGeorge, 2010).Researchers have noted the importance of providing safety and LGB-affirmative environments for LGB trainees and supervisees (e.g., Burkard et al, 2009;Lark & Croteau, 1998). For example, Lark and Croteau's (1998) study of 14 self-identified LGB doctoral students' mentoring relationship with faculty found that when students felt affirmed and safe in their LGB identities within the training environment, they were able to fully engage in their training.…”

“…For example, Clark and Serovich (1997) While the accrediting bodies of the major mental health professions have called for the infusion of LGB issues into their curricula (Long & Serovich, 2003), there is a paucity of research about how well graduate programs are integrating LGB issues into their training and supervision. The research that does exist raises question about the effectiveness of training programs to incorporate more LGB issues in their curricula (Allison et al, 1994;Bepko & Johnson, 2000;Buhrke, 1989;Carlson et al, 2012;Glenn & Russell, 1986; Graham et al, 1984;Mackelprang, Ray, & Hernandez-Peck, 1996;Morrow, 1996; Murphy, 1991;Murphy et al, 2002;Phillips & Fischer, 1998;Rock et al, 2010; Whittman, 1995).…”

“…For example, Clark and Serovich (1997) While the accrediting bodies of the major mental health professions have called for the infusion of LGB issues into their curricula (Long & Serovich, 2003), there is a paucity of research about how well graduate programs are integrating LGB issues into their training and supervision. The research that does exist raises question about the effectiveness of training programs to incorporate more LGB issues in their curricula (Allison et al, 1994;Bepko & Johnson, 2000;Buhrke, 1989;Carlson et al, 2012;Glenn & Russell, 1986; Graham et al, 1984;Mackelprang, Ray, & Hernandez-Peck, 1996;Morrow, 1996; Murphy, 1991;Murphy et al, 2002;Phillips & Fischer, 1998;Rock et al, 2010; Whittman, 1995).LGB SUPERVISEES' EXPERIENCES OF LGB-AFFIRMATIVE AND NON-AFFIRMATIVE SUPERVISION (Carlson et al, 2012;Charlés, et al, 2005;Godfrey, Haddock, Fisher, & Lund, 2006;Green, 1996; Hernandez & Rankin, 2008;Long & Serovich, 2003;Rock et al, 2010) have offered suggestions for how to integrate sexual minority information into training, but no comprehensive study has looked specifically at the degree to which this is occurring across theory, research, andLGB Other mental health disciplines, particularly psychology and social work, have better addressed the extent to which graduate training is preparing students for work with theLGB population (Charlés, et al, 2005;Rock et al, 2010). However, based on studies that assessed trainees' experiences with LGB issues and/or their attitudes about working with the LGB population, it appears that graduate training does not adequately prepare students to competently work with LGB individuals, couples, and families (Allison et al, 1994; Croteau, Bieschke, Phillips, & Lark, 1998).…”

“…Others (Croteau et al, 1998; Gerdes & Norman, 1998;Green, 1996) echo the need for programs to address sexual minority issues in didactic training by including a specific course in LGB issues. Green (1996) and Long and Serovich (2003) also offer many examples of how to integrate such content into coursework, such as (a)incorporating readings that contain sexual minority topics in all classes, (b) using films withLGB content or persons, (c) incorporating examples of LGB persons in role plays, and (d) inviting LGB persons as guest speakers.In order to include appropriate content in course(s), Phillips and Fischer (1998) suggest that faculty and administration learn how to include LGB issues in a Lack of scholarship focusing on LGB issues in many major mental health journals (see Buhrke et al, 1992;Clark & Serovich, 1997;Hartwell et al, 2012; Phillips et al, 2003) has led some to suggest that training programs should encourage research on LGB topics (Biaggio et al, 2003;Carlson et al, 2012; Hernandez & Rankin, 2008). This is in stark contrast to Pilkington and Cantor's (1996) finding that many graduates were discouraged from conducting such research.…”