Multicultural Supervision: The Influence of Race-Related Issues in Supervision Process and Outcome

Examining Supervisors' Multicultural Competence in Racially Similar and Different Supervision Dyads

“…For example, Toporek et al (2004) reported that some supervisees challenged the authority of REM supervisors and made negative assumptions when cultural issues were discussed in supervision. Similarly, researchers have posited that some REM supervisors may be reluctant to introduce cultural issues in supervision for fear of being labeled a "troublemaker" (Peterson, 1991), placed in the role of a multicultural expert (Norton & Coleman, 2003), or perceived as having a cultural agenda (Priest, 1994). Given the relatively low number of REM supervisor-supervisee dyads in this study, however, additional research is needed to provide further support of these findings.…”

“…Over the past ten years, multicultural supervision researchers have examined process dynamics in the supervision dyad (e.g., Toporek et al, 2004), proposed cultural considerations for supervisors (e.g., Fong & Lease, 1997), assessed perceptions and competence in multicultural supervision dyads (e.g., Pope-Davis, Toporek, & Ortega-Villalobos, 2003), considered racial identity theory to the supervision process (e.g., Norton & Coleman, 2003), and created conceptual models and frameworks (e.g., Ancis & Ladany, 2001). The influence of racial differences on the supervision process has also been examined, as researchers have speculated that racially mixed dyads are more conflictual than racially similar dyads.…”

Multicultural Supervision: What Difference Does Difference Make?

“…While we recognize issues of power are salient to all supervisory relationships, school psychologists who not only ignore power differentials in supervision but also lack cultural knowledge and awareness risk placing supervisees in a double bind. Norton and Coleman (2003) clearly outline this double bind: "If (supervisees) ignore their supervisors' cultural knowledge and awareness, they risk compromising their personal and professional development…yet if addressing supervisors' limitations, they potentially face interpersonal and professional repercussions (p. 122)."…”

“…Further, supervisees from a minority group may be particularly sensitive to supervisors' failures to acknowledge and raise multicultural issues (Norton and Coleman 2003). A lack of trust within the supervisory relationship may also cause supervisees to reluctantly implement the supervisor's recommendations or withhold their work by only submitting high-quality work samples for evaluative and corrective feedback that might not be as useful in assisting the supervisee to develop necessary professional skills (Fong and Lease 1997).…”

“…Despite the importance of this topic, research in the area of multicultural supervision is limited, especially regarding supervisory relationships where a supervisee and supervisor differ in some culturally meaningful way. Differences in racial status between a supervisor and supervisee have been referred to as cross-racial supervision (Estrada 2005;Norton and Coleman 2003) and are a unique component of multicultural supervision that is deserving of special attention. While we recognize that other parts of selfidentity contribute to building relationships, such as gender, sexual orientation, religion, ability, etc., the primary focus of this review is on culture and race in supervisory contexts.…”