School Psychology Quarterly © 2010 American Psychological Association

2010, Vol. 25, No. 4, 249 –278 1045-3830/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0021542

Evidence on Multicultural Training in School Psychology:

Recommendations for Future Directions

Markeda L. Newell Bonnie K. Nastasi

University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Tulane University

Chryse Hatzichristou Janine M. Jones

University of Athens–Greece University of Washington
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

G. Thomas Schanding, Jr. Georgette Yetter

University of Houston Oklahoma State University

School psychology training programs are required to provide multicultural training to

preservice school psychologists; however, trainers have had difficulty adequately
including multicultural content into the curriculum. Thus, there is a gap between the
requirements and the training that many school psychologists receive. Training pro-
grams have grappled with multicultural training because of difficulty identifying the
structure and content of such training for school psychologists. To advance multicul-
tural training in school psychology, guidance is needed regarding the content and
structure necessary to adequately develop multicultural competence. Hence, the pur-
pose of this article is to critically review the evidence on multicultural training in school
psychology and provide a synthesis of the best evidence for preparing multiculturally
competent school psychologists.

Keywords: multicultural training, multicultural competence, school psychology, evidence,

review

The development of multiculturally compe-
tent school psychologists is rapidly becoming a
major challenge in the training of school psy-
chologists (Esquivel, Warren, & Littman-
Orlizky, 2007). One of the most salient reasons
why multicultural competence is becoming es-
Markeda L. Newell, Department of Educational Psychol-
ogy, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee; Bonnie K. Nas-
tasi, Department of Psychology, Tulane University; Chryse
Hatzichristou, Department of Psychology, University of
Athens–Greece; Janine M. Jones, Department of Educa-
tional Psychology, University of Washington; G. Thomas
Schanding, Jr., Department of Educational Psychology,
University of Houston; Georgette Yetter, Department of
School Psychology, Oklahoma State University.
Markeda L. Newell and Bonnie K. Nastasi are co-first
authors. Chryse Hatzichristou, Janine M. Jones, G. Thomas
Schanding, Jr., and Georgette Yetter equally contributed as
second authors.
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Markeda L. Newell, Department of Educational
Psychology, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, P.O. Box
413, Milwaukee, WI 53202. E-mail: newell@uwm.edu
249
sential to the provision of effective service de-
livery is because the U.S. population is shifting
and expanding in ways that create a wider range
of cultural and linguistic differences that are not
reflected in the cultural and linguistic profile of
current school psychologists. A brief report
from the U.S. Census Bureau (2006) indicates
that one-third of the nation’s population in-
cludes people of ethnic minority backgrounds,
and the proportion of ethnic minorities contin-
ues to increase. Moreover, immigrants make up
12% of the U.S. population, and the number of
immigrants living in the United States has in-
creased 57% between 1990 and 2000. Of note is
the fact that 14 million children (under age 18)
in the United States are either immigrants or the
children of immigrants (Bornstein, Deater-
Deckard, & Lansford, 2007). Because of the
increasing number of migrants worldwide, the
21st century has been designated as the century
of migration (Van de Vijver, 2005). In addition
to increases in the number of ethnic minorities
and immigrants, linguistically diverse children
 250 NEWELL ET AL.
and families in the United States continues to
increase as well. According to the 2000 Census,
18% of residents in the United States spoke a
language other than English, with Spanish being
the most frequently spoken second language
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2003). In fact, the number
of children eligible for Limited English Profi-
ciency (LEP) programs has increased by 57%
since 1995 (U.S. Department of Education,
2006).
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
On the other hand, the demographic charac-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
teristics of school psychologists has not shifted
and expanded in the same ways as the nation’s
population. Approximately 75.1% of U.S. citi-
zens are White/Caucasian (Hobbs & Stoops,
2002), whereas 86% of school psychologists are
White/Caucasian (2005 National Association of
School Psychologists membership survey;
Curtis, Lopez, Batsche, Minch, & Abshier,
2007), reflecting an overrepresentation of
White/Caucasian school psychologists com-
pared with the general population. There are far
fewer racial/ethnic minorities represented
among school psychologists. Hispanics are the
largest ethnic minority group at ⬃4%, fol-
lowed by Black/African Americans at 3%,
Asian American/Pacific Islanders at 1.4%,
and American Indian/Alaska Natives at less
than 1% (Curtis et al., 2007). On the other
hand, Hispanics represent 12.5% of the U.S.
population, African Americans represent ap-
proximately 12.3%, and Asian Americans
represent ⬃4%. The only group commensu-
rate with the U.S. population is American
Indian/Alaska Native, which represent less
than 1% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2000). Moreover, women (74%) are
overrepresented among school psychologists
compared with me (26%). In regard to linguistic
diversity, the number of bilingual school psy-
chologists in the United States is difficult to
estimate (Lopez, 2008). However, in a 1995
survey of a random sample of school psychol-
ogists, Curtis, Hunley, Walker, and Baker
(1999) found that 9.7% of school psychologists
surveyed fluently spoke another language be-
sides English.
These data suggest a significant racial/ethnic,
linguistic, and cultural gap between school psy-
chologists and the populations they serve. With
this level of cultural incongruence between
school psychologists and children in schools,
training in the provision of multiculturally com-
petent service delivery is essential. While the
term “training” is being used to describe the
content and experiences during graduate school,
becoming multiculturally competent is a life-
long learning process that requires continued
professional development.
Multicultural Competence
The term multicultural has been defined in
many ways, contributing to confusion about the
meaning of multicultural competence (see
Frisby, 2009). Multicultural competence re-
quires “an individual going beyond the mere
possession of multicultural sensitivity to also
attain an acceptable level of knowledge, a suf-
ficient shift in attitude, and the production of a
repertoire of behaviors consistent with success-
fully interacting with diverse populations in
multicultural settings” (Wallace, 2000, p.
1101). Diversity includes race/ethnicity, gender,
gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, lan-
guage, ability, and economic status. Thus,
knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to serv-
ing all these different groups are integral to
multicultural competence. It is important to note
that the terms cross-cultural and multicultural
are often used interchangeably, but there are
some important distinctions. Cross-cultural
generally refers to examining or comparing
populations from two different countries
(Byrne, Oakland, Leong, van de Vijver,
Hambleton, & Cheung, 2009), whereas multi-
cultural is typically conceptualized as examin-
ing and comparing cultures within the same
country (American Psychological Association,
2003; Fields, 2010). Thus, multicultural refers
to the existence of members of these different
sociodemographic groups in the same context
(Oakland, 2005). Using this definition, multi-
culturalism manifests when there are members
of different groups interacting with each other;
however, individuals also can be multicultural
(e.g., a 10-year-old girl who is African Ameri-
can, speaks Afrikaans, and has a disability).
Whereas these demographics (e.g., race, lan-
guage, ability) are visible ways of defining mul-
ticultural, multicultural competence moves be-
yond identifying differences in how people look
and talk to understanding more substantive dif-
ferences in beliefs, perspectives, and behavior
(Banks & McGee Banks, 2004). Hence, multi-
cultural competence is particularly salient for
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
the field of school psychology because histori-
cally school psychologists have not thought
about how their practices impact different
groups (Esquivel, Warren, & Littman-Orlitzky,
2007). Because of this history, it is critical
that school psychologists be prepared to chal-
lenge monocultural conceptualizations of hu-
man behavior and integrate knowledge of
biological, psychological, and ecological fac-
tors within a sociocultural context in order to
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
effectively serve a multicultural population
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
(Jones, 2009).
Developing multicultural competence in a
manner that translates to more effective service
delivery for children and families has been a
challenge for trainers in school psychology.
One of the most significant barriers to the pro-
vision of multicultural training is the limited
evidence base on the requisite professional
competencies for working with culturally and
linguistically diverse populations (Braden &
Shah, 2005). A second, and equally important,
challenge is the lack of guidance on integrating
multicultural content into graduate curricula
(Newell, 2010b). Finally, the 21st century has
heralded a focus on transnational and transcul-
tural differences as professional psychologists
attempt to provide services in a global commu-
nity (e.g., Hatzichristou, 2002; Marsella, 2008;
Marsella & Pederson, 2004; Nastasi & Varjas,
in press), but competence in addressing this
domain is also lacking. Given these challenges,
the purpose of this article is to critically review
the evidence on multicultural competence and
multicultural training within an increasingly
global context to make practical recommenda-
tions for future research, training, and practice.
To provide perspective on current evidence and
challenges, we first briefly review the history on
the emergence and continued evolution of mul-
ticulturalism in school psychology.
Historical Basis for Multicultural Training
in School Psychology
The field of school psychology was born out
of the need to address the increasingly multi-
cultural context of schools in the United States.
As Fagan (1985a, 1992, 2000, 2005) explained,
the rapid influx of European immigrants, cou-
pled with the enactment of compulsory atten-
dance laws, were central to the growth of not
only the number of children in schools, but also
251
to the range of linguistic, economic, racial, and
cultural diversity represented among students.
As the number and diversity of students in-
creased, the variability in students’ educational
levels, learning needs, and physical and mental
health became evident (French, 1990). How-
ever, school personnel were ill-equipped to ad-
dress the plurality of learners attending schools
(Fagan, 1985a, 1992); moreover, the expansion
of diversity (particularly among students) man-
ifested cultural disconnections among schools,
staff, and students (Flaherty & Osher, 2002). To
address this range of differences, special classes
for students considered “atypical” were formed
(Braden, DiMarino, & Good, 2001). Johnson
(1962) explained that special classes, which
emerged around the mid-1890s, were developed
as a means to serve children with a wide variety
of needs ranging from children with intellectual
disabilities to those deemed “backward.” Many
of the children who were considered “back-
ward” and placed in special classes were Afri-
can American, Latino, southern or eastern
European immigrants, and/or economically dis-
advantaged (Catterall, 1972; Fagan, 1992;
Harry & Anderson, 1994; Patton, 1998). This
demographic profile of students placed in spe-
cial classes would eventually become the source
of much contention over service delivery to
culturally and linguistically diverse children.
Nevertheless, the rapid increase in students with
diverse educational needs dramatically intensi-
fied the need for professionals who could iden-
tify students for placement in special classes.
To meet this higher demand, teachers and
other professionals learned to administer “men-
tal” tests (i.e., Binet) and thus emerged a rudi-
mentary form of school psychologists (Fagan,
1985a, 1986). The variability in training and
practice of Binet testers necessitated more stan-
dardization (Catterall, 1972; Fagan, 1986;
French, 1990). Hence, the work of Lightner
Witmer (founder of the first psychological
clinic in 1896) and of G. Stanley Hall (Chicago
Bureau of Child Study established in 1899) was
influential in shaping the profession of school
psychology (Fagan, 1992, 2000). These early
psychologists did not necessarily address issues
related to cultural diversity. One of the only
indicators of addressing diversity at this time
was an occasion in which the Bureau of Child
Study successfully defended itself against a
lawsuit on racial bias in testing. Other evidence
 252 NEWELL ET AL.
of addressing cultural diversity was that by
1980, the Bureau employed approximately 40
bilingual psychologists who spoke approxi-
mately 18 different languages (Mullen, 1981).
However, beyond accommodating language dif-
ferences, minimal attention was given to cul-
tural diversity. Hence, cultural considerations
were not central to the development of school
psychology.
The field of school psychology was formed
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
out of the confluence of increasing student di-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
versity (i.e., demographic, cultural, and educa-
tional), inadequate capacity to serve all chil-
dren, and cultural disconnections between staff
and students (Fagan, 1985a, 2000; Phillips,
1990). Although these factors presented chal-
lenges to school professionals, increasing diver-
sity was not inherently a problem. Rather, the
problem emerged out of the decision to separate
culturally and linguistically diverse children in-
stead of trying to understand them and integrate
them into the mainstream educational environ-
ment. The decision to separate and exclude cul-
turally and linguistically diverse students was
pivotal because it set the tone for the evolution
of how culturally and linguistically diverse chil-
dren would be treated in education and school
psychology in the future. However, the separa-
tion of culturally and linguistically diverse chil-
dren in schools was not unlike the social prac-
tices of this time period. It is important to note
that many schools across the United States re-
main segregated (Adams, Biernat, Branscombe,
Crandall, & Wrightsman, 2007), although
schools may be segregated because of force or
choice (e.g., same-sex schools; African-
centered schools, etc.). While the data on the
effectiveness of these culture-specific schools is
not conclusive, these schools do not present the
same concerns as schools where segregation is
forced. Thus, forced segregation in which
groups are excluded and have less educational
resources are a significant concern and is reflec-
tive of early segregation practices of the late
1800s to early 1900s (Kozol, 2005).
At the time of the emergence of school psy-
chology and special classes (circa 1890 –1920),
racial, cultural, and linguistic minorities were
living under very difficult social, political, eco-
nomic, and educational conditions. Blacks were
legally segregated from Whites because of
Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, which made the
“separate but equal” doctrine law. Native Amer-
ican tribes were forced to relocate to reserva-
tions and, to facilitate assimilation, their chil-
dren were made to attend mission schools, and
later, Bureau of Indian Affairs schools where
they were not allowed to use their native lan-
guages or practice their religious and cultural
traditions (Boxer, 2009). During this same time
period, significant immigration from European
countries prompted national security concerns.
As a result, the National Origins Act of 1921
was passed, which restricted immigration based
on a quota system. Phillips (1990) argued that
“the current migration brings a variety of back-
grounds, languages, cultures to our schools. As
children of these immigrants enter American
public schools in increasing numbers, their ex-
periences, skills, and problems pose major chal-
lenges to teachers, school psychologists, and
other school personnel” (p. 25). Hence, the cul-
tural and linguistic differences of immigrant
children who entered schools in the United
States were considered problematic. And as late
as the 1930s and 1940s, in California, children
of Mexican and Chinese descent attended seg-
regated schools, because they were not permit-
ted to attend schools with other European
American children (Fagan, 1985a). As these
examples illustrate, being a member of racially/
ethnically, linguistically, and culturally diverse
minority group in the United States during this
time was immensely difficult, and the practice
of separating these groups was the norm both
within and outside of schools.
Within this social-political context, around
1920, school psychology began taking more
form as professionals started to question the role
definition and prerequisite training for school
psychologists. Although these questions would
remain largely unanswered for the next 30 years
(Fagan, 1985a; 1985b), the first recognized
training program in school psychology was at
New York University around 1920 (French,
1990). The program’s curriculum was not
clearly delineated and there was no evidence of
diversity or multicultural training (Fagan,
1985b). Without clear guidance on role defini-
tion and prerequisite training for school psy-
chology practice, the number of training pro-
grams continued to grow, but the content of the
curricula varied greatly as did titles, roles, and
responsibilities (Fagan, 1985b).
The first formalized attempt to bring unifor-
mity and standards to the training of school
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
psychologists did not occur until about 34 years
later at the Thayer Conference in August, 1954
(Fagan, 2005). The purpose of the conference
was to bring together professionals in the field
of school psychology to establish training stan-
dards and practice. This seminal conference
shaped the future identity, training, and profes-
sionalization of school psychology. Although
important strides toward professionalization of
the field were made, diversity was not consid-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ered (Fagan, 2005). Most notably missing was
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
any discussion of the Brown v. Board of Edu-
cation decision to desegregate schools (handed
down in May, 1954, 3 months before the Thayer
conference; Abramowitz, 1981). Social and cul-
tural considerations also were absent when Di-
vision 16 of the American Psychological Asso-
ciation (APA) was created in 1945 and the
National Association of School Psychologists
(NASP) was created in 1969 (Fagan, 1993).
What seemed to be more pressing at the time for
both Division 16 and NASP was the difference
in opinion regarding the entry level of training
for school psychologists (i.e., doctoral vs. non-
doctoral; Fagan, 1986; Farling, 1969; Reschly,
1982). Abramowitz (1981) explained that at the
time professionals in school psychology were
interested primarily in issues such as licensure
and certification because they had a stake in
them.
Consideration of diversity was missing also
in training programs. Cardon and French (1969)
conducted a review of the curriculum in school
psychology programs and identified 81 pro-
grams whose curricula included courses in psy-
chology, education, and child development, but
did not include courses on cultural diversity.
These curricula were in alignment with Divi-
sion 16 training standards for school psychol-
ogy which had no requirement for diversity
training. Subsequent reviews of training pro-
grams (e.g., Bardon & Walker, 1972; Bardon &
Wenger, 1976; Cardon & French, 1968; French,
Smith, & Cardon, 1968; Goh, 1977; Pfeiffer &
Marmo, 1981; Smith, 1964) also indicated that
diversity training was missing from school psy-
chology training programs. Despite limited rec-
ognition of the role of diversity in school psy-
chology research, training, and practice, several
legal and political decisions about culturally
and linguistically diverse populations would
have significant implications for school psycho-
logical service delivery.
253
Legal Basis of Multiculturalism
in School Psychology
After the Brown decision, the Civil Rights
Act was one of the most significant pieces of
legislation that influenced the treatment of mi-
nority populations in the United States. The
Civil Rights Act passed in 1964 and prohibited
discrimination on the basis of a person’s gender
and race. Shortly after the passage of the Civil
Rights Act, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR)
was established in 1968 to monitor discrimina-
tion in educational practices. In 1970, the Office
of Civil Rights issued a memorandum on the
Identification of Discrimination and Denial of
Services on the Basis of National Origin that
“prohibited the use of cultural and linguistic
differences of minority children as a means of
segregating or denying such children equal ac-
cess to the full benefits of the educational sys-
tem” (Gerry, 1973, p. 308). The OCR required
schools to collect data disaggregated by race,
ethnicity, gender, and disability (U.S. Depart-
ment of Education, 2010). The availability of
disaggregated data made possible comparisons
of the educational performance of minority stu-
dents with that of European American students.
Analyses of these data revealed that minority
students were overrepresented in special
classes, especially in classes for students with
intellectual disabilities (Dunn, 1968; Heller,
Holtzman, & Messick, 1982). Legal challenges
by parents and educators to overrepresentation
of minority students in special classes followed
(Catterall, 1972). Historic court cases, including
Hobson v. Hansen (1967), Diana v. California
(1970), and Larry P. v. Riles (1972), were in-
fluential in shaping how school psychologists
conducted assessments with minority students
(Richardson, 2002), particularly with regard to
the use of nondiscriminatory assessment.
Shortly after these decisions, Congress passed
the Education for All Handicapped Children
Act (PL 94 –142) in 1975, which required a free
and appropriate education for all children. Sev-
eral components of this legislation influenced
service delivery to minority children. Reschly
(2000) delineated the impact of this legislation
on school psychology, which included greater
emphasis on language, sociocultural status,
nondiscriminatory assessment, and due process.
Although the passage of PL 94 –142 was sig-
nificant, implementation, especially the ele-
 254 NEWELL ET AL.
ments that applied to minorities, was inconsis-
tent. Goldwasser and Meyers (1983) conducted
a survey of 856 school psychologists on the
impact of PL 94 –142. They found that 87% of
school psychologists indicated no change in
their practice after the passage of this law. How-
ever, 32% stated that they used nondiscrimina-
tory assessment more often and 34% used
interpreters or translators more often. Neverthe-
less, these legal decisions forced a more formal,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
organizational response from the field of school
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
psychology on addressing cultural and linguis-
tic diversity in service delivery, which had
never been done before.
Organizational Response to Multicultural
Training in School Psychology
In 1973, the National Conference on Levels
and Patterns of Professional Training in Psy-
chology was held in Vail, Colorado (referred to
as the Vail Conference). This was the first con-
ference that addressed diversity in psychology.
According to Abramowitz (1981), civil rights
groups attended the conference to have input in
diversifying the American Psychological Asso-
ciation. Specifically, conference participants de-
cided that cultural competence was integral to
ethical practice in psychology and should be
addressed in the training of psychologists
(Shriver & Kramer, 1996). Furthermore, the
participants agreed to increase diversity of fac-
ulty and student representation as well as in
training and curricula (Phillips, 1990).
NASP published their first edition of training
standards for school psychologists (Standards
for the Provision of School Psychological Ser-
vices) in 1978 and Division 16 of APA pub-
lished its first set of standards (Standards for
Providers of Psychology Services) in 1981.
Both NASP and Division 16 included standards
for addressing cultural and individual differ-
ences in service delivery (e.g., nondiscrimina-
tory assessment, language, and sociocultural
context) (Batsche, Knoff, & Peterson, 1989;
Zins & Curtis, 1988). APA created the Office of
Ethnic Minority Affairs (1979), Board of Ethnic
Minority Affairs (1981), and Division 45 (Eth-
nic Minority Psychology, 1986; see Jones,
1998). These organizations also published
guidelines to improve service delivery to cul-
turally and linguistically diverse populations,
including NASP Cultural Competence guide-
lines (NASP, 2009), APA Guidelines on Pro-
viders of Psychological Services to Ethnically,
Culturally, and Linguistically Diverse Popula-
tions (APA, 1990a), and APA Guidelines on
Multicultural Training, Research, Practice, and
Organizational Change for School Psycholo-
gists (APA, 2002). APA and NASP also formed
taskforces to address ethnic minority popula-
tions, including the Task Force on the Delivery
of Services to Ethnic Minority Populations in
1988 (APA, 1990b) and NASP Minority Re-
cruitment Task Force (NASP, 2010b).
The professional organizations responded
vigorously to addressing cultural and linguistic
diversity in school psychology (and psychology
broadly) in this legal era. These changes in
school psychology occurred because they were
“mandated by social, legal, political, economic,
and cultural conditions” (Phillips, 1990, 116, p.
3). Hence, the longstanding history of separat-
ing culturally and linguistically diverse students
in educational environments were no longer le-
gally, ethically, or professionally sanctioned
and school psychology was forced to acknowl-
edge diversity in training, research, and prac-
tice. According to Esquivel et al. (2007), the
1980s was the beginning of significant move-
ment toward addressing multicultural research,
training, and practice in school psychology. The
proliferation of standards laid the foundation for
identifying specific multicultural competencies
necessary for effective practice with diverse
populations.
Multicultural Competencies for School-
Based Psychological Practice
Psychology continues to move toward a cul-
ture of competence (Belar, 2009; Schulte &
Daly, 2009). Psychologists have a duty to pro-
tect the public with whom they work by iden-
tifying the competencies necessary to produce
independent practitioners and researchers capa-
ble of working with culturally and linguistically
diverse (CLD) populations. Psychologists have
highlighted the necessity of multicultural com-
petency in several documents that dictate and
guide the practice of psychology.
The APA and NASP make clear the mandate
for inclusion of multicultural competencies for
practice in school settings. The APA’s Ethical
Principles of Psychologists and Code of Con-
duct (APA, 2002) includes aspirational as well
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
as enforceable standards regarding practice with
CLD populations. Principle E (Respect for Peo-
ple’s Rights and Dignity) calls psychologists to
be aware of and respect differences based on
age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, cul-
ture, national origin, religion, sexual orienta-
tion, disability, language, and socioeconomic
status (SES). In doing so, psychologists are
expected to be familiar with the scientific and
professional knowledge as well as acquire com-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
petencies to effectively work with a diverse
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
public. Nearly all the enforceable standards
touch upon this idea with Standards 2.01
(Boundaries of Competence) and 9.l0 (Bases for
Assessments) reflecting exemplary standards
according to Fisher (2009). The NASP’s (2000)
Principles for Professional Ethics reflects the
same need for awareness of cultural and indi-
vidual differences among school psychologists
with regard to the standards on professional
relationships (parents, students, school person-
nel, and others) and professional practices (e.g.,
assessment and intervention).
In addition to ethics codes that are enforce-
able standards, both the APA and NASP have
adopted guidelines which, although not meant
to be enforceable, recommend specific behav-
iors or conduct (APA, 1992; NASP, 2000). The
APA has adopted several guideline papers in-
cluding guidelines for working with women and
girls (American Psychological Association,
2007), and lesbian, gay, and bisexual individu-
als (American Psychological Association,
2000). NASP’s (2010) Model for Comprehen-
sive and Integrated School Psychological Ser-
vices (formerly Guidelines for the Provision of
School Psychological Services), in its standards
regarding Foundations of School Psychological
Service Delivery: Diversity in Development
and Learning, calls for expanded responsibili-
ties of school psychologists regarding cultural
diversity:
School psychologists have knowledge of individual
differences, abilities, disabilities, and other diverse
characteristics; principles and research related to diver-
sity factors for children, families, and schools, includ-
ing factors related to culture, context, and individual
and role differences; and evidence-based strategies to
enhance services and address potential influences re-
lated to diversity. School psychologists demonstrate
skills to provide effective professional services that
promote effective functioning for individuals, families,
and schools with diverse characteristics, cultures, and
backgrounds and across multiple contexts, with recog-
255
nition that an understanding and respect for diversity in
development and learning and advocacy for social jus-
tice are foundations for all aspects of service delivery.
(NASP, 2010, p. 7)
Although the APA and NASP guidelines for
multicultural competence have been a major
advancement, more research on multicultural
competence in school psychology is needed.
Two seminal studies have helped to advance
the identification and conceptualization of mul-
ticultural competencies necessary for practitio-
ners providing psychological services in school-
based settings. Lopez and Rogers (2001) and
Rogers and Lopez (2002) built upon the extant
literature from other psychology specialty areas.
Utilizing a Delphi procedure with a panel of
school psychology experts, Rogers and Lopez
provided an empirical basis to begin the discus-
sion on extracting critical and essential cross-
cultural competencies germane to psychological
practice in schools. Rogers and Lopez (2002)
conducted an extensive literature review of mul-
ticultural competencies and gathered comments
and rankings from an expert panel. In this in-
vestigation, 102 competencies were identified
that covered 14 domains for school psycholo-
gists. The researchers made a distinction be-
tween knowledge and skills, with knowledge
referring to substantive content psychologists
should possess in working with diverse popula-
tions, and skills referring to actions or defined
practices (i.e., “assessing,” “consulting,” “inter-
preting”). Employing a different expert panel,
Lopez and Rogers (2001) extracted 89 cross-
cultural competencies based on the respon-
dents’ determinations, fitting within the 14 areas
outlined in Table 1. The identification of these
competencies is a significant step forward not
only because they help conceptualize multicul-
tural competence for school psychologists, but
also provide a foundation for multicultural
training.
Standards for Multicultural Training
and Practice
With the development of multicultural com-
petencies and standards, programs were forced
to think about and plan for training practitioners
in multicultural competence to ensure or main-
tain accreditation. The first review that identi-
fied cross-cultural training in school psychology
 256 NEWELL ET AL.

Table 1
Cross-Cultural Competencies From Lopez & Rogers (2001) and Rogers & Lopez (2002)
Competence domain Sample competency
Assessment Knowledge of cross-cultural variables influencing performance, assessment results, and
interpretation
Consultation Skill in demonstrating sensitivity towards the culture of school personnel involved in
consultation
Counseling An awareness of cultural factors that might influence counseling
Culture An understanding of cultural differences of groups within the United States
Language Knowledge of the first and second language acquisition process
Laws and regulations An awareness that assessment or eligibility issues may be seriously impacted by cross-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

cultural issues
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Professional characteristics
Report writing
Research
Theoretical paradigms
Academic interventions
Working with interpreters
Working with organizations
Working with parents
Respect and appreciation for the socioeconomic and cultural background of the child
and his or her family
Skill in writing reports in language culturally diverse individuals will understand
Working knowledge of the limits involved in generalizing from samples to populations
and from sample to sample
Knowledge of how our own (i.e., psychologists) theoretical paradigms are influenced
by our cultural background
Knowledge of successful instructional strategies used with linguistically and culturally
diverse students
Knowledge of methods and limitations of translation
An awareness of and sensitivity to the diversity of employees in an organization and
in the constituents which they serve
Respect of values that clash with dominant culture

was conducted by Brown and Minke in 1986.
They described cross-cultural as courses that
focused on teaching about nonbiased assess-
ment, so it is important to note that this concep-
tualization is consistent with the current defini-
tion of multicultural as these courses did not
reflect an international focus (as cross-cultural
is defined today). The inclusion of these cross-
cultural courses in the training curriculum co-
incides with the increasing recognition of the
importance of diversity in school psychology
(see Esquivel, Warren, & Littman-Orlitzky,
2007). Brown and Minke (1986) analyzed the
curriculum of 211 school psychology programs
and found that having a cross-cultural psychol-
ogy course significantly distinguished doctoral
from nondoctoral training programs. Specifi-
cally, doctoral programs were more likely to
offer at least one cross-cultural course com-
pared with nondoctoral programs. A study of
school psychology training curriculum con-
ducted in 1989 (Rogers, Ponterotto, Conoley, &
Wiese, 1992) surveyed 121 training directors
about areas such as location, faculty and student
demographics, and multicultural training re-
quirements. Findings revealed that 60% of pro-
grams included at least one multicultural
course; 75% of these required the course. In
addition, most of the programs had multicul-
tural content integrated into up to 15% of the
core courses (e.g., assessment, intervention, and
consultation). Newell (2010b) conducted a
more recent survey of program directors in doc-
toral and nondoctoral school psychology, and
found that most of the programs surveyed
(78%) included some form of multicultural
training (e.g., separate course or infused model),
although 22% provided no multicultural train-
ing. These 2010 data reflect an increase in the
number of programs providing multicultural
training compared with the 1989 survey in
which 40% of programs were not providing
multicultural training (Rogers, Ponterotto,
Conoley, & Wiese, 1992). Although this in-
crease is significant, most of the programs re-
ported that less than 20% of the content in core
courses (e.g., assessment, intervention, and con-
sultation) addressed multicultural issues (New-
ell, 2010b). Thus, the most current data indicate
that more graduate school psychology programs
have adopted some form of multicultural train-
ing, but programs continue to lag in integrating
multicultural content into core training areas.
Given that Lopez and Rogers (2001) identified
core multicultural competencies for school psy-
chology, the minimal degree of inclusion of
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
multicultural content may indicate a lack of
awareness of the Lopez and Rogers multicul-
tural competencies or difficulty integrating the
competencies into training. Hence, there is a
continuing need for guidance on how to struc-
ture multicultural training to maximize the cul-
tivation of multicultural competence.
Structuring Multicultural Training
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Lafromboise and Foster (1992) described
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
four models of cross-cultural training found in
APA-accredited counseling psychology pro-
grams: (a) separate course, (b) area of concen-
tration, (c) interdisciplinary, and (d) integration.
These models are not unique to counseling
psychology and have become a basis for eval-
uating multicultural training in both APA-
accredited and NASP-approved programs in
school psychology.
Separate Course Model
The most common approach to multicultural
training is to offer a single course in multicul-
tural competency development, offered under a
variety of course titles such as multicultural
issues, cultural competence, cross-cultural
counseling, and bilingual assessment. The train-
ing and practice standards of both the APA and
NASP require appropriate emphasis on issues of
diversity and preparation to serve diverse pop-
ulations. As a result, many school psychology
programs have developed a required course to
meet the minimum standards of the APA and
NASP.
Rogers, Hoffman, and Wade (1998) con-
ducted a study of five exemplary multicultural
training programs in school psychology and five
exemplary programs in counseling psychology.
In this analysis, exemplary programs were de-
fined by having the following characteristics:
representation of minority faculty, integration
of multicultural content throughout the curricu-
lum, institutional support for addressing multi-
cultural issues such as climate, and attention to
recruitment and retention of minority students.
They found that 90% of the programs offered a
specific diversity issues course. A subsequent
study of 17 school psychology programs nom-
inated as exemplars in multicultural training
indicated that 94% offered a required multicul-
tural course (Rogers, 2006). Although there is
257
usually variability in the content of these sepa-
rate courses, multicultural issues courses typi-
cally include a focus on developing awareness
of “others” or cultures that are different from
the mainstream culture. More advanced multi-
cultural courses also include a process for de-
veloping self-awareness and personal history
exploration that facilitates recognizing the im-
pact of the professional’s personal history on
interventions and decision-making with clients.
The primary limitation of the separate course
model is the lack of assurance that students will
apply knowledge to clinical practice. For in-
stance, learning about another culture may have
relevance in the context of the multicultural
course, but when beginning work with clinical
cases, some students may require more support
in translating that knowledge to their cases.
Further, if the faculty member who taught the
multicultural issues course is not the clinical su-
pervisor, there may be limited opportunity to
make the connections. Thus, opportunities for
translation to practice need to be available to max-
imize integration of the knowledge and use in
practice.
Interdisciplinary Model
An interdisciplinary approach to multicul-
tural training involves the inclusion of courses
with multicultural emphasis offered through
other academic departments (e.g., sociology,
anthropology). Such programs offer unique op-
portunities for gaining an interdisciplinary per-
spective and learning from other professionals
with expertise in culture and cultural differ-
ences. The primary limitation, assuming this is
the only multicultural course, is that the there is
no guarantee of content relevant to the provision
of psychological services to children in school-
based settings. Thus, the likelihood of transla-
tion to practice may be even more remote than
in separate course models taught within school
psychology programs.
Area of Concentration Model
Lafromboise and Foster’s (1992) area of con-
centration model combines multiple courses in
multiculturalism with application to clinical
cases. This model provides an enhanced oppor-
tunity for students to integrate the knowledge
obtained in didactic courses to a clinical context
 258 NEWELL ET AL.
(Duren Green, Cook-Morales, Robinson-
Zanartu & Ingraham, 2009). Some school psy-
chology programs have developed a specializa-
tion in multicultural training to characterize the
concentration. In these programs, competencies
necessary for working with bilingual clients of
Latino descent have been identified and provide
the basis for specialization in this area (Duren
Green, et al., 2009; Esquivel, 1985; Ochoa,
Rivera & Ford, 1997). Some programs with a
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
specialization in multicultural training offer a
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
summer immersion experience in an interna-
tional setting which is open to both matriculated
and nonmatriculated students.
The primary limitation to the concentration/
specialization model is that such programs typ-
ically focus on one aspect of multiculturalism
such as serving a specific population indigenous
to the region (e.g., bilingual assessment with
Latino children and adolescents; Esquivel,
1985; Ochoa et al., 1997). Although it is nearly
impossible to develop expertise in multiple cul-
tures in a single training program, students in
such settings will likely learn how to better
understand a culture different from their own
and thus be able to transfer their skills to other
cultural groups. To explain, when students are
given the opportunity to develop a deeper un-
derstanding of cultural variables and nuances in
the context of their work, it is theorized that
they are more able to translate that knowledge
to other groups. They become more efficient in
knowing what variables are inherently cultural
and must be analyzed in the context of the
professional relationship. For example, clini-
cians with multicultural skills recognize that
assessing acculturation and ethnic identity de-
velopment are cultural factors that should be
explored and they also recognize that there is
variability within- and between groups. Thus,
assumptions cannot be made about a person’s
cultural identity without exploration of the
variables in the context of that individual.
However, the capacity for translation of cul-
tural competence with one group to other
cultural groups remains a question that war-
rants further research.
Integration Model
The integration (infusion) model, endorsed
by Lafromboise and Foster (1992), requires that
multicultural content is integrated across the
program curriculum. This approach was the
most common among the 17 exemplary school
psychology programs surveyed by Rogers
(2006). By taking an integrated model approach
to multicultural training, students can learn how
multiculturalism is related to all aspects of
school psychological service delivery. More im-
portantly, students have an opportunity to learn
how to use what they have learned about other
groups to develop more appropriate assess-
ments (see Ortiz, 2008), design more effective
interventions (see Ingraham & Oka, 2006), and
engage in more successful consultation (See
Nastasi, Varjas, Bernstein, & Jayasena, 2000)
with culturally and linguistically diverse popu-
lations. In order for the integration model to be
successful, all of the faculty must have the
competence to teach multicultural content as it
relates to the course(s) they teach. For this rea-
son, adopting the integration model has been a
challenge in school psychology possibly be-
cause not enough faculty have the multicultural
competence to teach the entire curriculum from
a multicultural perspective. Furthermore, inte-
gration requires a coherent plan for incorpo-
rating multicultural competence training
across the curriculum and concerted efforts
by faculty to ensure consistency within the
program.
Although the integration model has been rec-
ognized as the ideal approach to multicultural
training, it does not address the need for insti-
tutional support for multiculturalism. Rogers et
al. (1998) explained that exemplary multicul-
tural training programs in school psychology
also had program-, department-, and university-
wide support for diversity initiatives such as
improving climate, targeting recruitment and
retention, and supporting organizations with
multicultural foci. Having these multiple levels
of support creates an environment where all
students learn about the importance of diversity
and develop a respect for and appreciation of
diversity that is not limited to courses and ex-
periences within the training program. There-
fore, in addition to integration within the train-
ing program, school psychology faculty need to
ensure that multicultural principles are em-
braced and demonstrated at department and uni-
versity levels through advocacy and policy
work.
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
Best-Evidence Approach to Multicultural
Training for School Psychology
After reviewing the current evidence on mul-
ticultural competencies as well as models of
multicultural training, it is clear that there is
much work to be done to refine the multicultural
competencies, develop feasible and sustainable
multicultural training models, and examine the
links between multicultural competence and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
outcomes. Nevertheless, the current evidence
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
can be used to improve the quality of multicul-
tural training in school psychology. Therefore,
based on this review, seven essential compo-
nents are recommended that programs can adopt
in order to provide a research-based approach to
multicultural training for school psychologists.
As can be seen in Tables 2 and 3, the best
evidence components are organized into two
levels, (a) program/faculty and (b) student, re-
spectively. The program/faculty level includes
best-evidence components that need to be ad-
dressed at the program and/or faculty level. The
student-level components include curricular
(e.g., courses and content) and practicum
changes that need to occur to improve multicul-
tural training for the students.
Program/Faculty-Level Best Evidence
Components
Component 1: Integration-Separate Course
Model of Multicultural Training
As discussed earlier, there are four primary
models of multicultural training (i.e., separate
course, interdisciplinary, area of concentration,
and integration). In reviewing the evidence on
these multicultural training models, much of the
support is for the use of an integration model in
which multicultural content is infused through-
out all aspects of the training curriculum. How-
ever, it appears that the integration model alone
is not characteristic of exemplary multicultural
training programs in school psychology. Specif-
ically, Rogers (2006) observed that the integra-
tion model coupled with separate multicultural
course(s) was the best approach to multicultural
training in school psychology. Therefore, pro-
grams can work toward including content about
multiculturalism for all courses, but also include
separate courses that have a more concentrated
focus on multiculturalism. Separate courses
259
would be ideal for addressing the knowledge
(e.g., history, beliefs, and practices of diverse pop-
ulations) and attitudes/beliefs (e.g., self-aware-
ness, attitudes toward diverse populations, etc.)
components of multicultural competence while
the skills (e.g., culturally appropriate assessment,
intervention, and consultation) domain of multi-
cultural competence can be addressed by integrat-
ing multicultural content into the assessment,
intervention, consultation, practicum, and intern-
ships courses.
Some school psychology programs have one
or more areas of concentration that focus on
minority populations (e.g., bilingual, Latino
populations, international) typically chosen be-
cause of a local/regional need or based on the
expertise of their faculty. Rogers (2006) found
some of these programs exemplary. Neverthe-
less, based on the cumulative evidence, it is
recommended that training also address other
populations to ensure that students develop
competencies in working with a broad range of
diverse groups. In sum, the evidence supports
an integration-separate course model of multi-
cultural training for school psychology.
Component 2: Multicultural Research
According to Rogers (2006), exemplary pro-
grams include faculty who value and implement
multicultural research. Multicultural research
can be defined as a research study in which
cultural variables (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity,
SES, religion, sexual orientation) are integral to
the conceptualization, design, and analysis of
the study (American Psychological Association,
2003; Quintana, Troyano, & Taylor, 2001).
Therefore, culture must be a central variable of
interest from the beginning of the study through
the end when then research is disseminated.
While having diverse samples is an important
need and step forward, the inclusion of a diverse
sample without inclusion of the dimensions of
culture in the conceptualization, design, and
analysis of the study is not sufficient for multi-
cultural research. With that being said, across
all domains of service delivery, there is a need
for more multicultural and cross-cultural re-
search. Brown, Shriberg, and Wang (2007) con-
ducted one of the most recent reviews of diver-
sity research in five major school psychology
journals from 2000 –2003. Although they note
an increase in the number of diversity-related
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Table 2
Best Evidence Model for Multicultural Training in School Psychology: Program/Faculty-Level
Best evidence component
Component 1: Integration-separate course model
Component 2: Multicultural research
Component 3a: Recruitment and retention
Component 3b: Faculty professional development
Implementation
(1) Develop separate course(s) to teach knowledge about
different groups
(2) Integrate multicultural content into core legal/ethical,
history, assessment, intervention, and consultation courses.
(3) Require students to complete cases using culturally-
appropriate assessment, intervention, and consultation
during practicum.
(1) Identify cultural considerations related to area of research
interests/questions
(2) Identify how those factors can be addressed in the
conceptualization, design, and analysis of the research
(3) Identify the potential implications of the research findings
on the target population
(4) Ensure students on research team are part of this process
Recruitment
(1) Develop strategies for faculty and student recruitment
(based on current evidence)
(2) Document implementation of recruitment strategies
Retention
(1) Identify program incentives to complete the program
(2) As part of annual student reviews, survey all
faculty/students about their thoughts about the program
(1) Identify community resources that can be used to conduct
presentations, trainings, and workshops with faculty
(2) Identify professional development opportunities via
conferences to attend
(3) Consume research related to diverse populations
260
Evaluation
(1) Use the evaluation model recommended in the student
section to evaluate students’ progress toward
becoming more multiculturally competent.
(1) Monitor faculty and student research/scholarly works
for the incorporation of multicultural frameworks.
(1) Document increases in diverse faculty and student
(2) Interview/survey all faculty and students about what
NEWELL ET AL.
drew him/her to the program
(1) Interview/survey all faculty and students about why
they stayed with the program
(2) Interview/survey all faculty/students about why they
leave the program
(1) Reflect on teaching
(2) Obtain student feedback about teaching multicultural
content
(3) Document changes on type of content covered,
teaching strategies, and student
development/competence
(4) Review syllabi for multicultural content including
readings, guest lectures, assignments, and activities
(5) Acknowledge increased multicultural competence in
teaching as part of annual reviews of faculty
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Table 3
Best Evidence Model for Multicultural Training in School Psychology: Student-Level
Best evidence component
Component 4: Knowledge about
different groups
Component 5: Translation of knowledge
to service delivery
Content Scope/sequence Multicultural competencies
(1) Students should demonstrate an understanding of the historical
context and experiences of different groups.
(2) Students should demonstrate an understanding of the strengths, Year 1–Year 2 (1) Legal/ethical
beliefs, and traditions of different groups.
(3) Students should demonstrate an understanding of family structures (2) Professionalism
and child rearing practices of different groups (which also
includes beliefs about the roles and functions of schools).
(4) Students should demonstrate an understanding of the (3) Culture
conceptualization of mental health and mental illness among
different groups.
(5) Students should demonstrate an understanding of indigenous
healing practices of different groups.
(6) Students should demonstrate an understanding of the legal/ethical
guidelines for service delivery to diverse populations.
(7) Students should demonstrate an understanding of social and
institutional challenges.
(1) Students should demonstrate an understanding of how to address Year 1–Year 2 (1) Assessment
the cultural context of assessment, intervention, and consultation.
(2) Students should demonstrate an understanding of the components (2) Intervention
of nondiscriminatory assessment.
(3) Students should demonstrate an understanding of alternative (3) Consultation
assessment models (e.g., authentic assessment, ecological
assessment, etc.).
REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
(4) Students should demonstrate an understanding of culturally- (4) Language
appropriate intervention design and evaluation.
(5) Students should demonstrate an understanding of multicultural (5) Working with interpreters
consultation.
(6) Students should demonstrate an understanding of how to work (6) Working with organizations
with interpreters.
(7) Students should demonstrate an understanding of second language
development and acculturation.
(8) Students should demonstrate an understanding of program
evaluation and systems consultation and intervention.
(table continues)
261
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

262

Table 3 (continued)
Best evidence component
Component 6: Practical experiences
Content Scope/sequence Multicultural competencies
(1) Students should be required to complete at least one culturally- Year 2 (Practicum) (1) Assessment
appropriate assessment, intervention, and consultation case with
minority clients to allow student to demonstrate competence in
each of these areas (determination of minority client can be made
based on population, program goals, as well as students’ needs)
(2) Students should be required to review the literature as it relates to Year 3 (Internship) (2) Intervention/counseling
the psychological functioning of the client as well as research on
the construct as it relates to the client
(3) Students should be required to have individual feedback with tape (Year 4 or 5 or Pre- (3) Consultation
supervision. Students are required to identify one system policy/ Doctoral (4) Working with interpreters
program that provides a hindrance to a specific population in the Internship) (5) Working with organizations
school. The students are required to develop a plan for evaluating (6) Working with parents
the effectiveness of the policy/program, developing a data-based (7) Legal/ethical
NEWELL ET AL.

analysis of how that policy/program is a barrier to the specified (8) Research

group, and develop a plan to remedy the problem. (9) Culture
(10) Report writing
Component 7: Evaluation of (1) Students development of multicultural competence should be All years of training 4 Levels of competence
multicultural competence evaluated throughout the training program program
(2) Evaluation should consist of coursework, faculty annual reviews (1) Emerging
of students, as well as student self-reports (2) Basic
(3) Proficient
(4) Advanced
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
articles, the diversity-related articles only con-
stituted approximately 16.9% of all articles pub-
lished during this time. The population and top-
ics covered most were low SES and assessment,
respectively. International samples/topics were
so minor that they were grouped into an “other”
category that represented 19% of the diversity-
related articles. Given this lack of research
across domains, it is difficult to prioritize one
multicultural or cross-cultural research agenda
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
over another; therefore, the major research
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
agenda should be to increase the production of
multicultural and cross-cultural research.
Several reasons account for the lack of mul-
ticultural and cross-cultural research in psychol-
ogy broadly, and school psychology, in partic-
ular. Byrne and colleagues (2009) explained
that although there is an increasing need for this
type of research, training in how to conduct
multicultural and cross-cultural research is woe-
fully lacking. They identify three broad areas
for improving the training of cross-cultural re-
searchers. The first area addresses the problem
of structural and measurement equivalence,
which refers to whether the constructs and the
measurement tools are equivalent across cul-
tural groups. To avoid obtaining inaccurate
and/or misleading results, the authors propose
more training in the use of structural equation
modeling as well as item response theory. Of
course, these quantitative methods do not fully
address the question of construct equivalence if
the instruments were developed with one cul-
ture in mind. Addressing this issue requires the
use of qualitative and mixed methods research
to examine construct definitions across cultural
groups (Hitchcock & Nastasi, in press). Another
area of training for cross-cultural research is the
use of nested or hierarchical designs to account
for the multiple levels of the influence of culture
(e.g., group and individual) (Byrne et al., 2009).
Often researchers only examine the individual,
but this model ignores the structure of the in-
fluence of culture occurring at multiple levels;
therefore, hierarchical designs would serve to
capture the nested nature of culture. A final area
of training is increasing understanding of how
to ethically and validly adapt and/or translate
measures. Researchers are rarely familiar with
the guidelines for how to translate or adapt
measures within the U.S. or in other countries,
and part of the problem is that there is not a firm
structure for international governance of trans-
263
lating or adapting measures (Byrne et al., 2009).
Although all of the areas of training are critical
to increasing the competence of researchers to
conduct cross-cultural and multicultural re-
search, there are other salient factors that hinder
engagement in multicultural or cross-cultural
research.
In particular, students in training programs
may be reluctant to engage in multicultural or
cross-cultural research. Conducting such re-
search is restricted by the lack of appropriate
measures to use in the design and analysis of the
study and by necessarily smaller sample sizes
(Sue et al., 1998). Moreover, much of cross-
cultural and multicultural research dictates the
need for qualitative designs and/or mixed meth-
ods designs (e.g., Ingraham & Oka, 2006; Nas-
tasi et al., 2007; Nastasi & Schensul, 2005). The
discipline of psychology, and specialty of
school psychology more specifically, show
preference to quantitative designs, which makes
it difficult to get multicultural or cross-cultural
research published (Sue, 1999; Sue et al., 1998).
However, school psychology journals are be-
ginning to expand the scope of publications to
include a broader range of methods. Perhaps
more problematic is the limited availability of
qualitative and mixed methods research courses
in psychology departments and school psychol-
ogy programs.
Beyond these technical design dimensions,
multicultural competence is an important factor
for ensuring students’ ability to conduct multi-
cultural research. Liu, Sheu, and Williams
(2004) conducted a study on multicultural re-
search and multicultural competency. They ad-
ministered several measures on multicultural
competence, self-efficacy, and the research en-
vironment to 119 graduate students in psychol-
ogy. They found a significant positive relation-
ship between multicultural competence and
multicultural research self-efficacy, which indi-
cated that the higher the level of multicultural
competence, the more likely students felt con-
fident in their ability to conduct multicultural
research. Also associated with an increase in
multicultural research self-efficacy was a posi-
tive perception of the research environment as
well as the multicultural environment. Of im-
portance, there was not a significant relationship
between multicultural research self-efficacy and
teaching the techniques of research (e.g., statis-
tics and design) nor was there a relationship
 264 NEWELL ET AL.
between the students’ multicultural research
self-efficacy and faculty engagement in multi-
cultural research. However, the authors pointed
out that modeling how multicultural research is
conducted is important, although it was not as
significant a factor as increasing multicultural
competence. Furthermore, all of the exemplary
programs in the Rogers (2006) study had at least
one faculty member with a multicultural re-
search agenda and encouraged these types of
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
research projects so that students were prepared
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
for developing their own related research agen-
das. Hence, students in 96% of the exemplary
programs produced theses and dissertations
with multicultural content.
Summarily, there needs to be more multicul-
tural and cross-cultural research across all do-
mains of school psychological service delivery.
As Ingraham and Oka (2006) explained, we
simply do not know whether the existing tools
and practices will function in the same way and
produce accurate outcomes for all students. Sue
(1999) noted that we cannot continue to assume
that all tools and practices will work the same
for all groups, we must investigate it; therefore,
there is strong impetus to conceptualize, design,
and analyze research that has cultural variables
as a primary focus (American Psychological
Association, 2003). In addition, just teaching
students research design and having faculty
model the use of multicultural research is not
sufficient to produce multicultural and cross-
cultural researchers; rather, increasing a stu-
dent’s multicultural competence significantly
increases their belief in their ability to conduct
multicultural research (Liu et al., 2004). More-
over, teaching students appropriate method-
ological tools (e.g., SEM and hierarchical de-
signs; qualitative and mixed methods research
designs) will increase the likelihood that stu-
dents will develop and execute multicultural
research appropriately and effectively.
Component 3: Recruitment and Retention
of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse
Faculty and Students
Minority recruitment and retention of faculty
and students in school psychology is an area of
tremendous need given the gap in cultural di-
versity discussed at the beginning of the article.
This trend is expected to continue until con-
certed effort is made to increase the range of
diversity reflected in the field of school psychol-
ogy. Hence, a major component of multicultural
training is the need to implement and evaluate
specific strategies for recruiting faculty and stu-
dents. Having diverse faculty is equally impor-
tant to having diverse students because diverse
faculty who engage in multicultural teaching
and research can encourage the recruitment of
trainees with similar interest.
Recruitment typically focuses on enrolling
minority students in school psychology training
programs with the goal of maintaining a critical
mass of such students (see Rogers, 2006). Often
recruitment and retention research focuses on
racial/ethnic minorities; however, minority re-
cruitment relates to all types of minority groups
that are underrepresented in school psychology
(e.g., linguistic, economic, as well as ability).
Thus, recruitment and retention efforts should
focus not only on racial/ethnic minorities, but
also individuals from culturally and linguisti-
cally diverse backgrounds. Minority groups
such as GLBTQ and adherents to a variety of
religious groups also are underrepresented in
training programs and faculty, but it is unclear
whether these groups are actually underrepre-
sented or if the information is just not reported
and/or collected. Nevertheless, once students
enter into training programs, it is important to
keep them in the program so that they graduate
and enter the field.
Chandler (2010) conducted a qualitative
analysis of recruitment and retention strategies
from the perspective of Black students and fac-
ulty at three historically Black colleges and
universities. In her analysis, she identified sev-
eral key recruitment strategies such as providing
sufficient financial support, increasing aware-
ness of psychology fields in the Black commu-
nity, making clear the connection between the
field and the Black community, and recruiting
(or exposing school psychology) early at the
high school level. Several key retention strate-
gies also were noted, including providing fac-
ulty support, cultivating community atmo-
sphere, having diverse professional networks,
and having a multicultural curricular paradigm.
Graves and Wright (2009) also conducted a
study on the perceptions of Black students to-
ward school psychology. In their analysis, they
found that participants had the least amount of
knowledge about school psychology compared
with other psychology disciplines. Moreover,
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
most of the participants were only somewhat
likely to choose school psychology for graduate
study. In addition to gaining perspectives from
minority community members, analysis of pro-
gram materials such as marketing materials, ap-
plication documents, and websites have been
conducted to determine how effectively pro-
grams communicate messages of inclusion to
diverse populations (see Bidell, Ragan, Broach,
& Carrillo, 2007; Bidell, Turner, & Casas,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
2006; Rogers, 2006). Exemplary multicultural
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
training programs in school psychology in-
cluded a diversity statement, course titles for
multicultural courses, and financial support for
minority students in their application material
(Rogers, 2006). However, in a recent review of
psychology graduate program websites, school
psychology program websites contained the
lowest amount of diversity content compared
with clinical and counseling psychology pro-
grams, which is often the first impression a
program makes to possible recruits (Bidell et
al., 2007).
Despite the data on recruitment and retention
strategies, it is unclear the extent to which pro-
grams actually use these strategies to effectively
recruit and retain minority students. For this
reason, it would be important for programs to
begin identifying and documenting the effec-
tiveness of their recruitment and retention strat-
egies. As part of this process, trainers should
determine what populations they are trying to
recruit because the types of recruitment/
retention strategies may need to be tailored to
that population (see Bidell et al., 2007; Chan-
dler, 2010). To that end, programs need to un-
derstand their current student population and
determine how they can expand the range of
perspectives in their programs. Recruitment and
retention are not about just increasing the num-
ber of people who look different. Rather, the
focus is on increasing the range of perspectives
and ideas to diversify the knowledge and practice
of the field. For this reason, programs should
make concerted efforts to diversify that population
along several dimensions, by making efforts to
recruit and retain students of different races, SES
levels, linguistic backgrounds, cultures, religions,
genders, and sexual orientations.
Bringing different groups together requires
thought and effort among the program faculty
about how to foster a collegial community
where the students are able to learn from each
265
other. From a program perspective, structured
social activities can be helpful for fostering
student-student as well as faculty-student rela-
tionships. Moreover, having a multicultural
model of training can also be welcoming to all
students and foster an academic community of
support and learning. Learning in diverse con-
texts may be at times challenging and uncom-
fortable because of the difficult dialogues that
occur (Sue, Lin, Torino, Capodilupo, & Rivera,
2009; Young, 2003), but these contexts need
not be painful or alienate students. To explain, it
might be difficult for an African American stu-
dent to read curriculum and engage in class
discussions that only address the problems with
African Americans while ignoring strengths and
productivity of the population. Relatedly, it
would likely be difficult for the European
American student to read or hear about how all
European Americans are racist when that is not
consistent with his or her beliefs or experience.
A multicultural model ensures curricular inclu-
sion of the nuances of culture relevant to all
groups. The onus for ensuring a comprehensive,
nuanced view of different cultural groups and
creating a welcoming community for all stu-
dents falls on the faculty. However, faculty
training is necessary to effectively deliver a
multicultural curriculum in a diverse context
that fosters a healthy multicultural environment.
Therefore, faculty need to obtain training in
multiculturalism so that they can develop and
use multicultural curricula effectively to create
healthy and productive multicultural environ-
ments for learning.
The components described in this section
(and summarized in Table 2) reflect changes
that need to be made at the program and/or
faculty level to ensure effective multicultural
training in school psychology. In addition, spe-
cific curricular changes also are needed at the
student level.
Student-Level Best Evidence Components
The four student-level components reflect
best-evidence content areas that need to be ad-
dressed in a multicultural training curriculum
for preparing school psychologists. The basis
for the components is the research outlined ear-
lier and the core multicultural competencies for
school psychology outlined by Lopez and Rog-
ers (2001) and Rogers and Lopez (2002), Ta-
 266 NEWELL ET AL.
ble 3 details the student-level components, the
content to be addressed, the scope/sequence in
which the component should be addressed, and
the targeted multicultural competencies for that
component associated with each component.
Component 4: Knowledge About
Different Groups
Learning about the histories, beliefs, tradi-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
tions, and practices of culturally and linguisti-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
cally diverse children and families is a founda-
tion of multicultural competence. Having this
information contributes to the ability to trans-
form practices in a manner that is consistent
with the worldviews of the client (Wallace,
2000). For this reason, one requirement for
evidence-based multicultural training is that
students learn about the histories, beliefs, and
cultures of different groups. This knowledge
component also should include understanding
mental health (e.g., symptoms and treatment)
for diverse populations. Given that the knowl-
edge base is foundational it should occur very
early in the training sequence because it sets the
stage for the other areas of training. Moreover,
because of the depth and range of information
that should be covered in this area, it would be
ideal for this content to be covered in one or
more separate courses so that adequate attention
can be paid to understanding different groups.
Component 5: Translation of Knowledge to
School Psychological Services
Another essential component is training stu-
dents how to apply knowledge about diverse
populations to transform assessment, interven-
tion, and consultation services. Best practices
chapters and research articles have been pub-
lished on nondiscriminatory assessment (see
Hitchcock et al., 2006; Ortiz, 2002, 2008), cul-
tural considerations for intervention and coun-
seling (see Ingraham & Oka, 2006; Jones, 2008;
Nastasi, Moore, & Varjas, 2004; Varjas et al.,
2006;), consultation (see Ingraham, 2000; Nas-
tasi et al., 2000; Newell, 2010a; Ramirez &
Smith, 2007; Tarver Behring et al., 2000), and
systems interventions (Hatzichristou, Lampro-
poulou, & Lykitsakou, 2006). Ensuring that stu-
dents understand these models and can apply
them in practice is the goal. Much of the train-
ing in the first year of the program (or before
students enter practicum) is likely to be didac-
tic. Once they begin practicum experiences, stu-
dents are expected to demonstrate competence
in these content areas.
Component 6: Practical Experiences With
Diverse Populations
In order for students to become multicultur-
ally competent, they need to apply what they
have learned didactically in practice and have
the opportunity for feedback, refinement, and
guidance that is integral to practicum supervi-
sion. One of the challenges for training pro-
grams is providing diversity experiences in
communities without racial/ethnic minority
populations. In such settings, however, it is crit-
ical to remember that diversity broadly defined
extends beyond race and ethnicity and encom-
passes religion, SES, sexual orientation, and
so on.
To execute this component, students could be
required to complete at least one case in which
they demonstrate the implementation of cultur-
ally appropriate assessment, culturally appropri-
ate intervention, and culturally appropriate
consultation. The determination of the targeted
cultural variables can be based on the practicum
site coupled with the necessary competencies
students need to develop. For example, if
the student had not had the opportunity to dem-
onstrate competence in working with English
language learners (ELLs), then it would be ideal
to have the student provide assessment, inter-
vention, and /or consultation services to an ELL
client. If there are no ELLs at the site then have
the students select another cultural variable
(e.g., race, SES, gender, sexual orientation, re-
ligion) as a focus for application. If students do
not have an opportunity during practicum to
demonstrate their competence along a wide
range of cultural dimensions then it is important
to identify these areas and set goals for intern-
ship. However, because it is unlikely that stu-
dents will be exposed to every cultural variable
during practicum, the goal is to have them con-
ceptualize and implement these culturally
appropriate services targeting at least 1 to 2
different cultural variables during this time.
Moreover, having even limited experience cre-
ates a foundation for future development and
practice.
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
Another critical issue is the level of multicul-
tural training of the school-based practicum su-
pervisors. If the school-based supervisor does
not have adequate multicultural training to
supervise students, then programs have the re-
sponsibility to either provide professional de-
velopment to on-site supervisors or provide su-
pervision for relevant cases through university
supervisors or ad hoc supervisory personnel.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Component 7: Evaluation of students’
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Multicultural Knowledge and Skills
The development of multicultural compe-
tence should be on par with development of
assessment, intervention, and consultation com-
petencies (National Association of School Psy-
chologists, 2010c, American Psychological As-
sociation, 2002). Therefore, just as students’
ability to conduct an appropriate assessment,
design an effective intervention, and engage in
successful consultation is evaluated and re-
quired for successful completion of the training
program, so too should demonstration of mul-
ticultural competence. In particular, students
should be required to demonstrate multicultural
knowledge, attitudes and skills, and the capacity
to apply these to service delivery with diverse
populations. Several measures have been devel-
oped and refined to assess knowledge, attitudes,
and skills relevant to multicultural competence,
and could serve as evaluation tools for training
programs. Some of these measures include Mul-
ticultural School Psychology Counseling Com-
petency Scale (MSPCCS; Rogers & Ponterotto,
1998), Multicultural Awareness-Knowledge
and Skills Survey (MAKSS; D’Andrea,
Daniels, & Heck, 1991), Multicultural Counsel-
ing Awareness Scale (MCAS; Ponterotto,
Gretchen, Utsey, Rieger, & Austin, 20022),
Cross-Cultural Counseling Inventory—Revised
(CCCI-R; Lafromboise, Coleman, & Hernan-
dez, 1991), Multicultural Counseling Inventory
(MCI; Sodowsky, Taffe, Gutkin, & Wise,
1994), and the California Brief Multicultural
Competence Scale (CBCMS; Gamst, Dana,
Der-Karabetian, Aragon, Arellano, Morrow, &
Martenson, 2004). These measures can be ad-
ministered in the context of courses or as part of
annual reviews or culminating reviews to mon-
itor students’ development of multicultural
competence throughout the training program.
Using these tools, trainers also can identify and
267
target areas that need improvement. Programs
also can develop their own tools based on their
curriculum much like they develop comprehen-
sive exams to assess other content knowledge
and skill development. One of the primary is-
sues is the degree to which programs hold stu-
dents accountable for mastering multicultural
content as well as content in other competency
areas (e.g., assessment, intervention, consulta-
tion). For example, if a student could not ad-
minister a standardized cognitive assessment it
is unlikely that they would have the competence
to graduate from a school psychology program.
Thus, multicultural skills should be given this
same weight.
Another challenge in evaluating multicultural
competence is scaling in measurable terms. To
address this challenge, we propose a 4-level
model for planning curriculum as well as mon-
itoring and evaluating multicultural competence
among school psychology students. The four
levels include Emerging, Basic, Proficient, and
Advanced (Table 4). This model is intended as
a general framework that programs can modify
and adapt to fit their model of multicultural
training.
Summary
The best-evidence approach to multicultural
training in school psychology provides a road-
map for trainers to begin structurally, holisti-
cally, and intentionally providing multicultural
training to preservice students. Ideally, a train-
ing program would include all of these compo-
nents; however, for a number of reasons, the
implementation of all seven components may
not be feasible. Trainers are encouraged to in-
clude as many of the components as possible.
Although there may be variability in how pro-
grams implement the aforementioned compo-
nents, the one constant that all programs need to
address is the capacity of faculty to provide
multicultural training. Inherent in the best-
evidence approach is the Lafromboise and Fos-
ter’s (1992) integration model of multicultural
training, which requires that multicultural con-
tent be infused throughout the curriculum; such
infusion requires that faculty have the necessary
expertise to achieve infusion across content and
skill areas. Therefore, programs should attempt
to include as many of these components as
 268 NEWELL ET AL.

Table 4
Levels of Multicultural Competence as the Basis for Evaluating Student Competencies
Emerging multicultural competence
Competence at this level is focused on knowledge of different groups.
A. Students demonstrate an understanding of different racial/ethnic, linguistic, economic, religious, immigrant and
sexual orientation groups in the United States.
B. Students demonstrate awareness of the legal/ethical guidelines for service delivery to diverse populations, social
and institutional challenges to diverse groups, as well as the sociohistorical contexts of diverse groups.
C. Students demonstrate awareness of the beliefs/traditions of different groups, family and child rearing practices
of diverse groups, as well as perspectives on education and mental health among diverse groups.
D. Students demonstrate awareness of the unique interaction of multiple identities (e.g., race, religion, and sexual
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

orientation).
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

E. Students demonstrate the ability to self-reflect on their own culture, beliefs, and bias; and to explain how they
will continue to self-reflect on their worldview in their work with diverse clients.
Basic multicultural competence
Competence at this level is focused on continued demonstration of knowledge and translation of knowledge to skill.
A. Students demonstrate how to use research to conceptualize assessment, intervention, and consultation services
with diverse populations.
B. Students demonstrate the implementation of culturally-appropriate assessment.
C. Students demonstrate the implementation of culturally-appropriate intervention.
D. Students demonstrate the implementation of culturally-appropriate consultation.
E. Students demonstrate an ability to effectively evaluate culturally-appropriate interventions and consultation
processes.
F. Students demonstrate an ability to work with an interpreter during assessment, intervention, and consultation
service provision (if there is access to ELLs).
Proficient multicultural competence
Competence at this level is focused on increasing the range of cultural variables in which students have proficiency
as well as being able to think flexibly and critically about multicultural service delivery.
A. Students demonstrate an ability to implement culturally-appropriate assessment, intervention, and consultation
across multiple cultural variables.
B. Students demonstrate an ability to develop effective partnerships with diverse families and communities to
better serve diverse children within schools.
C. Students demonstrate an ability to translate culturally-appropriate assessment, intervention, and consultation
outcomes to diverse children and families.
D. Students demonstrate an ability to work with school professionals to increase their awareness of culturally-
appropriate service delivery.
Advanced multicultural competence
Competence at this level is focused on systems-level change as well as multicultural research.
A. Students demonstrate an ability to develop and implement culturally-appropriate systems-level prevention and
intervention programs.
B. Students demonstrate an ability to engage in social justice advocacy for diverse clients that address school and/
or community barriers.
C. Students demonstrate an ability to conceptualize, design, and implement research in which culture is a central
variable.
D. Students demonstrate an understanding of social, cultural, and educational systems in other countries and how
they relate to service delivery in the United States.
Note. ELL ⫽ English language learner. Students are not likely to be able to demonstrate competence beyond an emerging
level during the first year of training unless they have opportunities to apply the skills through practicum experiences.

possible with the goal of acquiring the addi-
tional training and resources needed to fully
implement all components.
A final consideration in the implementation
of this best-evidence approach is to evaluate
whether or not this approach to multicultural
training makes a (positive) difference in out-
comes for children. Although research linking
multicultural competence and outcomes is
emerging, the existing evidence is not sufficient
to make conclusive statements about the degree
to which multicultural competence improves
outcomes for populations served by school psy-
chologists. Few studies have been conducted
and most of the studies are qualitative or analog
studies. Qualitative research in particular is not
designed for generalization to the larger popu-
lation (Ingraham, 2003). Nevertheless, the ex-
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
isting research has contributed to our under-
standing of cultural considerations and their
impact on service delivery and thus is worth
considering.
Tarver Behring, Cabello, Kushida, and Mur-
guia, (2000) conducted a qualitative study ex-
amining cultural modifications to consultation
practices and found that African American,
Asian American, and Latino consultants were
more likely to make cultural modifications to
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
current consultation approaches with non-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
European American clients. However, no data
have been gathered to examine the treatment
outcomes of these modifications. Ingraham
(2003) used a qualitative case approach to ana-
lyze how three novice consultants engaged in
consultation with teachers of ethnically diverse
students. The findings of this study indicated
that novice European American consultants
may need more training on how to address
cultural issues with consultees compared with
culturally diverse consultants. Several factors
that contributed to the outcomes of the cases
were identified, such as student behavior,
teacher attitudes toward the students, and cul-
tural identity of the consultants. However, the
study’s design did not permit identification of the
specific factors that contributed to outcomes. In
addition to multicultural considerations for con-
sultation, there is increasing interest in multicul-
tural considerations for interventions.
The development and use of evidence-based
interventions has become a major force in the
field of school psychology (Kratochwill & Stoi-
ber, 2002). However, the generalizability of
these interventions to culturally and linguisti-
cally diverse populations has been questioned
(see Wampold, 2002). Most of the concerns
stem from the lack of sufficient representation
of culturally and linguistically diverse students
in evidence-based intervention samples, thus
limiting generalization to diverse populations.
Given the limited evidence base, it is unclear
whether outcomes can be improved by making
cultural modifications to existing evidence-
based interventions (Ingraham & Oka, 2006).
This question needs further research in order to
inform multicultural training and practice. As we
advance this research agenda, it is important to
continually look forward to the future of multicul-
tural competence for school psychology.
269
Future of School-Based Multicultural
Competencies
Two directions for the future of multicultural
competence in school psychology have
emerged: (a) developing transnational compe-
tence to better serve immigrant populations in
the United States and (b) evaluating the effect of
multicultural (and transnational) competence on
client outcomes.
Transnational Competence
School psychologists in the 21st century are
faced with increasing globalization and the de-
mand for better understanding of practice
within the global community (Nastasi & Varjas,
in press). Moreover, children and families who
immigrate into the United States face a unique
set of circumstances. Therefore, global consid-
erations within the area of multicultural compe-
tence are necessary.
Alternative terminology for multicultural
competence on a global or international level
has been proposed, and speaks to the emerging
nature of this area of study. Hatzichristou
(2002) has referred to multicultural competence
on a global level as transnational or cross-
cultural competence. Marsella (1998) called for
an even broader framework for conceptualizing
international psychology as ‘global-commu-
nity’ psychology, with an emphasis on the mul-
ticultural, multinational, multidisciplinary, and
multisectoral nature of our global community.
Nastasi and Varjas (in press) suggested apply-
ing this concept to school psychology as ‘glo-
bal-community school psychology.’ For our
purposes we adopt transnational competence to
represent multicultural competence at an inter-
national level.
Research with immigrant populations pro-
vides the basis for our discussion of transna-
tional competence, as most school psycholo-
gists are likely to encounter global issues at the
local level as they serve immigrant populations.
In particular, research shows that the amount of
difficulty immigrants experience relocating to
another country depends on (a) whether they
experience many stressors over a short period of
time; (b) the extent of cultural differences be-
tween their old country and new country; (c)
whether or not they were forced to leave their
homelands (immigrants who were forced to
 270 NEWELL ET AL.
leave tend to experience more stress than those
who left by choice); and (d) whether they were
exposed to war, terrorism, or other conflict prior
to emigrating (Ben-Sira, 1997; Mendoza,
Javier, & Burgos, 2007; Yakushko et al., 2008).
To address this complexity, the key areas of
competency development that should become
integral to the training of school psychologists
include acculturation, home and community
collaborations, international educational sys-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
tems, and reconceptualizing roles and functions
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
of school psychologists. (Discussions of cul-
tural differences on a worldwide scale and the
implications for cultural competence training is
beyond the scope of this article but deserves
attention in future efforts to develop transna-
tional or cross-cultural competencies within
school psychology.)
Acculturation. Psychological accultura-
tion refers to the psychological changes in a
person that result from contact with a different
cultural group for a protracted period (Berry,
1997). Acculturation is a long process that takes
at least one to two generations before reaching
a stable endpoint (Ryder et al., 2000; Van de
Vijver, 2005). Berry (2008) developed an influ-
ential, empirically supported framework that
many have found helpful for understanding the
acculturation styles and strategies used by im-
migrants and their host societies (Ryder, Alden,
& Paulhus, 2000). According to Berry (2008),
individual immigrants vary in the extent to
which they maintain their traditional cultural
practices and accommodate to the cultural prac-
tices of their host countries. Persons strongly
accommodated to the mainstream culture of
their host country are described as integrated if
they also closely adhere to their traditional cul-
tures; they are assimilated if they cease to
follow their traditional cultural practices. By
contrast, those immigrants who are weakly ac-
commodated to the mainstream culture are
termed separated if they maintain strong bonds
with their traditions of origin; they are margin-
alized if they cease to stay connected to their
traditions of origin. Empirical studies have
shown that culturally integrated and assimilated
youth demonstrate the most favorable outcomes
and that marginalized youth manifest are most
at risk (e.g., Ryder et al., 2000; Van de Vijver,
2005).
A considerable body of research has substan-
tiated a robust positive relationship between the
extent to which young people acquire compe-
tence in navigating their majority culture and
their healthy psychological adjustment. When
immigrants adapt to the majority culture they
are less apt to experience depression, anxiety,
and social and academic problems. The extant
research suggests that maintenance of their her-
itage culture has less influence on their psycho-
logical and social functioning (Ryder et al.,
2000). Research indicates that immigrants favor
accommodation to cultural-majority practices in
their public interactions with others in public
settings, and prefer maintaining connections to
their cultural roots in their personal lives (Van
de Vijver, 2005).
In sum, much of the empirical research con-
ducted to date on first- and second-generation
immigrants suggests that it is most advanta-
geous for individual immigrants when they be-
come familiar with the majority culture of their
host countries, but also maintain connections
with their traditions of origin. Yet there are
many gaps in this literature. More research is
needed to better understand factors that impact
on the mental health status of children from
immigrant families, and ways to assist with
their integration (Mendoza et al., 2007). Longi-
tudinal studies of immigrant individuals and
families would be especially valuable for better
understanding the acculturation process
(Fuligni, 2001). Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) eco-
logical framework is helpful for understanding
the complex influences on immigrant children’s
development, particularly because immigrant
youth need to negotiate the sometimes conflict-
ing demands of multiple cultures at each level
(Gonzalez, Dumka, Mauricio, & Germán, 2007;
Neto, 2009).
Home and community collaborations.
Schools should strive to become supportive
communities for immigrant families. Both fam-
ilies and their children would benefit from
schools offering parenting classes in the fami-
lies’ native language (Dwyer, Osher, & Hoff-
man, 2000; Frisby, 2008; Khoury-Kassabri et
al., 2004; Mendoza et al., 2007). Because re-
search has shown that parents from different
parts of the world hold many diverging beliefs
and understandings about child development,
parenting classes in elementary schools should
teach about child development and should in-
clude specific strategies that parents can carry
out in the home for stimulating their children’s
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
intellectual growth. Parenting classes also should
provide information about access to affordable
preschools (for siblings of students) and medical
care. Other worthwhile goals for parenting classes
include familiarizing parents with the school sys-
tem and outlining the goals and expectations of
schooling. In secondary schools, it is important to
be mindful that youth from immigrant families are
at increased risk of dropping out of high school
and college, often because of their desire to help
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
provide economically for their extended families.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Therefore parenting classes targeting immigrant
parents in secondary schools would do well to
provide information about college scholarships,
other sources of education funding, and career
opportunities.
Schools would do well to establish contact
and solicit active engagement by members of
cultural minority communities, consistent with
the recommendations of Van de Vijver (2005).
Strategies for doing so could, for instance, in-
clude inviting parents and community represen-
tatives into classrooms as guest presenters.
School psychologists should advocate for im-
proved access to low-cost preschool programs,
especially for children from low-income fami-
lies and whose parents have little formal edu-
cation and limited English proficiency (Fuligni
& Fuligni, 2007; Hernandez, Denton, &
Macartney, 2007).
International educational systems. There
are fundamental differences from country to
country in all aspects of mainstream and special
education (structure of the educational systems,
curricula, teachers’ expectations concerning the
best methods for educating pupils, etc.). Given
the diverse nature of the countries in which
school psychological services are delivered, the
contexts within which school psychologists
work vary considerably based on a country’s
educational system, demographic characteris-
tics, economy and geography (Farrell, Jimerson
& Oakland, 2007). Differences also apply from
country to country regarding the provision of
school psychological services, school psychol-
ogy research and training, the role of school
psychologists, the status of school psychology
as a profession, and the related professional
associations (Hatzichristou, 2002; Hatzichris-
tou, Lampropoulou, Lykitsakou & Dimitropou-
lou, 2010; Jimerson et al., 2004, 2006).
Because of the differences obtained in edu-
cational systems and in the provision of school
271
psychology services, current assumptions about
the role and training of school psychologists in
education require some reexamination and re-
adjustment to the varying educational and cul-
tural/national settings. This reexamination
needs to be of a comprehensive nature, synthe-
sizing all possible factors of the new multicul-
tural and cross-cultural environment. This trend
toward reexamination has been recently con-
firmed within the multicultural and multina-
tional European Union, which favors common
guidelines and standards for training in many
disciplines, including Psychology, which would
lead to a European Diploma in Psychology and
its various sub disciplines. Consistent with eth-
ical responsibilities regarding service provision
to culturally diverse populations within a given
country, school psychologists have an increas-
ing responsibility to develop transnational com-
petencies and to examine their competence with
regard to service provision within a global com-
munity. Similarly, professional associations and
training programs are well advised to examine
the extent to which their standards and practices
meet the needs of the increasingly global
community.
Reconceptualize roles of school psychol-
ogy. Speakers at the Future of School Psy-
chology, 2002 Invitational Conference repeat-
edly emphasized the need to reconceptualize the
roles of school psychologists, with implications
for both training and practice in different coun-
tries. Specifically, the speakers emphasized the
need for comprehensive educational and mental
health services; providing professional develop-
ment opportunities related to consultation, as-
sessment, intervention , mental health, and cul-
tural competency; collecting and disseminating
information on effective and evidence-based
models of school psychology services and pro-
grams; providing information and training re-
lated to influencing public policy efforts; and
recognizing standards and guidelines for train-
ing, credentialing, practice and ethics
(Ehrhardt-Padgett, Hatzichristou, Kitson &
Myers, 2004). Achieving these goals requires
aligning the structures of schools and universi-
ties to support data-based practices, group-
focused services, collaborations and partner-
ships, and competency in cultural issues.
The combination of knowledge mastery and
practice is critical in providing opportunities for
learning, self-reflection, development, and
 272 NEWELL ET AL.
change regarding personal attitudes, misconcep-
tions, behaviors, and professional skills.
Hatzichristou (2002) suggested common future
perspectives and goals at a cross-national level
associated with three interrelated domains: (a)
collaboration of professional associations, (b)
scientific foundation for practice, and (c) devel-
opment of a multicultural professional identity.
At the Futures Conference, Hatzichristou pro-
posed a Task Force on continuing professional
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
development and cross-cultural educational cur-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
riculum for school psychologists emphasizing
the decisive impact that training and continuing
professional development has on the specialty
definition and the provision of school psycho-
logical services around the world (Hatzichristou
& Lampropoulou, 2004). We strongly believe
that the change of paradigm in school psychol-
ogy training, away from the currently predom-
inant monocultural paradigm can only come
from a synthetic approach combining multicul-
tural, multinational, and transnational (and per-
haps multidisciplinary and multisectoral) ap-
proaches that encourage trainers, professionals,
and students to work synergistically and learn
from each other’s cultures, values, traditions,
and experiences.
In considering the need for more attention to
transnational competency in training, a separate
course could include topics such as interna-
tional educational systems, international school
psychology, and comparative psychology with
special focus on countries from which children
in the area have immigrated. In addition, pro-
grams can address assessment, consultation,
and intervention from a transnational perspec-
tive, with particular emphasis on cultural appro-
priateness of existing evidence-based practices
in these areas and strategies for adaptation to
specific cultural groups.
Furthermore, to advance transnational com-
petency in consuming and producing research,
it is important to provide training in research
that addresses school psychology issues from an
a transnational, cross-cultural perspective (Nas-
tasi & Varjas, in press) and for faculty to culti-
vate a spirit of collaboration on research
projects with students (and faculty) from other
countries (see Jimerson et al., 2006) as well as
national and international conferences,
taskforces, and publications (Jimerson, Oak-
land, & Farrell, 2007). These opportunities al-
low for another level of understanding of tran-
snational issues that are central to effectively
serving immigrant populations.
Conclusions
The purpose of this article was to provide a
comprehensive, critical review of multicultural
training in school psychology. Based on this
review of the literature, there has been signifi-
cant advancement in the recognition of cultur-
ally and linguistically diverse children and fam-
ilies in school psychological service delivery.
To explain, several legal decisions forced the
recognition and inclusion of minority children
and families in school-based settings. More spe-
cific to school psychology, court rulings such as
Larry P., Diana, Guadalupe, and P.L. 94 –142
brought about changes to how school psychol-
ogists provide services to minority students, es-
pecially in the area of assessment. Once school
psychologists were legally mandated to provide
nondiscriminatory services to culturally and lin-
guistically diverse children, it was soon recog-
nized that there were limitations to the tradi-
tional roles, functions, and practices of school
psychologists because of the lack of consider-
ation of cultural factors. Thus, the journey be-
gan to better understand cultural differences and
how school psychologists can best address cul-
tural differences in the provision of services,
more broadly. Hence, there was recognition for
the need for multiculturally competent school
psychologists. As the current evidence stands,
there are several areas of research that need to
be addressed to better understand how to de-
velop multiculturally competent school psy-
chologists who can provide effective, culturally
appropriate services. We suggest the following
as foci for future research in school psychology,
specifically, examination of the link between
multicultural training and practice outcomes
across domains of assessment, consultation,
prevention, intervention, research, supervision,
and advocacy.
• The examination of the link between mul-
ticultural competence and client outcomes and
the transferability of multicultural competencies
to different cultural groups.
• The examination of different approaches to
multicultural training and outcomes.
• The examination of the translation/adapta-
tion of evidence-based practices to different cul-
tural groups.
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
• The examination of training of trainers in
multicultural education practices at the graduate
level, including supervision of field experiences.
• The examination of the state of art in re-
search methods for enhancing our understand-
ing of cultural and contextual variables, for ex-
ample, the potential role of qualitative and
mixed methods research.
• The examination of the implications of
“globalization” for multicultural training, prac-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
tice, and research particularly with regard to
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
work with immigrant populations and transla-
tion of Western-based models of school psy-
chology internationally.
• The examination of the role of school psy-
chology in advocating for culturally competent
practices in schools and communities for the
populations they serve.
The purpose of conducting this research is to
advance multicultural training, research, and
practice in school psychology. The implications
of this research agenda are significant because
they set the stage for better understanding the
nature and preparation of multiculturally com-
petent school psychologists, and subsequently
provide the basis for examining the impact of
enhanced cultural competence on service provi-
sion and outcomes for children, families,
schools, and communities.
References
Abramowitz, E. A. (1981). School psychology: A
historical perspective. School Psychology Re-
view, 10, 121–126.
Adams, G., Biernat, M., Branscombe, N. R., Cran-
dall, C. S., & Wrightsman, L. S., Jr. (Eds.). (2008).
Commemorating Brown: The social psychology of
racism and discrimination. Washington, DC: APA
Books.
American Psychological Association. (1990a).
Guidelines on providers of psychological services
to ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse
populations. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/
policy/providerguidelines.aspx
American Psychological Association. (1990b). Task
force on the delivery of services to ethnic minority
populations. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/
policy/providerguidelines.aspx
American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical
principles and code of conduct. American Psychol-
ogist, 48, 1597–1611.
273
American Psychological Association. (2000). Guide-
lines for psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and bi-
sexual clients. American Psychologist, 55, 1440 –
1451. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.12.1440
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical
principles of psychologists and code of conduct.
American Psychologist, 57, 1060 –1073. doi:
10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guide-
lines on multicultural education, training, research,
practice and organizational change for psycholo-
gists. American Psychologist, 53, 377– 402. doi:
10.1037/0003-066X.58.5.377
American Psychological Association. (2007). Guide-
lines for psychological practice with girls and
women. American Psychologist, 62, 949 –979. doi:
10.1037/0003-006X.62.9.949
Banks, J. A., & McGee Banks, C. A. (Eds.). (2004).
Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives
(5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Bardon, J., & Walker, N. (1972). Characteristics of
graduate training in school psychology. American
Psychologist, 27, 652– 656. doi:10.1037/h0033433
Bardon, J., & Wenger, R. (1976). School psychology
training trends in the early 1970s. Professional
Psychology, 7, 31–37. doi:10.1037/0735–7028.7
.1.31
Batsche, G. M., Knoff, H. M., & Peterson, D. W.
(1989). Trends in credentialing and practice stan-
dards. School Psychology Review, 18, 193–202.
Belar, C. D. (2009). Advancing the culture of com-
petence. Training and Education in Professional
Psychology, 3, S63–S65. doi:10.1037/a0017541
Ben-Sira, Z. (1997). Immigration, stress, and read-
justment. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and
adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International
Review, 46, 5–34. doi:10.1080/026999497378467
Berry, J. W. (2008). Globalisation and acculturation.
International Journal of Intercultural Rela-
tions, 32, 328 –336. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008
.04.001
Bidell, M. P., Turner, J. A., & Casas, J. M. (2006).
First impressions count: Ethnic/Racial and Lesbi-
an/Gay/Bisexual content of professional psychol-
ogy application materials. Training and Education
in Professional Psychology, S(2), 112–121. doi:
10.1037/1931–3918.S.2.112
Bidell, M. P., Turner, J. A., & Casas, J. M. (2007).
First impressions: A multicultural content analysis
of professional psychology program web sites.
Training and Education in Professional Psychol-
ogy, 1, 204 –214. doi:10.1037/1931–3918.1.3.204
Bornstein, M. H., Deater-Deckard, K., & Lansford,
J. E. (2007). Introduction: Immigrant families in
contemporary society. In J. E. Lansford, K. Deater-
Deckard, & M. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Immigrant
 274 NEWELL ET AL.
families in contemporary society (pp. 1– 8). New
York: Guilford Press.
Boxer, A. (2009). Native Americans and the federal
government. Historical Review, 64, 7–12.
Braden, J. P., & Shah, K. G. (2005). A critique of
multicultural training in school psychology: Ratio-
nale, strategies, and tactics. In C. L. Frisby & C. R.
Reynolds (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of mul-
ticultural school psychology (pp. 1023–1047).
New York: Wiley.
Braden, J. S., DiMarino-Linnen, E., & Good, T. L.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
(2001). Schools, society, and school psychologists:
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
History and future directions. Journal of School
Psychology, 39, 203–219. doi:10.1016/S0022-
4405(01)00056 –5
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). Contexts of child rearing:
Problems and prospects. American Psycholo-
gist, 34, 844 – 850. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34
.10.844
Brown, D. T., & Minke, K. M. (1986). School psy-
chology graduate training: A comprehensive anal-
ysis. American Psychologist, 41, 1328 –1338. doi:
10.1037/0003-066X.41.12.1328
Brown, S. L., Shriberg, D., & Wang, A. (2007).
Diversity on the rise? A review of school psychol-
ogy journals from 2000 –2003. Psychology in the
Schools, 44, 639 – 650. doi:10.1002/pits.20253
Byrne, B. M., Oakland, T., Leong, F. T. L., Vijver,
F. J. R. van de, Hambleton, R. K., Cheung, F. M.,
& Bartram, D. (2009). A critical analysis of cross-
cultural research and testing practices: Implica-
tions for improved education and training in psy-
chology. Training and Education in Professional
Psychology, 3, 94 –105. doi:10.1037/a0014516
Cardon, B. W., & French, J. L. (1968 –9). Organiza-
tion and content of graduate programs in school
psychology. Journal of School Psychology, 7, 28 –
31. doi:10.1016/0022– 4405(68)90128 –3
Catterall, C. D. (1972). Special education in transi-
tion: Implications for school psychology. Journal
of School Psychology, 10, 91–98.
Chandler, D. (2010). Proactively addressing the
shortage of Blacks in school psychology: High-
lighting the school psychology subfield. The Jour-
nal of Black Psychology [Online], doi:10.1177/
0095798409359774
Civil Rights Act of 1964, P. L. 88 –353, 78 Stat. 241
(1964).
Curtis, M. J., Hunley, S. A., Walker, K. J., & Baker,
A. C. (1999). Demographic characteristics and
professional practices in school psychology.
School Psychology Review, 28, 104 –116.
Curtis, M. J., Lopez, A. D., Batsche, G. M., Minch,
D., & Abshier, D. (2007, March). Status report on
school psychology: A national perspective. Paper
presented at the annual convention of the National
Association of School Psychologists, New York
City.
D’Andrea, M., Daniels, J., & Heck, R. (1991). Eval-
uating the impact of multicultural counseling train-
ing. Journal for Counseling and Development, 70,
143–150.
Dunn, L. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly
mentally retarded: Is much of it justifiable? Excep-
tional Children, 23, 5–21.
Duren Green, T., Cook-Morales, V. J., Robinson-
Zanartu, C., & Ingraham, C. L. (2009). Pathways on
a journey to getting it: Multicultural competence
training and continuing professional development. In
J. M. Jones (Ed.). The psychology of multiculturalism
in the schools: A primer for practice, training, and
research (pp. 83–116). Bethesda, MD: National As-
sociation of School Psychologists.
Dwyer, K. P., Osher, D., & Hoffman, C. C. (2000).
Creating responsive schools: Contextualizing early
warning, timely response. Exceptional Chil-
dren, 66, 347–365.
Ehrhardt-Padgett, G., Hatzichristou, C., Kitson, J., &
Meyers, J. (2004). Awakening to a new dawn:
Perspectives of the future of school psychology.
School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 483– 496. doi:
10.1521/scpq.18.4.483.26994
Esquivel, G. B. (1985). Best practices in the assess-
ment of limited English proficient and bilingual
children. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology (pp. 113–123).
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Esquivel, G. B., Warren, T. M., & Littman-Orlitzky,
S. L. (2007). A historical overview of the devel-
opment of multicultural school psychology. In
G. B. Esquivel, E. C. Lopez, & S. G. Nahari (Eds.),
Handbook of multicultural psychology (pp. 3–28).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fagan, T. K. (1985a). Sources for the delivery of
school psychological services during 1890 –1930.
School Psychology Review, 14, 378 –382.
Fagan, T. K. (1985b). Historical perspectives on
school psychology. School Psychology Review, 14,
121–124.
Fagan, T. K. (1986). School psychology’s dilemma:
Reappraising solutions and directing attention to
the future. American Psychologist, 41, 851– 861.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.41.8.851
Fagan, T. K. (1992). Compulsory schooling, child
study, clinical psychology, and special Education:
Origins of school psychology. American Psychol-
ogist, 47, 236 –243. doi:10.1037/0003-066X
.47.2.236
Fagan, T. K. (1993). Separate but equal: School
psychology’s search for organizational identity.
Journal of School Psychology, 31, 3–90. doi:
10.1016/0022– 4405(93)90022-B
Fagan, T. K. (2000). Practicing school psychology: A
turn-of-the-century perspective. American Psy-
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
chologists, 55, 754 –757. doi:10.1037/0003-066X
.55.7.754
Fagan, T. K. (2005). The 50th anniversary of the
Thayer Conference: Historical perspectives and
accomplishments. School Psychology Quar-
terly, 20, 224 –251. doi:10.1521/scpq.2005.20
.3.224
Farling, W. H. (1968 –1969). The problems and po-
tential of school psychology in 1969. Journal of
School Psychology, 7, 33–35. doi:10.1016/0022–
4405(68)90129 –5
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Farrell, P. F., Jimerson, S. R., & Oakland, T. D.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
(2007). School psychology internationally: A syn-
thesis of findings. In S. R. Jimerson., T. D. Oak-
land & P. T. Farrell (Eds.). The handbook of in-
ternational school psychology (pp. 501–509).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fields, A. J. (2010). Multicultural research and prac-
tice: Theoretical issues and maximizing cultural
exchange. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 41, 196 –201. doi:10.1037/a0017938
Fisher, C. B. (2009). Decoding the ethics code: A
practical guide for psychologists. Washington,
DC: Sage.
Flaherty, L. T., & Osher, D. (2002). History of
school-based mental health services in the schools.
In M. D. Weist, S. W. Evans, & N. A. Lever
(Eds.), Handbook of school mental health: Ad-
vancing practice and research (pp. 11–22). New
York: Springer.
French, J. L. (1990). History of school psychology. In
T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The hand-
book of school psychology (1st ed., pp. 3–20). New
York: Wiley.
French, J. L., Smith, D. C., & Cardon, B. W. (1968).
Institutions offering graduate training and financial
assistance in school psychology. Journal of School
Psychology, 6, 261–267. doi:10.1016/0022–
4405(68)90072–1
Frisby, C. (2009). Cultural competence in school
psychology: Established or elusive Construct?. In
T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The hand-
book of school psychology (pp. 855– 887). Hobo-
ken, NJ: Wiley.
Fuligni, A. J. (2001). A comparative longitudinal
approach to acculturation among children from
immigrant families. Harvard Educational Re-
view, 71, 566 –578.
Gamst, G., Dana, R. H., Der-Karabetian, A., Aragon,
M., Arellano, L., Morrow, G., & Martenson, L.
(2004). Cultural competency Revised: The Cali-
fornia Brief Multicultural Competency Scale.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 37, 3.
Gerry, M. H. (1973). Cultural myopia: The need for
a corrective lens. Journal of School Psychol-
ogy, 11, 307–315. doi:10.1016/0022– 4405(93)
90044-J
275
Goh, D. S. (1977). Graduate training in school psy-
chology. Journal of School Psychology, 15, 207–
218. doi:10.1016/0022– 4405(77)90002– 4
Goldwasser, E., & Meyers, J. (1983). The impact of
PL 94 –142 on the practice of school psychology:
A national survey. Psychology in the Schools, 20,
153–165. doi:10.1002/1520 – 6807(198304)20:
2⬍153
Gonzalez, N. A., Dumka, L. E., Mauricio, A. M., &
Germán, M. (2007). Building bridges: Strategies to
promote academic and psychological resilience for
adolescents of Mexican origin. In J. E. Lansford,
K. Deater-Deckard, & M. H. Bornstein (Eds.),
Immigrant families in contemporary society (pp.
268 –286). New York: Guilford Press.
Graves, S. L., & Wright, L. B. (2009). Historically
Black colleges and university students’ and facul-
ties’ views of school psychology: Implications for
increasing diversity in higher education. Psychol-
ogy in the Schools, 46, 616 – 626. doi:10.1002/
pits.20402
Harry, B., & Anderson, M. G. (1995). The dispro-
portionate placement of African American males
in special education programs: A critique of the
process. Journal of Negro Education, 63, 602–
619. doi:10.2307/2967298
Hatzichristou, C. (2002). A conceptual framework of
the evolution of school psychology. Transnational
considerations of common phases and future per-
spectives. School Psychology International, 23,
266 –282. doi:10.1177/0143034302023003322
Hatzichristou, C., & Lampropoulou, A. (2004). The
future of school psychology conference: A cross-
national approach to service delivery. Journal of
Educational and Psychological Consultation, 15,
313–333. doi:10.1207/s1532768xjepc153&4_7
Hatzichristou, C., Lampropoulou, A., & Lykitsakou,
K. (2006). Addressing cultural factors in develop-
ment of system interventions. Journal of Applied
School Psychology, 22, 103–126. doi:10.1300/
J370v22n02_06
Hatzichristou, C., Lampropoulou, A., Lykitsakou, K.,
& Dimitropoulou. (2010). Promoting university
and schools partnerships: Transnational consider-
ations and future directions. In J. Kaufman, T. L.
Hughes, & C. A. Riccio (Eds.), Handbook of
education, training and supervision of school psy-
chologists in school and community, Vol. II. Bridg-
ing the training and practice gap: Building collab-
orative university/field practices (pp. 89 –108).
New York: Routledge.
Heller, K. A., Holtzman, W., & Messick, S. (Eds.).
(1982). Placing children in special education: A
strategy for equity. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Hernandez, D. J., Denton, N. A., & Macartney, S. E.
(2007). Family circumstances of children in immi-
grant families: Looking to the future of America.
 276 NEWELL ET AL.
In J. E. Lansford, K. Deater-Deckard, & M. H.
Bornstein (Eds.), Immigrant families in contempo-
rary society (pp. 9 –29). New York: Guilford
Press.
Hitchcock, J., & Nastasi, B. K. (in press). Mixed
methods for construct validation. In P. Vogt & M.
Williams (Eds.), Handbook of methodological in-
novation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hobbs, F., & Stoops, N. (2002). U.S. Census Bureau,
Census 2000 Special Reports, Series CENSR-4,
Demographic Trends in the 20th Century. Wash-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Ingraham, C. L. (2000). Consultation through a mul-
ticultural lens: Multicultural and cross-cultural
consultation in schools. School Psychology Re-
view, 29, 320 –343.
Ingraham, C. L. (2003). Multicultural consultee-
centered consultation: When novice consultants
explore cultural hypotheses with experienced
teacher consultees. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 14, 329 –362. doi:
10.1207/s1532768xjepc143&4_7
Ingraham, C. L., & Oka, E. R. (2006). Multicultural
issues in evidence-based interventions. Journal of
Applied School Psychology, 22, 127–149. doi:
10.1300/J370v22n02_07
Jimerson, S. R., Graydon, K., Farrell, P., Kikas, E.,
Hatzichristou, C., Boce, E., & Bashi, G. (2004).
The International School Psychology Survey: De-
velopment and data from Albania, Cyprus, Esto-
nia, Greece and Northern England. School Psy-
chology International, 25, 259 –286. doi:10.1177/
0143034304046901
Johnson, G. O. (1962). Special education for the
mentally handicapped: A paradox. Exceptional
Children, 29, 62– 69.
Jones, J. M. (1998). Ethnic minority psychology in
the 20th century: Reflections and mediations on
what has been and what is next. Cultural Diversity
and Mental Health, 4, 203–211. doi:10.1037/
1099 –9809.4.3.203
Jones, J. M. (2008). Best practices in multicultural
counseling. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology (5th ed.). Washing-
ton: National Association of School Psychologists.
Jones, J. M. (Ed.). (2009). The psychology of multi-
culturalism in the schools: A primer for practice,
training, and research. Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Khoury-Kassabri, M., Benbenishty, R., Astor, R. A.,
& Zeira, A. (2004). The contributions of commu-
nity, family, and school variables to student
victimization. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 34, 187–204. doi:10.1007/s10464-
004 –7414-4
Kozol, J. (2005). Shame of the nation: The restora-
tion of apartheid in America. New York: Crown
Publishing.
Kratochwill, T., & Stoiber, K. C. (2002). Evidence-
based interventions in school psychology: Concep-
tual foundations of the Procedural and Coding
Manual of Division 16 and the Society for the
Study of School Psychology Task Force. School
Psychology Quarterly, 17, 341–389. doi:10.1521/
scpq.17.4.341.20872
Lafromboise, T. D., Coleman, H. L. K., & Hernan-
dez, A. (1991). Development and factor structure
of the Cross-Cultural Counseling Inventory-
Revised. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 22, 380 –388.
Lafromboise, T. D., & Foster, S. L. (1992). Cross-
cultural training: Scientist Practitioner model and
methods. The Counseling Psychologist, 20, 472–
489. doi:10.1177/0011000092203006
Liu, W. M., Sheu, H., & Williams, K. (2004). Mul-
ticultural competency in research: Examining the
relationships among multicultural competencies,
research training and self-efficacy, and the multi-
cultural environment. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 10, 324 –339. doi:10.1037/
1099 –9809.10.4.324
Lopez, E. C. (2008). Best practices in working with
school interpreters. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes
(Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp.
1751–1770). Bethesda, MD: National Association
of School Psychologists.
Lopez, E. C., & Rogers, M. R. (2001). Conceptual-
izing cross-cultural school psychology competen-
cies. School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 270 –302.
doi:10.1521/scpq.16.3.270.19889
Marsella, A. J. (1998). Toward a global psychology:
Meeting the needs of a changing world. American
Psychologist, 53, 1282–1291.
Marsella, A. J. (2008, Sept). Psychology in a global
era: Foundations, issues, directions. Presentation
at the 2008 APA Education Leadership Confer-
ence: Internationalizing Psychology Education,
Washington, DC.
Marsella, A. J., & Pederson, P. (2004). Internation-
alizing the counseling psychology curriculum: To-
ward new values, competencies, and directions.
Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 17, 413– 423.
doi:10.1080/09515070412331331246
Mendoza, F. S., Javier, J. R., & Burgos, A. E. (2007).
Health of children in immigrant families. In J. E.
Lansford, K. Deater-Deckard, & M. H. Bornstein
(Eds.), Immigrant families in contemporary society
(pp. 30 –50). New York: Guilford Press.
Mullen, F. A. (1981). School psychology in the USA:
Reminiscences of its origin. Journal of School
Psychology, 19, 103–119. doi:10.1016/0022–
4405(81)90053– 4
Nastasi, B. K., Hitchcock, J., Sarkar, S., Burkholder,
G., Varjas, K., & Jayasena, A. (2007). Mixed
methods in intervention research: Theory to adap-
 REVIEW OF MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
tation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1,
164 –182. doi:10.1177/1558689806298181
Nastasi, B. K., Moore, R. B., & Varjas, K. M. (2004).
School-based mental health services: Creating com-
prehensive and culturally specific programs. Wash-
ington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Nastasi, B. K., & Schensul, S. L. (2005). Contribu-
tions of qualitative research to the validity of in-
tervention research. Journal of School Psychol-
ogy, 43, 177–195. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2005.04.003
Nastasi, B. K., & Varjas, K. (in press). International
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
development of school psychology. In M. A. Bray
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
& T. J. Kehle (Eds.), Oxford handbook of school
psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nastasi, B. K., Varjas, K., Bernstein, R., & Jayasena,
A. (2000). Conducting participatory culture-
specific consultation: A global perspective on mul-
ticultural consultation. School Psychology Re-
view, 29, 401– 413.
National Association of School Psychologists.
(2000). Professional conduct manual: Principles
for professional ethics: Guidelines for the provi-
sion of school psychological services. Bethesda,
MD: Author.
National Association of School Psychologists. (2009).
Culturally competent practice. Retrieved from http://
www.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/
index.aspx
National Association of School Psychologists.
(2010). Minority recruitment taskforce. Washing-
ton, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www
.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/
minrecruit.aspx
National Association of School Psychologists.
(2010). Model for comprehensive and integrated
school psychological services. Bethesda, MD:
NASP.
National Association of School Psychologists.
(2010). Multicultural affairs committee. Washing-
ton, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www
.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/
mac.aspx
Neto, F. (2009). Predictors of mental health among
adolescents from immigrant families in Portugal.
Journal of Family Psychology, 23, 375–385. doi:
10.1037/a0015831
Newell, M. L. (2010a). The implementation of
problem-solving consultation: An analysis of
problem conceptualization in a multiracial con-
text. Journal of Educational and Psychological
Consultation, 20, 83–105. doi:10.1080/
10474411003785529
Newell, M. L. (2010b). The structure of multicultural
training in school psychology: Current status and
future directions. Manuscript under review.
Oakland, T. (2005). Commentary #1: What is multi-
cultural school psychology? In C. L. Frisby &
C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook
277
of multicultural school psychology (pp. 3–13).
New York: Wiley.
Ochoa, S. H., Rivera, B., & Ford, L. (1997). An
investigation of school psychology training per-
taining to bilingual psycho-educational assessment
of primarily Hispanic students: Twenty-five years
after Diana v. California. Journal of School Psy-
chology, 35, 329 –349. doi:10.1016/S0022-
4405(97)00009 –5
Ortiz, S. O. (2002). Best practices in working with
culturally diverse children and families. In A.
Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school
psychology IV (pp. 337–352). Bethesda, MD: Na-
tional Association of School Psychologists.
Patton, J. M. (1998). The disproportionate represen-
tation of African Americans in special education:
Looking behind the curtain for understanding and
solutions. Journal of Special Education, 32, 25–
31. doi:10.1177/002246699803200104
Pfeiffer, S. I., & Marmo, P. (1981). The status of
training in school psychology and trends toward
the future. Journal of School Psychology, 19, 211–
216.
Phillips, B. N. (1990). School psychology at a turning
point. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
Ponterotto, J. G., Gretchen, D., Utsey, S. O., Rieger,
B. P., & Austin, R. (2002). A revision of the
Multicultural Counseling Awareness Scale. Jour-
nal of Multicultural Counseling and Develop-
ment, 30, 153–180.
Quintana, S. M., Troyano, N., & Taylor, G. (2001).
Cultural validity and inherent challenges in quan-
titative methods for multicultural research (pp.
604 – 630). In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A.
Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.) Handbook of
multicultural counseling (2nd ed.). Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Ramirez, S. Z., & Smith, K. (2007). Case vignettes of
school psychologists’ consultation involving His-
panic youth. Journal of Educational and Psycho-
logical Consultation, 17, 79 –93. doi:10.1207/
s1532768Xjepc1701_4
Reschly, D. J. (1982). School psychology today:
Progress, not impasse. Professional Psychol-
ogy, 13, 990 –998. doi:10.1037/0735–7028.13
.6.990
Reschly, D. J. (2000). The present and future status
of school psychology in the United States. School
Psychology Review, 29, 507–522.
Richardson, J. G. (2002). Historical context, profes-
sional authority, and discourse of risk: Child guid-
ance and special education. Teachers College
Record, 104, 563–585.
Rogers, M. R. (2006). Exemplary multicultural train-
ing in school psychology programs. Cultural Di-
versity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 12, 115–
133. doi:10.1037/1099 –9809.12.1.115
 278 NEWELL ET AL.
Rogers, M. R., Hoffman, M., & Wade, J. (1998). No-
table multicultural training in APA approved coun-
seling psychology and school psychology programs.
Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, 4, 212–226.
doi:10.1037/1099 –9809.4.3.212
Rogers, M. R., & Lopez, E. C. (2002). Identifying
critical cross-cultural school psychology compe-
tencies. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 115–
141. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00093– 6
Rogers, M. R., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1998). Develop-
ment of the multicultural school psychology coun-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
seling competency scale. Psychology in the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Schools, 34, 211–217. doi:10.1002/(SICI)
1520 – 6807(199707)34:3⬍211::AID-PITS3⬎3.0
.CO;2-R
Rogers, M. R., Ponterotto, J. G., Conoley, J. C., &
Wiese, M. J. (1992). Multicultural training in
school psychology: A national survey. School Psy-
chology Review, 21, 603– 616.
Ryder, A. G., Alden, L. E., & Paulhus, D. L. (2000).
Is acculturation unidimensional or bidimensional?
A head-to-head comparison in the prediction of
personality, self-identity, and adjustment. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 49 – 65.
doi:10.1037/0022–3514.79.1.49
Schulte, A. C., & Daly, E. J., III. (2009). Operation-
alizing and evaluating professional competencies
in psychology: Out with the old, in with the new?
Training and Education in Professional Psychol-
ogy, 3, S54 –S58. doi:10.1037/a0017155
Shriver, M., & Kramer, J. (1996). National confer-
ence on levels and patterns of professional training
in school psychology. In T. Fagan & P. G. Warden
(Eds.), Historical encyclopedia of school psychol-
ogy (p. 225). Westport. CT: Greenwood Press.
Smith, D. C. (1964). Institutions offering graduate
training in school psychology. Journal of School
Psychology, 3, 58 – 66. doi:10.1016/0022–
4405(64)90013–5
Sodowsky, G., Taffe, R., Gutkin, T., & Wise, S.
(1994). Development of the Multicultural Coun-
seling Inventory: A self-report measure of multi-
cultural competencies. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 41, 137–148.
Sue, D. W., Carter, R. T., Casas, J. M., Fouad, N. A.,
Ivey, A. E., Jensen, M., LaFromboise, T. D., et al.
(1998). Multicultural counseling competencies in
individual and organizational development. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sue, D. W., Lin, A. I., Torino, G. C., Rivera, D. P., &
Capodilupo, C. M. (2009). Racial microaggres-
sions and difficult dialogues on race in the class-
room. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psy-
chology, 15(2), 183–190.
Sue, S. (1999). Science, ethnicity, and bias: Where
have we gone wrong? American Psychologists, 54,
1070 –1077.
Tarver Behring, S., Cabello, B., Kushida, D., & Mur-
guia, A. (2000). Cultural modifications to current
school-based consultation approaches reported by
culturally diverse beginning consultants. School
Psychology Review, 29, 354 –367.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Census 2000. Retrieved
from http://censtats.census.gov/data/US/01000.pdf
U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Language use and En-
glish-speaking ability: 2000. Washington, DC:
U.S. Census Bureau.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). Nation’s Population
One-Third Minority. Retrieved from http://
www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/
archives/population/006808.html
U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil
Rights. (2010). Office for civil rights data collec-
tion. Retrieved from http://www2.Ed.gov/about/
offices/list/ocr/data.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2006). The growing
numbers of limited English proficient students
1995–96 to 2005– 06. Retrieved from www.ncela
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2005). Theory and research
in acculturation and school adjustment. In C. L.
Frisby & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Comprehensive
handbook of multicultural school psychology (pp.
651– 673). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Henrich, C. C., Graybill, E. C.,
Dew, B. J., Marshall, M. L., . . . Avant, M. (2006).
Using a participatory culture-specific intervention
model to develop a peer victimization intervention.
Journal of Applied School Psychology, 22(2), 35–58.
Wallace, B. J. (2000). A call for change in multicul-
tural training at graduate schools of education:
Educating to end oppression for social justice.
Teachers College Record, 102, 1086 –1111.
Wampold, B. (2002). An examination of the bases of
evidence-based interventions. School Psychology Quar-
terly, 17, 500–507. doi:10.1521/scpq.17.4.500.20870
Yakushko, O., Watson, M., & Thompson, S. (2008).
Stress and coping in the lives of recent immigrants
and refugees: Considerations for counseling. Interna-
tional Journal for the Advancement of Counsel-
ing, 30, 167–178. doi:10.1007/s10447-008 –9054-0
Young, G. (2003). Dealing with difficult classroom dia-
logues. In P. Bronstein & K. Quina (Eds.), Teaching
gender and multicultural awareness (pp. 437–360).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Zins, J. E., & Curtis, M. J. (1988). Current status of
professional training and practice: Implications for fu-
ture directions. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in
school psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 7–48). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Zins, J. E., & Halsell, A. (1986). Status of ethnic minority
group members in school psychology training pro-
grams. School Psychology Review, 15, 76–83.