Clinical Supervision: Dialogues on Diversity

Ann S. YabusakiCoalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii, Honolulu

Integration of diversity issues into supervision training and research has been sorely neglected, in spiteof the recognition that diversity is a core component of psychological training. Several barriers to thisintegration are described. The author suggests that these barriers can be surmounted by implementingpedagogy developed for diverse and underserved populations. The author suggests that the supervisorworks within the supervisees’ zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986), use mediatedlearning experiences that intentionally create collaborative learning environments (Feuerstein, 1979;Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman, & Miller, 1980), and mentoring relationships (Huang & Lynch, 1995).Disguised case vignettes are presented to illustrate how diversity issues emerge and are discussed withinthe learning environment.

Keywords: supervision, supervisor, supervisee, diversity, mediated learning

Clinical supervision can be one of the most valuable experiencesin the education and training of psychologists. To understand theart of supervision, Falender and Shafranske (2004) conducted anextensive research of the literature. They defined supervision as “adistinct professional activity in which education and trainingaimed at developing science-informed practice are facilitatedthrough a collaborative interpersonal process” (p. 3), and identifiedtwo qualities that made for good supervision: the supportive rela-tionship and the working alliance. Little was known, however,about how these qualities were created in supervision, much lesswith ethnic minority supervisees.

Focusing on the training of diversity in supervision, Falenderand Shafranske (2004, p. 115) found that “diversity was one of themost neglected areas in supervision training and research.” Othersechoed this finding calling for increased research in multiculturalsupervision in general (Constantine, 2003) and on specific emicfactors such as the value on verbal communication, similarity anddifferences in ways of language systems, and power differentialsoperating in the supervisor-supervisee interaction (Brown &Landrum-Brown, 1995). To help supervisees understand the im-portance and complexity of working with diversity, many othersinsisted that supervisors learn about and appreciate themselves ascultural beings (Ponterotto, Casas, Suzuki, & Alexander, 1995;Pope-Davis, Coleman, Liu, & Toporek, 2003). The ethical obliga-tion to practice responsibly underscored the importance of themulticultural competencies (Sue et al., 1982; Wilcoxon’s, Magnu-son, & Norem, 2008).

At least five barriers impeded diversity training in supervision:(1) Supervisees were afraid to discuss color and race in a “White”

environment. They feared that they may be perceived as makingexcuses for their poor performance or using their ethnicity as adefense, or “seen as pathologically preoccupied with color anddiscrimination.” (2) Many supervisors felt inadequately trained ondiversity issues. In some cases, trainees knew more than theirsupervisor. (3) There was a lack of empirical evidence to supportthe models of ethnic and cross-cultural training and their relation-ship to treatment. (4) Psychological training rarely focused onself-knowledge and exploration. (5) The process of diversity edu-cation itself—the exploration of personal cultural biases and prej-udices—induced resistance, defensiveness and inhibition in stu-dents (Falender & Shafranske, 2004, pp. 119–120). If these andother barriers were not confronted, Duran, Firehammer, andGonzales (2008) cautioned that the status quo would be main-tained in the mental health profession and unintentional oppressivepractices would continue, in part, because counselor educationtaught predominantly from one worldview. If culture or humandiversity was not discussed, our silence condoned the denial of apart of the Self.

Dialogues on diversity, however, are challenging: they speak tothe part of ourselves that we may not want to confront. Pinder-hughes’ (1989) early attempts illustrated the challenge of raisingdiversity issues in supervision. Falender and Shafranske (2004)described several developmental and training models of multicul-tural competence, but there was little discussion on the interactionor relational processes that facilitate the supervisee through thesemodels.

I am a third-generation Asian-American woman of Okinawadecent, born and raised in the cultures of Hawaii, and college-educated on the United States continent. Most of my supervisoryexperience has been with ethnic minority supervisees: AfricanAmerican, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Island, and Asian. Almost allwere of mixed ethnicities such as Puerto Rican, Mexican, NativeAmerican, German, English, and other European ancestries. Al-though many were monolingual English-speakers raised in theUnited States, most were bilingual and bicultural refugees orimmigrants from Asia and the Pacific Islands. The supervisees

ANN S. YABUSAKI, PhD, earned her degree in psychology from theRosebridge Graduate School of Integrative Psychology. She currentlydirects the Family Intervention and Training Services program at theCoalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii. Her interests include the cultural aspectsof psychology and family therapy.

CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THIS ARTICLE should be addressed to AnnS. Yabusaki, Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii, 1130 N. Nimitz Hwy.,Suite A259, Honolulu, HI 96817. E-mail: geckogroup@cs.com

Training and Education in Professional Psychology © 2010 American Psychological Association2010, Vol. 4, No. 1, 55–61 1931-3918/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0017378

55

worked at agencies primarily serving Asian refugee and immigrantor Asian and Pacific Islander children and families.

As a college student on the United States continent, I becameincreasingly concerned about the effects of racism and other formsof oppression. Born and raised in Hawaii, I grew up keenly attunedto cultural differences. I became aware that my courses and su-pervised practice in psychology rarely addressed the experiencesof ethnic minority persons or the effect of microaggressions andculture on behavior. I later realized that much of my education wasabout adapting to the dominant culture. In response, I have devotedmost of my professional life deconstructing oppressive practicesand integrating cultural sensitivity into psychology.

As a supervisor, I wanted to create a forum for sharing differentworldviews where the concept of truth could be approached fromdifferent perspectives. Assuming that all communication was cul-tural (Hall, 1959), I defined supervision as a process of commu-nication embedded in multicultural nuances. The supervisor’s re-sponsibility was to bridge the cultural differences with thesupervisee. To learn, I studied the supervisees. I cocounseled andreviewed their videotapes. I created informal moments to talkstory, learn about what was important to them, and inquired abouttheir families, countries of origin, immigration history, values, andbeliefs. I attended to their protocols and other ways of communi-cation. I also searched for theoretical scaffolding that would sup-port the inclusion of alternative worldviews and nonoppressivepractices in supervision. Guided by pedagogy derived from diverseand underserved populations, I focused on the cultural contexts ofcommunication and learning and adapted them to supervision.

This article proposes that (1) learning occurs slightly out of thesupervisees’ comfort zones in the zone of proximal development(ZPD) (Vygotsky, 1955/1978, 1934/1986); (2) mediated learningexperiences (MLEs) or moments of new learning in the ZPD arecreated in collaborative learning environments (Feuerstein, 1979;Feuerstein, Rand, Hoffman, & Miller, 1980); and (3) a specialrelationship such as the Tao mentoring relationship (Huang &Lynch, 1995) enhances the learning environment. Althoughthese theories are culturally bound and developed for differentpurposes, they helped me to formulate ways of crossing culturesin supervision.

Pedagogy of Supervision

ZPD

The Russian developmental psychologist, Lev Vygotsky, ob-served that all mental functions developed within the context ofsocial interaction and therefore, all mental functions were culture-bound. He was particularly interested in the development ofthought and language. To illustrate his theory of how higherfunctions developed through social interactions, he demonstratedthat students improved their performance on cognitive tasks whenassisted or coached by a more knowledgeable person. With con-tinued coaching, they internalized and later generalized the newlearning to different situations. He labeled the area from the edgeof what a person could do independently to what they couldachieve with assistance as the ZPD (Vygotsky, 1955/1978, 1934/1986). These zones are where experiences of manageable chal-lenges occur. Unfortunately Vygotsky died in 1934 before elabo-rating about the cultural influences on the development of higher

mental functions such as thought and language (Vygotsky, 1934/1986).

Hall (1959) later attempted to clarify the influence of culture onlanguage, thought, and social interactions. An American anthro-pology consultant to American Foreign Service officers, Halldemonstrated how the expression of language, thought, and be-haviors were based in cultural worldviews. Others have shownhow cultural differences in worldviews apply in counseling(Brown & Landrum-Brown, 1995; Lee, 2002; Ponterotto et al.,1995; Pope-Davis et al., 2003; Sue & Sue, 1990).

Extrapolating these observations to supervision was challeng-ing. For example, a supervisee who had emigrated from the Phil-ippines often fell into an uncomfortable silence after greeting herclients. She confessed that she panicked and could not speakbecause she was afraid that she would upset the client. Herprofessors taught her that questions such as “How does that makeyou feel” were helpful in therapy, but to her, they seemed intrusiveand rude. After unsuccessful attempts to assuage her fears, Iwondered if my efforts felt intrusive to her. I asked her to teach meabout her world and the Tagalog language and tried to adapt to hercommunication and learning styles. As we struggled to make theunfamiliar familiar and she became more willing to risk upsettingothers, I imagined that we were working within the ZPD.

MLEs

After World War II, Feuerstein and colleagues (Feuerstein,1979; Feuerstein et al., 1980) were faced with the task of assessingthe psychological and cognitive functioning of children from di-verse cultures flowing into Israel. Many were refugees with trau-matic histories. Conventional assessment instruments, standard-ized with children from dominant, mainstream culture, onlyrevealed the inadequacies of culturally deprived populations. Hedefined culturally deprived populations as people who had becomealienated from their culture (Feuerstein, 1979). Feuerstein wouldeventually develop methods that would show the individual’spotential for learning, suggest causes for failure, and recommendmethods to remediate or improve learning.

Feuerstein (1979) observed that individuals who had learned tofunction within their own culture showed a considerable capacityto learn and adapt to new situations. They tended to solve rela-tively difficult and novel tasks on assessment. He reasoned thatthese individuals had been mediated or taught higher functioningcognitive skills through their cultures and in turn, were able toadapt to new situations. In contrast, individuals who were alienatedfrom their cultures were deprived of the intergenerational trans-mission and mediational processes necessary for the developmentof higher cognitive functioning. This cultural deprivation mighthave strongly affected their adaptive capacities.

Guided by the research of others (e.g., Budoff, 1969; Budoff &Friedman, 1964; Luria, 1961; Vygotsky, 1978; Piaget, 1954; Piaget& Inhelder, 1969) and his personal observations, Feuerstein (1979)developed the Learning Potential Assessment Device (LPAD), a“dynamic, interactional view of intelligence . . . with the examinerand examinee interacting as teacher and student, as helper andhelped” (Feuerstein, 1979, p. 51). The examiner/mediator assessedthe processes of perception, thought, learning, and problem solvingby attempting to change them (Haywood, 1988). Feuerstein laterrefined these social interactions or interventions and called them

56 YABUSAKI

mediated learning experiences (MLEs). Although more research isneeded, many have explored the efficacy of the LPAD and otheralternative assessment methods and found them useful in thepsychoeducational assessment of minority children (Jones, 1988).

The most important characteristics of MLEs reside in the me-diator’s intentions and behaviors. The mediator intentionally in-tervenes between the individual and the stimuli, shaping responsesso they have cognitive and social meaning to the individual (Feuer-stein, Rand, & Rynders, 1988). Mediators convey value and im-portance of information through their voices, affect, and othernonverbal communication helping the individual perform beyondtheir current functioning (ZPD) without becoming overwhelmed.Some qualities of MLEs include (Feuerstein et al., 1988; Lidz,1991):

• Intentionality and reciprocity: create a reciprocal relationshipand improve higher cognitive functioning.

• Transcendence: generalize skills to other situations.• Meaning: create meaning to the information.• Feelings of competence: provide encouragement.• Regulation and control of behavior: decreased impulsivity and

critique the stimuli.• Individuation and psychological differentiation: independent

thinking.• Challenge: a search for novelty and complexity in tasks.Mediators coach, help individuals understand problems and

solutions, encourage, and give meaning to ideas and values. Theyaccommodate to the learning style of the student. However, be-cause MLEs are situated in social interaction, they are culturallybound and influenced by the mediator’s worldview. That is, whatmight be meaningful to the mediator may not be to the individual.If the information is necessary for survival, then the mediator mustmake the information meaningful to the individual. They are bothchallenged to mediate one worldview to another.

I was drawn to dynamic assessments because they provided analternative to normative or standardized testing and focused onmaximizing an individual’s performance. Marginalized and unfa-miliar with the cultures of the United States continent, I felt it wasunfair to be compared to others from the continent. I adapted themethods of dynamic assessments to supervision and focused onimproving the individual supervisee’s effectiveness in the clinicalsetting. To create MLEs in supervision, I needed to understand theworldview of the supervisee. The style of Socratic questioning andverbal analysis of situations common to supervision, were some-times off-putting. Supervisees who were raised in cultures thatused talk story (informal sharing of experiences), observation, andreflection as vehicles for learning seemed to have difficulty en-gaging in the Socratic method of learning. For supervisees whoappeared uncomfortable with the formality of supervision or whopreferred less eye contact or being in an office, I utilized informalmoments outside the office and limited eye contact to mediate newconcepts. Hence, I adjusted my style to the supervisee as best Icould, and developed multiple ways of creating MLEs.

The Mentoring Relationship

When your capacity for sharing wisdom is stunted,

So will be your fortune in receiving.

(From Mentoring: The Tao of giving and receiving wisdom[p. xii], by C. A. Huang and J. Lynch, 1995, New York: Harper-Collins Publishers. Copyright 1995 by HarperCollins Publishers.Reprinted with permission.)

The above saying describes the mentoring relationship. Taomentoring is about the more experienced person generously shar-ing their wisdom and in turn, graciously accepting new learning. Amajor reward of supervising and teaching comes from the learningI receive from my students. I grow from the mentoring experience.

According to Huang and Lynch (1995) the earliest model of thementoring process was established between 2333 and 2177 B.C., inthe succession procedures of three Chinese kings. “The passing ofthe throne by the sovereign to a virtuous and competent successorwas known in early democratic Chinese history as Shan Jang.Literally, it means: ‘the enlightened stepping aside to create roomin the center for the next deserving person to step in and takecharge’” (p. xi).

The Tao mentoring process was a sharing of wisdom, a dancethat provided opportunities for giving and receiving without lim-itations and fears. It was “open, compassionate, and caring. Itexudes passion and inspiration for personal growth. Tao mentorsare accessible, but not close friends” (From Mentoring: The Tao ofgiving and receiving wisdom [p. 17–18], by C. A. Huang and J.Lynch, 1995, New York: HarperCollins Publishers. Copyright1995 by HarperCollins Publishers. Reprinted with permission.).Humility, self-acceptance, integrity, kindness, nonjudgment, andtruthfulness were qualities of Tao mentoring.

Ideally, Tao mentoring created safe, nonjudgmental learningenvironments. It enabled others to realize their full potential byconfronting and overcoming self-doubt and fear. It focused onbuilding an understanding of the interdependent nature of relation-ships and the interconnectedness of all life (Huang & Lynch,1995).

Falender and Shafranske (2004) found that mentoring washighly rated by trainees who received it and differentiated men-toring from supervision in several ways. The mentoring relation-ship was voluntary, typically sought out by the mentee, lacked anevaluative or legal component, and often lasted longer than thesupervisory relationship. Many cultures make no such distinctions.In Japan the sensei (teacher or master) (Takahashi, 1951) is ex-pected to be a good coach, an esteemed, trusted, and benevolentperson who acts in the best interest of the student. Ideally, thesensei teaches, evaluates, chastises, and gives advice. Perhapsbecause I was raised with Tao mentoring, it was natural to bring itto supervision.

Practicing the Theories in Supervision

Beginning of Supervision

Before I accept students into supervision, I ask potential super-visees what they would like to learn. Many respond with wantingto learn specific skills such as motivational interviewing orcognitive–behavioral therapy or family therapy. I never discour-age them and share my goal of helping them process situations anduse all of who they are. I inform them that my intention insupervision is to create a mentoring relationship (intentionality andreciprocity in MLE); that is, I will explain, show, and help them in

57SPECIAL ISSUE: CLINICAL SUPERVISION: DIALOGUES

any way possible to learn. I explain that I prefer this relationshipas a means to help them develop their personal style (mediation ofindividuation and psychological differentiation), understand andrespect their and their clients’ worldviews (mediation of challenge)as they explore ways to facilitate change (mediation of meaning).

I describe the ZPD by telling them that I might push them intouncomfortable areas that will challenge them personally. I ask fora commitment to this journey of learning. If supervisees agree tothis contract, I accept them into supervision.

Process of Supervision

Throughout the course of supervision, I focus on the mentoringrelationship. As I had been taught by my family to value people forwho they are, not by what they do, I invite supervisees to askquestions about and share anything of interest to them. I selectivelyshare information about myself, family, and work. Because I wasraised with the idea that sharing food is part of the protocol ofbuilding relationships, I share meals with supervisees and seekopportunities to meet with them informally to learn about who theyare. I have adapted my family’s ways of caring for people to thementoring relationship. In my family, when parents or grandpar-ents pick up children from school, they bring snacks. Grandchil-dren are expected to care for grandparents. Children are taught tocare for the ancestral gravesite. People bring gifts to the familyafter a trip. In similar ways, I bring snacks and treats from mytravels to training to share and create collaborative environments.I encourage supervisees to share their work in ways that feel safefor them.

The following examples illustrate how I learned to adapt MLEs,worked in the ZPD, and adapted Tao mentoring to the supervision.The illustrations have been disguised to protect the confidentialityof clients and supervisees.

Example 1: Supervising immigrant and refugee counselors.My intention was to create a collaborative learning environment inwhich everyone took responsibility for their learning. The collab-orative relationship, however, assumed a new meaning when Isupervised a group of bilingual–bicultural counselors. I found thatfor this group, I had to address their personal and professionalneeds and take responsibility for their learning.

Early in my supervision experience at an agency primarilyserving Asian refugees and immigrants, supervisees from Cambo-dia, Laos, Vietnam, and China taught me about the role of thesupervisor. I was expected to be their sensei (teacher in Japa-nese)—the ultimate authority. When I asked them how I couldimprove myself as their supervisor, they scolded me for asking.They assumed that I should know how to supervise them and wereoffended by my question. Throughout the supervision, I struggledto balance their expectations with my beliefs that all experts werestudents and everyone brought unique knowledge to share.

On another occasion, I was asked by a group of Cambodiancounselors to help them deepen their therapy group’s experience.They asked me to teach them about group counseling skills byhelping them run the group. They, in turn, would interpret for me.I was not sure if I could help, but I was intrigued by the request.After reading several autobiographies and the history of the region,I told the counselors that I would like to bring a couple of thebooks to the group to help them discuss their stories and perhaps

by discussing their stories, the group would have a differentexperience. They agreed.

At the next meeting, I shared the autobiography and historyof the genocide by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Everyone inthe group had experienced the genocide, but none had heard aboutthe extent of devastation to their country or their people. Soon, thegroup members began to tell their stories and we all started to cry.I worried that I was retraumatizing the group and the counselors.When I asked the counselors about stopping, they said it washelpful to tell their stories and wanted to continue. I still worriedthat they were being polite and I should close the process. As Iwatched the counselors, I realized that I had not properly preparedthem for this experience: I had neglected to desensitize them totheir experiences of the war. I realized that I had to debrief andattend to their needs from this group experience. The traumas fromthe war might impede their learning and personal healing. As theirsensei I knew that they counted on me to take care of them. Isought support for myself as I too was affected by the experience.I realized my limitations as well. No matter how I prepared thisgroup of supervisees for the counseling experience, the process oftherapy would be difficult and I questioned whether I was ethicallyand personally the best person for them.

While supervising refugee and immigrant supervisees, I recalleda lesson that my father, who was raised in Okinawa, taught me. Heoften chastised me about my Western ways. On one occasion, Iasked him if he would like the last ice cream bar for dessert. Hesaid, “No.” As I proceeded to walk away unwrapping the bar formyself, he yelled, “You’re supposed to ask me three times!” andscolded me for being insensitive. I was supposed to ask threetimes, he said, and he was supposed to refuse twice before sayingyes. The no meant yes. Laughing at my faux pax, I gave him theice cream bar.

Many supervisees embracing traditional values communicatedin many indirect ways. It did not matter what generation fromwhich they came. Fourth generation supervisees could also em-brace indirect ways of communication. To understand how tocommunicate with them, I used role plays, observed their sessions,and observed how they interacted with one another. They sharedstories with me about their culture and beliefs and explained whysome of my suggestions would not work. For example, as Idebriefed a role play of a traditional Vietnamese family, all of thesupervisees agreed with my analysis of the family interaction. Ithen suggested that the counselor intervene and stop the father’stirade toward the son. The young woman Vietnamese counselorlooked panicked. I wondered what I had said to upset her. Shehaltingly replied that she could not intercede with the father.She was raised in a traditional Vietnamese family in which all themen—uncles included—disciplined the children. She could not bedisrespectful to this man. I did not want her to feel that she hadfailed or was being disrespectful to me and reassured her that wewould find another solution.

In group discussion, the first generation counselors from Viet-nam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Philippines, and China agreedthat she should not intercede. The third generation counselors fromKorea, Japan, and the Philippines expressed the need to intercedebut did not know how without being disrespectful. We all agreedthat age and gender played roles in whatever intervention wedecided upon. To hold the MLE perspective, I carefully monitoredthe frustration level of the group and kept encouraging them to

58 YABUSAKI

expand their ideas about an intervention. They decided that anolder male counselor should intervene and empathize with thefather about the difficulty of raising children in America.

The discussion taught me patience: supervisees’ dilemmas andsolutions would unfold eventually if I stayed focused on therelationship. If the relationship was right, they would enter into theZPD. I was grateful that the group felt safe enough to challengeand help the sensei. I was even more grateful that they couldsupport and help each other find solutions and individuate from thesensei. The result was a group of supervisees who analyzed ses-sions, questioned therapy, engaged in avid discussions, and foundcreative solutions.

Example 2: Supervising third- or more-generation counsel-ors. In an interview with Bill Moyers(Moyers & Moyers, 1990),Tu Wei-Ming, professor of Chinese history and philosophy, intro-duced the concept of a cultural DNA. He suggested, for example,that the culture of China was embedded in Chinese communitiesthroughout the world. Whether living in Europe, Asia, or NorthAmerica and irrespective of the generations, a person from theChinese culture will practice Confucian traditions. They may notbe aware of that they are Confucians, but they will transmit someof these values to their children. In essence, supervisees of everygeneration will bring some values and beliefs from their traditionalcultures. My hope is to understand and weave their worldviewsinto the supervision. The following example illustrates my struggleto use a cultural understanding of the supervisee in supervision.

Gen, a 35 year-old fourth generation Japanese American super-visee, asked the supervisees’ group to review a videotaped portionof a session with a couple. He was concerned that he had been rudeand overly direct and feared that they would not return. He wantedhelp on how he could have responded differently.

The videotape showed a couple discussing their teenage son.The mother said, “I know he (my child) needs limits, but he wasdoing so well, that I gave him back the cell phone (earlier thanagreed upon).”

The father looked complacently at Gen. When Gen asked thefather what he thought about this, he replied, “Why should wehave to keep the cell phone when he (son) is now behaving? I’mwaiting for him to allow God into his heart. We’ve all haddifficulties in life. I know because I did the same—even worse—things than he did. And God turned my life around.”

Gen turned pale. His face and posture became rigid. He repliedin a very controlled tone,

“Do you love your son?”

The couple looked aghast and angry. “What are you saying?”They asked.

He replied, “Well, you are not telling him the truth. You say onething then do another.”

Gen then launched into a long explanation about the need forlimits because their son feels he can do anything he wants andknows how to manipulate them to get what he wants. If they lovedtheir son they would teach him there were limits in this world.

At this point, Gen stopped the tape. I was concerned that hemight have overexposed himself to the others and wanted tosupport and protect him. From what I knew shame and saving facewere important to him. I decided to create a MLE by acknowl-

edging the courage it took to present this tape and asked otherswhat it was like to see this couple. I guessed that the group, madeup mostly of third and fourth generation Asian and many-generation Native Hawaiian supervisees who were kind and con-siderate individuals would probably respond supportively.

After sharing about our clients with similar presentations, Inoticed that Gen seemed more relaxed. I did not feel comfortableasking directly about his feelings, as I did not want to be intrusive.I decided to ask in an indirect way, “If you don’t mind sharing,what were you feeling at that moment?”

Gen responded that he was angry and felt used. The couple camefor help with their son’s temper and when he tried to help, theyundermined his suggestions. I decided to press him into the ZPDand asked what it was like in previous sessions for him. Thequestion was intended to help Gen (and the group) discover howwe tend to accommodate to the feelings of others and deny ourown. My hope was that he would wonder why he ignored hisirritation earlier in the therapy. I also wanted Gen and the group tonotice that there are other sources of information that therapistssometimes miss in sessions. I carefully monitored Gen’s bodylanguage so as not to embarrass or overly expose him to the group.When Gen slumped in his chair I worried if he was overwhelmedby the attention. I knew that it was difficult for him to ask forconsultation in a group setting and to appear foolish to hiscolleagues.

The group, however, approached his question with serious con-cern. They discussed their difficulty of balancing Western direct-ness with their value of indirectness. They wondered if, when, andhow to share information to further the therapy. It was impressiveto watch them working in the ZPD: they hypothesized, compareddata, and made new meanings and connections from watching thevideotape. They were also individuating from the supervisor.

In individual supervision, I struggled to know how to approachGen about his angry response to the couple. My family taught meto care about people’s feelings before my own. Yet, my Westerneducation taught me that speaking directly was important. It was adifficult lesson to learn. Tao mentoring also required me to behonest, but I wondered how to be honest. I approached himindirectly. I asked Gen what he had learned from his family aboutthe value of harmony. We talked about our experiences, laughedat the extent our families went to avoid conflict, and acknowledgedthe pain it caused for the family. I then asked if he would sharewhat his true feelings (honne in Japanese) were about this familyand why he responded as he did. He stated that he wanted toexpress his frustration but did not want to be rude. Instead hecreated a facade of understanding (tatemae in Japanese) thinkingthat avoiding conflict would further the therapy. I was relieved thatour relationship could be based on honesty and I could be flexiblydirect and indirect with him.

Throughout supervision, I constantly assessed the thinking andmotivational factors of all the supervisees. Were they aware of themultiple sources of information in a session? Could they identifymissing information? How efficient were their skills of planning,organization, and action, and did they apply them with sensitivityto the client? How much effort would it take and how do I refocustheir attention and refine their thinking about psychological pro-cesses? It was most important that I tried to assess their interpre-tation of supervision, monitor frustration levels, and sought waysto encourage them.

59SPECIAL ISSUE: CLINICAL SUPERVISION: DIALOGUES

End of Supervision

Supervision is often over when the supervisee becomes moreindependent, appears to be relating well to the client, and clientsappear to be improving. I listen to the way the supervisee speaksabout clients and try to model any areas I feel they could be morerespectful of the clients’ worldview. The end of supervision isalways bittersweet. I will miss our process of sharing and receiv-ing. I will miss the challenge of learning to communicate andbridging to their worldview. And I know that the supervisee canbenefit from other perspectives and ways of supervision. It is timeto let go.

Conclusion

When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Zen Buddhist Saying.

A classic story in Zen Buddhism teaches that one cannot receivewisdom until one is ready to accept it. A pompous professor askeda Zen master to teach him the art of Zen. In response, the masterinvited him for tea. He eagerly accepted. After seating themselves,the master began pouring the tea. He continued to pour even as thecup overflowed. The professor, confused, wet, and upset, jumpedback from the table and angrily asked the master what he wasdoing. The master replied, “Your knowledge is already spillingover, so how can I offer you any more?” (From Mentoring: TheTao of giving and receiving wisdom [p. 29], by C. A. Huang andJ. Lynch, 1995, New York: HarperCollins Publishers. Copyright1995 by HarperCollins Publishers. Reprinted with permission.).

Students come eagerly to an internship wanting to test theirskills. They are fresh with ideas, hopes, and dreams of making adifference. They feel they have something to offer. Similarly, Ithought I could make a difference and believed that I had some-thing special to offer. In the process of supervising, however, Ihad to empty my cup—myself—so that I could learn from thesupervisees.

In this article, I attempted to present an abbreviated versionof my journey as a supervisor. When called to supervise, Ipanicked and searched for models to guide me. I found severalthat embraced my worldview: (1) if I follow Tao mentoring,then I become the student; (2) if I follow the tenets of MLEs,then I am responsible for creating moments of learning; (3) if Ilearn to communicate with the supervisee, then I might learn towork within the ZPD. All embraced the importance ofrelationship.

I learned early on that I would never become comfortable in therole of a supervisor: I would be constantly challenged to reconcilecontradictions. In Tao mentoring and MLEs, I am the more expe-rienced person and the student. When I want to be the student, I amscolded and told to be the sensei. In supervision, I am expected toevaluate supervisees’ skill, when I prefer a more egalitarian rela-tionship. I am bound to patience when supervisees irritate, annoyor challenge me. I am responsible for the learning environmentwhen I am tired and bored. When I am eager to help, I must adjustmyself to the supervisee’s learning style. While conversations ondiversity can be extraordinarily challenging, I cannot ignore them.If I did, I would neglect an important a part of the Self. And if myintention is to help supervisees explore and experience as much of

the art of therapy, then discussions on diversity must become partof the supervision.

Throughout supervision I am forced to question and stretch myworldview, challenge hubris, deal with nadir, and create internalbalance. This process has taught me to take better care of myselfand left me with the hope that we became more thoughtful andethical therapists because of it.

References

Brown, M. T., & Landrum-Brown, J. (1995). Counselor supervision.Cross-cultural perspectives. In J. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki,& C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural education (pp.263–286). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Budoff, M. (1969). Learning potential: A supplementary procedure forassessing the ability to reason. Seminars in Psychiatry, 1, 293–309.

Budoff, M., & Friedman, M. (1964). “Learning potential” as an assessmentapproach to the adolescent mentally retarded. Journal of ConsultingPsychology, 28, 434–439.

Constantine, M. (2003). Multicultural competence in supervision. Is-sues, processes, and outcomes. In D. B. Pope-Davis, H. L. K.Coleman, W. M. Liu, & R. L. Toporek (Eds.), Handbook of multi-cultural competencies in counseling and psychology (pp. 383–391).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Duran, E., Firehammer, J., & Gonzalez, J. (2008). Liberation psychologyas the path toward healing cultural soul wounds. Journal of Counselingand Development, 86, 288–295.

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). Clinical supervision. Acompetency-based approach. Washington D.C.: American Psychologi-cal Association.

Feuerstein, R. (with Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. B.). (1979). The dynamicassessment of retarded performers. The learning potential assessmentdevice, theory, instruments, and techniques. Glenview, IL: Scott Fores-man and Company.

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M. B., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumen-tal enrichment. An intervention program for cognitive modifiability.Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman and Company.

Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Rynders, J. E. (1988). Don’t accept me as I am:Helping “retarded” people to excel. New York: Plenum Press.

Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. New York: Doubleday.Haywood, H. C. (1988). Dynamic assessment: The learning potential

assessment device. In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Psychoeducational assessmentof minority group children: A Casebook (pp. 39–63). Berkeley, CA:Cobb & Henry Publishers.

Huang, C. A., & Lynch, J. (1995). Mentoring: The Tao of giving andreceiving wisdom. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Jones, R. J. (Ed.). (1988). Psychoeducational assessment of minority groupchildren. A casebook. Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry Publishers.

Lee, E. (2002). Meeting the mental health needs of Asian and PacificIslander Americans. Alexandria, VA: National Technical AssistanceCenter for State Mental Health Planning (NTAC).

Lidz, C. S. (1991). Practitioner’s guide to dynamic assessment. New York:The Guilford Press.

Luria, A. R. (1961). The role of speech in the regulation of normal andabnormal behavior. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation.

Moyers, J. D., & Moyers, B. (Executive Producers). (1990, July 15). BillMoyers’ world of ideas: Tu Wei-Ming. [Television broadcast]. New York:Public Affairs Television, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2007/11/bill_moyers_rewind_tu_weiming.html

Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York:Ballantine Books.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York:Basic Books.

60 YABUSAKI

Pinderhughes, E. (1989). Understanding race, ethnicity, and power. NewYork: The Free Press.

Ponterotto, J., Casas, J. M., Suzuki, L. A., & Alexander, C. M. (Eds.).(1995). Handbook of multicultural education. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Pope-Davis, D. B., Coleman, H. L. K., Liu, W. M., & Toporek, L. R.(Eds.). (2003). Handbook of multicultural competencies in counselingand psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sue, D. W., Bernier, Y., Durran, A., Feinberg, L., Pedersen, P. G., Smith,E. J., & Vasquez-Nuttal, E. (1982). Position paper: Cross-cultural coun-seling competencies. The Counseling Psychologist, 10, 45–52.

Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1990). Counseling the culturally different: Theoryand practice (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Takahashi, M. (1951). Romanized English-Japanese Japanese-English dic-tionary. Tokyo: Taiseido Shobo Co.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mentalprocesses. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.and Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original workpublished 1955)

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. (A. Kozulin, Ed. and Trans.).Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)

Wilcoxon, S. A., Magnuson, S., & Norem, K. (2008). Institutional valuesof managed mental health care: Efficiency or oppression? J Multicul-tural Counseling and Development, 36, 143–154.

Received August 15, 2008Revision received July 6, 2009

Accepted July 24, 2009 �

Members of Underrepresented Groups:Reviewers for Journal Manuscripts Wanted

If you are interested in reviewing manuscripts for APA journals, the APA Publications andCommunications Board would like to invite your participation. Manuscript reviewers are vital to thepublications process. As a reviewer, you would gain valuable experience in publishing. The P&CBoard is particularly interested in encouraging members of underrepresented groups to participatemore in this process.

If you are interested in reviewing manuscripts, please write APA Journals at Reviewers@apa.org.Please note the following important points:

• To be selected as a reviewer, you must have published articles in peer-reviewed journals. Theexperience of publishing provides a reviewer with the basis for preparing a thorough, objectivereview.

• To be selected, it is critical to be a regular reader of the five to six empirical journals that are mostcentral to the area or journal for which you would like to review. Current knowledge of recentlypublished research provides a reviewer with the knowledge base to evaluate a new submissionwithin the context of existing research.

• To select the appropriate reviewers for each manuscript, the editor needs detailed information.Please include with your letter your vita. In the letter, please identify which APA journal(s) youare interested in, and describe your area of expertise. Be as specific as possible. For example,“social psychology” is not sufficient—you would need to specify “social cognition” or “attitudechange” as well.

• Reviewing a manuscript takes time (1–4 hours per manuscript reviewed). If you are selected toreview a manuscript, be prepared to invest the necessary time to evaluate the manuscriptthoroughly.

61SPECIAL ISSUE: CLINICAL SUPERVISION: DIALOGUES