the rupture between the students of color and white students and race relationships in general given the political and social climate. It will be vital to highlight how classroom dynamics connect to students’ advocacy work as future school counselors. Jessica and Veronica will also need to be mindful of how power and privilege impact their interactions with the class and implementation of the intervention. This is especially important because some students who identified as African American or Black expressed their frustration and disappointment at having to be the voice of Black people and their white peers appeared disinterested in interacting with them. Some white students also expressed hesitation about engaging in open dialogue about marginalized populations.
Beatrice’s reaction to the video was passionate. She expressed her frustration in an open, engaged, and respectful manner. However, Amy’s mental and physical disengagement from the discussion is most concerning. Her actions run counter to several dispositions the program considers essential for student success. Amy’s actions may indicate a lack of integrity, self-awareness, sensitivity to individual differences and respect for diversity, and adherence to the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014) and an inability to accept and make use of feedback. Amy’s actions can create more harm within the cohort if they are not addressed or it appears that the instructors are excusing or ignoring her behaviors.
Jessica decided to consult other faculty to determine whether Amy’s behavior was an isolated incident or whether Amy consistently disengaged from class discussions, especially those related to multiculturalism. Reports from faculty were mixed. One faculty member reported that Amy was more reserved in class than other students but did not come across as disengaged or disrespectful. Another faculty member shared that Amy tended to be more disengaged when topics related to multiculturalism and social justice were discussed. He recalled a class session in which Amy walked out while several students of color were presenting on school counselors working with students who were undocumented. He did not think anything of it because it was not unusual for students to take breaks throughout the 3-hour class, but he noted that Amy did not participate in the discussion following the presentation. Both faculty members also reported an underlying tension in the class, and they observed students self-segregating. Based on this feedback, Jessica invited Amy to an individual meeting to discuss concerns related to her reaction to multicultural and social justice issues and her closed-off behavior in class.
Jessica and Veronica were concerned that the cohort rupture would impact how the group continued with internship, in which there would be more discussion of the MSJCC. They put aside course content to facilitate the final class session as a continued discussion of cultural climate. At the start of the class, Jessica and Veronica established ground rules for respectful dialogue and reviewed the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014), the ASCA School Counselor Professional Standards and Competencies (ASCA, 2019), and the MSJCC (Ratts et al., 2016).
Jessica used a fishbowl approach to facilitate a conversation about race relations, cohort dynamics, and work as a school counselor. Jessica asked for six volunteers to sit in the middle of the classroom and discuss the topics at hand. The group was mixed evenly with students of color and white students. The intervention also called for six observers of the discussion and seven observers of the intervention at large. The majority of class time was spent addressing unanswered questions and exploring ways to move forward as a cohort and as future school counselors. The last 20 minutes of the class were used to wrap up the intervention and express unanswered concerns before the students left their last class as a cohort.
Although there were still some unresolved issues within the cohort, the students were willing to address them overtly and engage in a productive discussion. In addition, Amy was open to meeting individually and listening to feedback, and she processed insecurities regarding her multicultural awareness. As the students progressed in their respective internship groups, they continued exploring their cultural heritage and the impact their cultural identities had on their colleagues and themselves.
Conclusion
This case documents intersecting identities of facilitators and students as well as the impact of sociopolitical climate on cohort dynamics and learning environment. Jessica and Veronica’s multicultural and social justice counseling competencies were demonstrated in (a) their level of awareness of their own worldviews and those of their students, (b) their knowledge of how these dynamics impacted the classroom, (c) the interventions they used, and (d) their advocacy efforts at individual and systems levels. Their decision-making and intervention were guided by the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014), the ASCA School Counselor Professional Standards and Competencies (ASCA, 2019), the CACREP Standards (CACREP, 2016), and the MSJCC (Ratts et al., 2016). Although the incident was not fully resolved, students expressed growth following the cohort rupture. In addition, Jessica and Veronica assessed the students’ professional dispositions and believed the cohort was ready to continue with internship, having a deeper understanding of multicultural awareness and interpersonal dynamics.
Reflection Questions
1 What are some additional issues that need to be considered in this case?
2 What additional issues would you consider in setting ground rules for the fishbowl exercise?
Critical Incident Response
Jonathan H. Ohrt and Kathryn P. Linich
The timing of this incident presents a significant challenge, as the end of the semester is typically focused on wrapping up content and processing learning and experiences. Nevertheless, the instructors made a sound decision to address cohort dynamics and concerns around multicultural and social justice counseling competencies. This response focuses on the initial conversation, cohort support, and programmatic implications.
Consistent with their constructivist, student-centered approach, the instructors did a good job facilitating open and honest discussion. To prepare for the conversation, they might have assigned some brief readings that address privilege, oppression, and experiences of students in counseling programs (e.g., Paone et al., 2019). The instructors could model disclosure and vulnerability by acknowledging their own biases and blind spots with the class (Pulliam et al., 2019). For example, the video likely included an effective intervention; however, Black students may have been frustrated by not learning from a Black counselor. The instructors could acknowledge that some curricula are still colonized, validating Black students’ feelings of anger and frustration (Haskins et al., 2013). In the future, the instructors could further decolonize materials so students are able to hear Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) perspectives in readings, case examples, and videos.
The instructors did well to honor the needs of the cohort and focus on unfinished business in the last class. This reinforced the expression of concerns as well as productive and honest discussion. Structuring the class around how to have a respectful and progressive discussion of multicultural issues provided a substantive opportunity for professional development, and these instructors made it clear to their students that they were invested. Having a safe and nonjudgmental environment in which to reflect on difficult topics aided Amy’s growth and that of the cohort overall. The activity Jessica and Veronica used and other service-learning activities could be incorporated into the curriculum more regularly in other classes, such as classes on ethics, multicultural counseling, and group work (Langellier et al., 2020). Because the students were in a cohort, the instructors could have further developed a plan to continue to address unresolved issues as the students transitioned to the next internship.
Although this case is specific to a course, the cohort tension that emerged indicates that more systemic program dynamics are present. The instructors handled their concerns about Amy in a fair and ethical way through consultation with faculty and discussion. It could be helpful to review program policies and practices to ensure the perspectives of minoritized students are heard. For instance, program faculty members could develop an advisory committee. The program could also review all courses to ensure diversity concepts are reinforced and multicultural and social justice counseling