Cultural Responsiveness Framework in BCBA® Supervision

Abstract

Behavior analytic supervisees need to master technical and conceptual skills in their fieldwork and training. Recently, the profession has recognized the need for cultural responsiveness to be emphasized and woven throughout clinical practice and supervision. However, findings from research within applied behavior analysis (ABA) yield limited information on specific methods to increase one’s cultural responsiveness, as well as few tools to identify areas of development. This paper highlights challenges BCBA®s face in providing culturally responsive supervision. The authors also make recommendations for specific areas of focus in the pursuit of culturally responsive training and skill development through the introduction of the Culturally Responsive Supervision Self-Assessment (CRSS) tool. Cultural constructs that could be addressed using the CRSS tool include, but are not limited to, race, religion, gender conformity, and intersectional paradigms of culture.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40617-022-00688-7.

The Behavior Analyst Certification Board® (BACB®) has specific requirements for fieldwork supervisors training individuals who aspire to become behavior analysts in the future (BACB, 2018). The behavior analyst has the responsibility to educate and coach many skills related to the implementation and practice of effective behavior analysis, including those related to cultural responsiveness (BACB, 2020). However, cultural responsiveness has arguably been an overlooked skill, despite its importance in training an individual to become an adaptive and effective behavior analyst. Cultural responsiveness can be defined as viewing differences as strengths, creating a safe learning environment, and promoting justice and equity in society (Miller et al., 2019). Additional definitions related to culturally responsive terminology are provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Terms and definitions related to culture

Term	Definition
Cultural competency	“The ability of individuals to use academic, experiential, and interpersonal skills to increase their understanding and appreciation of cultural differences and similarities within, among, and between groups, which includes the individuals' desire, willingness, and ability to improve systems and work closely with knowledgeable persons from the community to develop interventions and services that affirm and reflect the value of different cultures” (National Institute of Health, 2020, p. 1).
Cultural humility	“A lifelong process of self-reflection and self-critique that does not require mastery of beliefs and behaviors pertaining to different cultures, rather it encourages to develop a respectful attitude toward diverse points of view” (National Institute of Health, 2020, p. 1).
Cultural awareness	This encompasses an individual’s ability to examine their own cultural beliefs and values in relation to others and develop a level of awareness or understanding of how culture can shape behavior and interactions with others (Danso, 2018; Fong, 2020).
Cultural sensitivity	This is an individual’s ability to understand and embrace cultural differences while also recognizing that one’s own culture can influence professional practice, and then use this information to be able to design interventions with clients that take culture into consideration (Fong, 2020; Danso, 2018; Nassar-McMillan, 2014; Ben-Ari & Strier, 2010; Burchum, 2002).
Intersectionality	A lens through which you can see where power comes and collides, where it interlocks and intersects (Crenshaw, 1991).
Culturally responsive teaching	A pedagogy that recognizes the importance of including students' cultural references in all aspects of learning (Hollie & Allen, 2017).

Understanding Terminology

Before discussing culture as a broad term, it will be instructive to pinpoint and operationally define what it is not. Culture is not a single social or racial construct, nor is it an intellectual achievement rating or specific cuisine that represents one’s identity. It is a cultivation of intersecting thoughts, language, actions, and characteristics that are learned, embodied, and transmitted from generation to generation (Ololube, 2016). From a behavior analytic lens, Skinner (1953) explained culture as a collection of the contingencies of reinforcement into which individuals are born and to which they are exposed throughout their lives. Throughout the present paper, the reader will encounter various terms related to concepts of culture and diversity within the context of behavior analysis. Table 1 provides the reader with a summary of terms used throughout the article and that are relevant to developing the supervisee’s skill set and self-reflective practices.

Cultural humility has been emphasized as an important addition to cultural competence because of its focus on lifelong learning and the strong connection it has to social justice (Wright, 2019). Wright offered a series of questions that can be asked on individual and organizational levels to assist in assessing current performance in cultural humility and in identifying targets for individual and organizational change. For example, individuals are asked, “What are my initial reactions to clients, specifically those that are different from me?” Questions posed organizationally include, “How do we define culture? Diversity?” Cultural humility puts a major emphasis on self-reflection, on identifying bias and power differentials, and on finding individual and organizational solutions to address identified issues (Miller et al., 2019). In addition, cultural responsiveness has been emphasized because of its focus on celebrating difference and on embracing all that can be gained from an inclusive environment (Miller et al., 2019). Several authors have highlighted how aligned this movement is with core foundational values espoused in the field of behavior analysis since its inception; the focus is not new, but the commitment to ensuring it is embedded in clinical practice, training, and supervision has never been more pronounced (BACB, 2020; Miller et al., 2019; Wright, 2019).

The present paper seeks to combine the approaches and recommendations within the existing literature to provide actionable strategies for behavior analysts to implement in their supervisory practice. Specifically, we propose a self-assessment tool that a supervisor can utilize throughout the supervision process to monitor the degree to which they are aware of how culture and race can impact the supervisor-supervisee relationship and the extent to which the supervisor implements those skills consistently and teaches the importance of cultural considerations within clinical practice.

Ethical Obligations for Supervisors and Trainees

The term “trainee” is used by the BACB to denote someone accruing supervised experience hours to apply to sit for a BACB examination. Throughout this paper, we use the term “supervisee” to encompass both trainees and others working under the supervision of a BACB credentialed professional. Throughout the supervision process, the supervisor and supervisee have ethical obligations by which they must abide. Recently, the obligation of integrating and affirming culture and diversity throughout supervision and service provision has been added to the Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2020); however, prior to this addition, several behavior analysts had highlighted the need for culturally responsive supervision. For example, Fong (2020) described the importance of culturally responsive supervision, as well as the potential risks of not considering cultural factors within supervision. The benefits included improved quality of supervisory practices and the relationship between the supervisor and supervisee. The potential risks of failing to be mindful of cultural variables included an increased likelihood of miscommunication, decreased trust, and increased hostility within the relationship. Fong highlighted the supervisory obligation of providing culturally responsive supervision by tying it into the BACB’s Professional and Ethical Compliance Code for Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2014), replaced in 2022 by the BACB’s Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2020), as well as the 5th Edition Task List (BACB, 2017). We refer to the Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2020) as the “Code” for the remainder of the paper.

The Code includes an ethical responsibility for supervisors and supervisees to understand cultural variables within the context of behavior analytic service delivery. Notably, the fourth core principle (Ensure Competence) specifically obligates behavior analysts to engage in culturally competent practice and be prepared to serve a diverse clientele (BACB, 2020). Several additional standards highlight the commitment to this core principle. First, behavior analytic professionals must abide by standard 1.05 Practicing within Scope of Competence which highlights the need to be competent in the treatment and procedures they provide, as well as to seek out professional development and mentorship or refer to another professional when needed (BACB, 2020). The importance of providing culturally responsive behavior analytic treatment and supervision is also included in standard 1.07 Cultural Responsiveness and Diversity. Supervisors and supervisees should explore how culture impacts all aspects of service delivery (e.g., assessment, caregiver training) as part of the supervision process.

Next, supervisors and supervisees are responsible for maintaining competence of their skills through professional development activities as indicated in standard 1.06 Maintaining Competence (BACB, 2020). Participating in professional development creates an opportunity for supervisors and supervisees to engage in a joint process of learning by attending training on culture and ways to become more culturally responsive practitioners. This also ties into the previously mentioned standard 1.05 Practicing within Scope of Competence where supervisors and supervisees can enhance their skill sets together to provide better behavior analytic services through a multicultural lens (BACB, 2020).

The Code also states that behavior analysts engage in equitable and inclusive behavior and do not engage in discriminatory behavior, “regardless of age, disability, ethnicity, gender expression/identity, immigration status, marital/relationship statues, national origin, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or any other basis proscribed by law” (standard 1.08 Nondiscrimination) (BACB, 2020). This specific code lends itself to an opportunity where supervisors and supervisees can engage in exercises to explore their own implicit biases through self-assessment activities. Furthermore, supervisors and supervisees should engage in exercises to actively work on overcoming potential biases and confront cultural misinformation (spread of inaccurate information without intention) to improve their ability to work with various diverse groups as practitioners (See Appendices A and B for suggested scripts and activities).

Lastly, there are additional sections of the Code that speak further about supervision and culture. First, standard 4.02 Supervisory Competence (related to standards 1.05 and 1.06 mentioned earlier) discusses how supervisors should only train others within their scope of competence (BACB, 2020). Therefore, supervisors have an ethical obligation to seek mentorship and training prior to supervising supervisees in providing culturally responsive behavior analytic practices if they are not knowledgeable and competent in this area. The need for continual mentorship, self-reflection, and professional growth as a supervisor is important in being able to provide better supervision to supervisees. Furthermore, standard 4.07 Incorporating and Addressing Diversity stresses the importance of incorporating topics related to diversity in the training and supervision process (BACB, 2020). This further highlights the ethical obligation of supervisors to include these topics as part of the experience of supervisees.

Self-Assessment Tools for Supervisors from Related Disciplines

Many related fields have more robust resources for practitioners and organizations regarding cultural humility in comparison to the field of applied behavior analysis (ABA). These resources commonly include self-assessment tools. Fields such as speech-language pathology and social work have developed self-assessment tools and guidelines that can be used to assess cultural sensitivity and responsiveness at the individual and organizational levels. Professionals can utilize these tools to assess the degree to which their clinical work and organizational systems, for example, adhere to cultural recommendations that are relevant within their fields.

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c) offers various cultural competence checklists focusing on a practitioner’s self-reflection, assessment of service delivery, and assessment of policies and procedures. The Personal Reflection checklist assesses the degree to which clinicians understand how culture impacts different aspects of clients’ lives (e.g., child-rearing practices, life activities, communication), whether they understand and respect differences in norms and values, and whether they hold any discriminatory views or engage in discriminatory practices (ASHA, 2010a). The Service Delivery checklist focuses on the frequency with which the clinician adheres to culturally competent service delivery practices such as considering different norms and preferences throughout various aspects of clinical care, allowing for different methods of communication, and understanding how clients’ backgrounds may be associated with varying degrees of risk for certain diseases which may impact their speech, language, and hearing (ASHA, 2010c). The Policies & Procedures checklist focuses on steps taken at an organizational level to ensure cultural competence (ASHA, 2010b). Some of the areas assessed include employment recruitment, policies regarding discrimination that occurs in the workplace, the inclusion of individuals from various backgrounds in leadership roles, and whether the agency provides feedback and promotes individuals based on employees’ job performance and not on their use of mainstream American English. These self-assessments are meant to increase an individual’s self-awareness regarding their covert and overt behaviors regarding individuals from various backgrounds and should be used to identify areas in need of improvement through professional development activities.

The National Association of Social Workers (2015) developed Standards and Indicators for Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice. Within this guide there are ten identified standards for social work including: Ethics and Values; Self-Awareness; Cross-Cultural Knowledge; Cross-Cultural Skills; Service Delivery; Empowerment and Advocacy; Diverse Workforce; Professional Education; Language and Communication; and Leadership to Advance Cultural Competence. Each of the standards includes a list of indicators that provide actionable steps social workers should take to adhere to each standard. For example, under Standard 9 - Language and Communication, some of the indicators of culturally competent social workers include: adjusting their services, information provided, and referrals based on a person’s preferred language; providing materials that are free of jargon; taking steps necessary for clients to receive accommodations based on their linguistic needs; and taking steps to increase their competency as it related to speaking “speak[ing], read[ing], writ[ing], and understand[ing] the languages and dialects of their clients without attempting to engage in dialogue that is beyond their own skill level” (National Association of Social Workers, 2015, p. 46). While this resource is not a self-assessment tool itself, social workers can use the lists of indicators under each standard to self-assess the degree to which they adhere to these standards.

Self-Assessment Tools for BCBA Supervisors

Within the field of ABA, it is unlikely that self-assessment tools are used as commonly as other related fields. This may be because behavior analysis emphasizes using objective measures, which is in direct conflict with self-assessments as they are subjective in nature. Self-assessments often lack operational definitions and precise measurement, which may lead to a lack of objectivity. Despite these limitations, self-assessments offer a starting point for evaluating performance of crucially important target behaviors among specific content areas.

Despite the agreed upon need for improvement and the accountability required by the BACB, there are limited tools available for behavior analysts to address various aspects of supervision. One noteworthy example is Turner et al. (2016), which discussed the importance of the supervision of behavior analytic supervisees and asserted that quality supervision is important for “...development of effective and ethical practitioners, protection of clients, and advances in the field” (p. 287). Turner and colleagues provided practical recommendations for delivering competency-based supervision including ensuring a collaborative relationship between the supervisor and supervisee. Specific strategies could include setting clear expectations, identifying skills to teach supervisees and effective methods for instruction, and selecting ways to evaluate progress. The authors proposed the use of a tool they developed - the Supervision Monitoring and Evaluation Form - to monitor the effectiveness of supervision, as well as to assess supervision and supervisor quality. Some of the items included various measures such as the degree to which supervision occurs as arranged, whether the supervisor engages in specific supervisory behaviors, and the extent to which supervision includes specific content, such as “matters of diversity and inclusion.” Performance can be measured using a rating scale (1 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 5 = Always) or by responding “Yes” or “No or Not Always.” This form can be used to provide meaningful feedback to the supervisor regarding their performance. This tool in the literature does note processes related to diversity, but it does not identify specific skills that a supervisor should demonstrate during culturally responsive supervision processes. This limitation was considered when creating the proposed cultural supervision tool.

Additionally, LeBlanc et al. (2020) offered various self-assessment tools and activities that supervisors can complete regarding their supervisory practices, including an emphasis on a variety of important aspects of cultural responsiveness within supervision (LeBlanc et al., 2020). These components included steps such as assessing your own place of privilege across a variety of factors in comparison to others such as your supervisor or supervisees (e.g., race, sex, religion, gender identity, socioeconomic status, education level, health, disability status, native languages spoken, age), engaging in perspective taking, and completing a survey regarding employee and/or supervisee cultural satisfaction. LeBlanc et al. (2020) suggest self-reflection activities surrounding supervision, inviting supervisors to examine their own comfort in cross-cultural contexts, the ways in which culture informs their supervisory practices, and the ways in which culture might influence a supervisee’s interactions. Suggestions are offered to assist in identifying assumptions and areas in need to change, such as responding to a variety of challenging questions that focus on these points and enlisting the support of colleagues from other cultures.

Additionally, Leland and Stockwell (2019) recently developed a self-assessment tool for behavior analysts focusing on creating a safe and supportive environment for transgender and gender-nonconforming (TGNC) individuals. This tool primarily addresses behavior analysts’ adherence to ethical guidelines, the arrangement of supportive and inclusive environments, and whether the behavior analyst engages in supportive behavior and refrains from engaging in behavior that is not supportive of TGNC clients, students, supervisees, and colleagues. The goal of the tool is to universally transform workplace and educational environments into places where LGBTQIA+ community members feel affirmed. Questions on the tool examine the extent to which the responder represents, supports, and models inclusion and gender affirmation in professional interactions, in materials used, and in organizational policies. This instrument is presented as a self-assessment instrument to objectively evaluate the extent to which one’s behavior conforms to a values-based criterion.

The present authors propose a new (and similarly conceptualized) self-assessment, the Culturally Responsive Supervision Self-Assessment (CRSS) Tool, for supervisors who provide BACB-required supervision to supervisees accruing fieldwork experience. This self-assessment tool can be utilized to assess the degree to which supervisors engage in culturally responsive practices during supervision and identify areas for improvement. The CRSS Tool addresses and provides examples and nonexamples of the following:

1. Understanding how the cultural and racial backgrounds of the supervisor and supervisee may impact aspects of the supervision process.

2. Understanding how the cultural and racial backgrounds of an individual receiving ABA services may impact aspects of their clinical care.

3. Looking at the behavior of the supervisor both at the onset of the supervision process and throughout the delivery of supervision.

The tool provides both examples and non-examples of adhering to different practices. The assessment tool is provided for readers along with several additional resources including a terminology table, practice scenarios, scripts to use in supervision, and various activities to expand and strengthen the skill set of both supervisors and supervisees.

The Development and the Use of the CRSS Tool

The authors of the present paper began by reviewing the existing literature within ABA and other fields regarding cultural responsiveness and supervision. Whereas a systematic review of the existing behavior analytic literature is beyond the scope of this paper, the authors used keywords of diversity, supervision, multiculturalism, cultural competence, cultural humility, and cultural responsiveness to obtain relevant articles. Based on the key concepts and the overlap between existing resources, the authors constructed the initial draft of the tool. Further discussion around tool construction and revision is reviewed in subsequent sections.

The CRSS Tool is intended to be incorporated into the practices of supervisors who are providing BACB® supervision. This tool serves as an ongoing assessment of one’s implicit bias and provides specific context and guidance for areas of further development and investigation. The CRSS Tool is organized in four subdomains focusing on how cultural and racial backgrounds impact aspects of 1) the supervision process, 2) the clinical care for an individual receiving ABA services, 3) the behavior of the supervisor at the onset of the supervision process, and 4) the behavior of the supervisor throughout the delivery of supervision.

Each subdomain contains a series of statements with varying access points for developing cultural responsiveness in supervision and corresponding examples and non-examples for each statement. For example, if the self-assessor does not understand how cultural backgrounds impact personal boundaries, they would circle 0, then proceed to the next statement. Questions are not intended to be skipped as cultural responsiveness is a continuum, though it is possible to encounter questions that are not applicable (i.e., OBM specialists may not directly encounter hygiene goals when working with clients and may minimally focus on culture and clinical intervention during supervision).

Tool Domains

The domains and descriptions are provided below to orient readers to the various components of the tool to better understand the potential utility of the instrument in supervisory practice.

Aspects of the Supervisor-Supervisee Relationship

The first domain asks the self-assessor ways in which they understand how the cultural and racial backgrounds of the supervisor and supervisee may impact aspects of the supervision process. This subdomain utilizes seven statements to evaluate the engagement practices of the assessor in this domain. Items 1.1 and 1.2 focus on assessing the supervisor’s understanding of how the supervisee prefers to receive feedback from the supervisor and the degree to which they may feel comfortable providing feedback to their supervisor. Item 1.3 highlights social interactions which may need to be considered (e.g., the degree of acceptability of handshaking with different people across cultures). Items 1.4 to 1.7 identify the impact of historical or present-day issues between different communities or groups of people, as well as the power differentials that exist between supervisors and supervisees.

Aspects of Clinical Care

The second domain asks the self-assessor ways in which they understand how the cultural backgrounds of an individual receiving ABA services may impact aspects of their clinical care. This subdomain includes 15 statements to facilitate critical thinking about the engagement practices of the assessor while highlighting examples and non-examples related to clinical care. Item 2.1 targets the assessment and interview process and lists seven examples of what the clinician should do (e.g., ask about the interviewee’s preferred language for the interview, ask open-ended questions, use accessible language). Items 2.2 and 2.3 focus on the importance of assessing the cultural relevance of behaviors targeted for reduction as well as skill acquisition targets. Item 2.4 captures the need to assess the acceptability of any proposed treatments. Items 2.6 and 2.7 focus on how social interactions can differ across cultures and communication (e.g., language of instruction, functional communication training). Items 2.5 and 2.8 through 2.10 highlight the importance of assessing family structure, acceptable disciplinary practices, and family involvement in services (e.g., parent training). Item 2.11 prompts clinicians to ask questions about aspirations and expectations for the individual’s future rather than making assumptions. Item 2.12 focuses on religious and spiritual factors. Item 2.13 discusses how gift giving expectations differ across cultures. Item 2.14 describes considerations regarding telehealth services, for example, the family comfortability of receiving services through telehealth and their technology skill level. Item 2.15 is divided into seven subsections focusing on various types of protocols, such as safety skills, sleep, and feeding.

Onset and Throughout the Supervision Process

The final two domains ask the self-assessor to look at the behavior of the supervisor both at the onset of the supervision process and throughout the delivery of supervision. This subdomain includes 16 statements to evaluate supervision practices. Items 3.1, 3.2, and 3.6 restate the importance of assessing preference for receiving and providing feedback. Furthermore, items 3.3 to 3.5 advise supervisors to set goals and hold themselves accountable in teaching culturally responsive skill sets and providing culturally responsive supervision. Next, progress towards goals can be assessed by taking and graphing data, as well as by soliciting feedback (Item 3.6).

Item 4.1 emphasizes the importance of not engaging in any racist or discriminatory practices, including the use of slurs, microaggressions, and jokes regarding race, culture, or immigration status. Item 4.2 discusses ways in which the supervisor can demonstrate empathy and compassion. Items 4.3 and 4.4 describe valuing others’ perspectives and decisions on whether to adopt norms on the dominant culture. For example, the assessor must consider statements like “I allow my supervisee to maintain their cultural identity (e.g., dress, language, hair style) during supervision sessions and clinical work without judgement or bias”. Item 4.5 requires reflection on the ways in which the supervisor provides diverse clinical examples. Item 4.6 asks the supervisor to assess whether they discuss the importance of culture throughout a variety of topics. Item 4.7 discusses accessing literature from both within and outside of the ABA field regarding cultural responsiveness. Item 4.8 describes ways in which a supervisor can respectfully obtain information about a person’s cultural background, values, and norms (e.g., asking for specific routines or expectations for visiting the home that may impact sessions such as removing shoes off upon entry either outside of the home or at the door). Item 4.9 describes the importance of discussing the harm that can occur when cultural differences are ignored (e.g., Black and Latinx students being disproportionately punished in comparison to their white peers or delayed diagnosis/misdiagnosis). Lastly, Item 4.10 assess the degree to which the supervisor makes the supervisee aware of ABA materials which have been translated into other languages so they can provide them to families when needed.

Scoring Procedure

The self-assessor (i.e., supervisor) will have the option to select from 0-4 depending on the level of agreement with the specific statement. Table 2 provides more information on the descriptive ranges for the CRSS Tool.

Table 2.

Descriptive ranges of CRSS tool

Score	Descriptive meaning
0	The supervisor strongly disagrees or has never engaged in the behavior illustrated in the statements/example
1	The supervisor disagrees or rarely engages in the behavior illustrated in the statements/examples
2	The supervisor remains neutral or sometimes engages in the behavior illustrated in the statements/examples
3	The supervisor agrees or engages in the behavior illustrated in the statements/examples most of the time
4	The supervisor strongly agrees or always engages in the behavior illustrated in the statements/examples

After completing the tool, we recommend that the supervisor to review the tool once again and take notes of the statements in which the score is a 2 or lower to create a plan of action to monitor throughout the supervision process. It may be helpful to administer the CRSS tool periodically (e.g., every 500 hours) to establish an index of change over time and set new goals throughout supervision.

Utility of the CRSS Tool

The use of the CRSS tool is a complex and new skill that may be best integrated with the support of a trusted senior supervisor, mentor, or colleague. This may be especially important for novice supervisors with limited experience in self-reflection. Input from mentors can increase the supervisor’s comfort and confidence in the integration of the tool as part of their supervisory practice.

We have also provided scripts in the appendix for supervisors to use with supervisees to accomplish goals within the supervision context related to diversity. Furthermore, supervisors may find it useful to reference the scripts and even to use them in role plays or practice saying some of them out loud to become more comfortable with language, learn to put the concepts into their own words, and to increase their fluency speaking about topics of diversity. Regarding the CRSS tool, it might be helpful for supervisors to show the CRSS tool to supervisees at an appropriate point in the supervisor relationship based upon skillset and developmental level. One suggestion may be to introduce the CRSS tool when evaluating scope of practice along with other resources such as articles (e.g., Brodhead, 2015; Leland & Stockwell, 2019; Wright, 2019).

Practice scenarios are provided to assist in the application of these goals to develop culturally responsive practices within the context of ABA service delivery and supervision. Upon completion of the CRSS tool and the practice scenarios, supervisors and supervisees can design individualized goals for supervision. Supervisors can assist supervisees to use self-management strategies to improve their skills related to culturally responsive practice with clients and in supervision.

Social Validity of CRSS Tool

To obtain corroborating opinions from a diverse group of stakeholders regarding the CRSS tool, an electronic survey was sent to a total of 54 behavior analysts and other human service professionals (e.g., social worker, school psychologist, nurse, occupational therapist) all of whom had exposure to and experience with ABA. The focus of this survey was to establish content validity of the CRSS tool. The survey was sent to a convenience sample of individuals from various racial identities, ages, and levels of professional experience with ABA. The survey included a mixture of statements with rating scales and open-ended questions.

Initially, 10 responses were received from the first 25 individuals to whom the tool was sent (i.e., a 40% response rate). Once the initial feedback was received, the feedback was reviewed by the authors and edits were made accordingly. The authors then sent out a revised version of the CRSS tool to a total of 54 people (25 of these individuals received both the first and second versions of the tool and 29 of these people received the tool for the first time during this round). The second round resulted in feedback from 7 individuals (15% response rate), 6 of whom were assessing the tool for the first time. Across the two versions of the tool, feedback was ultimately received from 16 different people (30%).

Respondents (N = 10) to an initial survey generally agreed on the importance of addressing this area within supervision, and found the tool to be clear, easy to use, and useful. Respondents provided feedback on the content, structure, and utility of the assessment, but were not asked to pilot the instrument as a supervisor. All suggested changes were implemented to improve the tool; these included suggestions to broaden examples and add some additional contexts that pose challenges in culturally responsive supervision. A second administration of the survey after revisions were incorporated inquired about future usage, and respondents (N = 7) indicated they would use it in supervision (100% somewhat likely or very likely). Additional edits were made accordingly to the instrument based upon feedback from the second survey.

Discussion

Supervision and mentorship have always had multiple purposes across professions (Sellers et al., 2016). There is a primary purpose of ensuring that the junior member of a profession is equipped with the skills necessary to function competently and effectively. A secondary function of supervision is a gatekeeping function, to ensure that competent individuals are invited into the profession, while less competent members remain in supervised practice. This gatekeeping function, while not always explicitly discussed, has been a persistent function within behavior analysis, and is present across all professions (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998). The quality of the field depends on the next generation of professionals, continually across time (Milne, 2007; Roberts & Borders, 1994).

As noted above, competent mastery of key skills associated with the profession is the primary focus of supervision. Hence, supervision is focused on knowledge and skills. Fong et al. (2016) recommended that cultural awareness training be embedded within supervision to allow for discussion and feedback to increase supervisees’ engagement in culturally aware behavior (Fong et al., 2016). The authors also stated that fidelity checklists can be utilized to monitor culturally aware behaviors that occur throughout a wide range of activities within clinical practice including assessment, treatment, and consultation.

A common feature of most professions is the identification of a set of skills that define scope competence. Training and supervision of junior members of the profession is guided by these core competencies. Within behavior analysis, the essential practice competencies are identified in the Task List (BACB, 2017). In addition, the BACB’s Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts (BACB 2020) provides guidance for practicing behavior analysts and supervisees while the Supervisor 2.0 Training Outline offers supervisors a framework of competencies for supervision. It is also implied that the supervisor will shape a wide array of professionalism skills including aspects of culturally responsive practices. LeBlanc et al. (2020) have emphasized the importance of integrating culturally responsive practices into supervision. These authors provide assessments and activities to help the supervisor and supervisee focus on culture as part of service-delivery and within organizations (LeBlanc et al., 2020).

In relation to culture, in behavioral science there is an understanding that an individual’s behaviors are indicative of one's learning history and environment. Human diversity is a lived experience and views reflect those experiences. The behavior analyst is responsible for teaching the supervisee the skills necessary to succeed in their current environment while understanding that the supervisee’s current behavior is shaped by a combination of a lifetime of cultural contingencies among other environmental contingencies. The cultural intersectionality of the supervisee permeates how the individual responds, processes, communicates and interacts with others. The responsibility of a BCBA supervisor is to provide relevant guidance through personalized experiences, to prepare supervisees to enter the workforce. This personalized experience includes training evidence-based behavioral techniques, providing performance-based feedback, and modeling problem-solving techniques.

Increasingly, supervision within behavior analysis has emphasized performance-based demonstration of competence in the areas identified in the BACB Task List (BACB, 2017). This is especially true for the direct care/implementer level of credentialing within behavior analysis, the RBT (BACB, 2019). However, in recent explorations regarding the skill sets of behavior analysts in key practice areas such as functional assessment, it has become apparent that competency-based assessment is not always integrated into supervision. Furthermore, consumer outcomes should also be integrated into the performance-based feedback of individuals training and supervisees in relation to culturally responsive treatment. As part of this feedback, individual training must ensure that minimal competency has been attained by the supervisees in demonstrating the necessary skills related to culturally diverse practices (e.g., family dynamic and culture in guardian training, developing materials that include a client’s cultural background, among others). In the context of cultural humility within supervision, the obligations are clear. While raising the awareness level of supervisees is important, the field should move into teaching and training complex skills to those future behavior analysts.

In the context of perennial caretaking of the profession, appropriate supervision begets appropriate supervision (Sellers et al., 2016). As we model ethical, humble, and compassionate supervision, we train effective, humble, and compassionate practitioners. It is likely that supervisees who are the recipients of high-quality supervision will, themselves, mentor and nurture excellent practitioners as well. In this way, the cycle of supervision leads to the enrichment of the field, the maintenance of quality within the field, and the provision of humane and effective services.

As reviewed in this article, there are a variety of self-assessment tools that have been developed in related disciplines on multiculturalism and diversity issues, but no such tool exists specifically in behavior analysis related to supervision. In this article, as the authors, we attempted to develop a self-assessment tool that would span various domains of professional practice as they are relevant to the skill development of both supervisees and supervisors. While this contribution awaits empirical verification of its impact, it does create a context within supervision where these issues can be addressed and shaped.

Limitations

There are a number of limitations with regard to the development of this tool. First, while efforts were made to send the tool to a diverse group of responders, the participants were from a convenience sample of colleagues of the authors. Therefore, the feedback provided must be interpreted with caution, as there may be potential response bias. Perhaps most importantly, the tool is theoretically embedded and clinically compelling; however, the tool has not yet been empirically validated. Ideally, such support would precede the distribution of the tool; however, the urgent need for our field to explore and refine our approach to addressing these areas in supervision accelerated the dissemination effort.

Future Directions

This article highlighted numerous areas of diversity and supervision related topics for further growth and development in the field of behavior analysis. An initial step would be for the field to develop a clearer understanding of diversity as it relates to service delivery and supervision in behavior analysis in a way that is conceptually systematic and compassionate.

Given that our field is still in its early stages of addressing the need, it would be beneficial to examine current practices in ABA and the need of consumers to understand what is absent from behavior analytic interventions to develop procedures that are more culturally responsive. This would help to better inform the training and supervision of future professionals entering the field as a means of developing more culturally responsive practitioners. This could help lead to the development of more specific training for supervisors on diversity (including but not limited to confronting mainstream assumptions, improving critical thinking surrounding unfamiliar cultural norms, etc.). These trainings could then include cultural responsiveness as an element of supervisor initial training requirements. Furthermore, renewal of eligibility to supervise could be contingent upon continued training in this area.

While waiting for these initial steps of growth in the field to occur, the self-assessment tool designed by the authors offers an immediate way for supervisors and supervisees to take a structured approach to engaging in self-reflection of their practices. Reflecting on and talking about these topics can be uncomfortable for many, producing avoidance responses. It is our hope that the CRSS tool can help facilitate supervisors actively engaging with this critical topic in their self-reflective and supervisory practices. Some self-reflective categories captured include unintentional microaggressions, societal value and devaluing actions, heteronormative and/or binary biases. The prompts in the CRSS tool increases the saliency of the topic and offers trainers and supervisees a way to continue the dialogue and the refinement of these skills. Further research would be needed on the self-assessment tool to better understand its efficacy in supervisory practices.

In conclusion, the field of behavior analysis has begun to integrate cultural responsiveness into clinical service provision and supervision. There is still more that needs to be done in this area, but this contribution to the literature aims to provide a tool and resource for those providing supervision and training to future generations of professionals in the field. We hope that the resources provided in the appendices serve to support the efforts of supervisors to address this vital topic. The CRSS tool is designed to actively incorporate diversity topics into the supervisory model in a structured way. Furthermore, the scripts, activities, and discussion questions are provided to scaffold conversations and skill development for future professionals in ABA. All these resources can be readily incorporated throughout the entire supervision experience for both supervisors and supervisees. Finally, the discussion questions could be used in supervision, or as an activity in a course or journal review activity, to promote thoughtful discussion after reading this article. In this way, it is our hope that culturally responsive supervision and clinical practice are continually discussed between supervisors and supervisees and within service provision teams. We recognize that we are in the earliest stages of growth on this topic in the field and look forward to the field continuing to define and refine this essential skill set.

Discussion Questions

1. What are some steps you can take as a behavior analyst to integrate cultural responsiveness into your clinical practice and supervision?

2. What are some ways you would use the CRSS Tool within your organization and supervisory practice as a behavior analyst?

3. How would you train other supervisors in the use of the CRSS Tool to incorporate into their supervision?

4. What are the benefits and risks of incorporating and not incorporating cultural responsiveness into your supervision practices?

5. Which examples and non-examples did you find most instructive? What additional examples and non-examples could you add from your experience?

Declarations

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Conflicts of Interests

We have no conflicts of interests to disclose.