TPC-Journal-V5-Issue3

The Professional Counselor /Volume 5, Issue 3 426 Implications Implications for Counselor Training There are several implications for counselor education based on the findings in this study. First, the results of this study support Fuertes’ (2004) suggestion that counselor training programs “attend to issues of culture and language as part of their curriculum training and supervision” (p. 84). If bilingualism does indeed positively influence multicultural awareness and knowledge, it may be important for counselor educators to consider, where feasible and appropriate, how they might recruit and train bilingual individuals (Ivers et al., 2013; Smith-Adcock et al., 2006). In areas with high concentrations of non-English speakers, it may be reasonable for counseling programs to provide additional language training opportunities to students, such as second-language training courses, bilingual counseling courses and bilingual supervision (Fuertes, 2004; Smith-Adcock et al., 2006). These training opportunities would likely increase the number of counselors willing to provide counseling in a second language as well as improve the provision of counseling in a second language (Castaño, Biever, González, & Anderson, 2007; Trepal et al., 2014; Verdinelli & Biever, 2009). Also, as the results of the current study suggest, these programs would likely enhance counseling students’ overall effectiveness in working with culturally diverse clients. Second, the results of this study may reinforce the use of cultural immersion assignments to enhance students’ multicultural awareness and knowledge in multicultural training programs. Contact theory (Allport, 1954), which is the theoretical framework upon which many cultural immersion assignments rest, suggests that exposure to and interaction with culturally different others can result in prejudice reduction. With respect to language, if it is true that culture and language are inextricably connected, as the Neo-Whorfians contend, it is likely that the in-depth, sustained contact and interaction inherent in learning a second language would expose bilingual counselors to latent and manifest cultural paradigms. This exposure may enhance counselors’ multicultural knowledge and awareness (Ivers et al., 2013). Implications for Counseling Practice The current results also provide potential implications for counseling practice. As mentioned in the introduction, ethnic minority clients continue to underutilize and prematurely discontinue counseling services (DHHS, 2001). An increased number of bilingual counselors could theoretically enhance access to counseling services for linguistically diverse clients. Furthermore, according to these findings, counselors might demonstrate higher rates of multicultural counseling knowledge and awareness. Sentell et al. (2007) reported that English-speaking Latinas/os and Asian Americans are more likely than non-English speakers to use mental health services. Furthermore, from 1980 to 2007, the percentage of individuals in the United States who spoke a language other than English at home increased 140% to approximately 55.4 million individuals. In addition, of the 55.4 million individuals who reportedly speak a language other than English at home, 24.5 million stated that their ability to communicate in English was below “very well,” indicating a need for assistance in some communication contexts (Shin & Kominski, 2010). These statistics and the results of the current study indicate a need for bilingual counselors who have the cultural and linguistic skills necessary to effectively serve this increasingly linguistically diverse population (Sentell et al., 2007). Limitations and Implications for Future Research The present study is an exploratory study of the relationship between bilingualism and multicultural awareness and knowledge, and has limitations that are important to take into account when interpreting results. First, the MCCTS-R is a self-report instrument and is potentially susceptible to intervening variables such as social desirability and ignorance bias (Heppner,