IJSP Number 4, 2022

11 we think about supervisory experiences, including the degree to which the team members negotiated their own international background vs. the U.S. norms. In recognizing these potential biases and individual experiences, the researchers strived to keep an open mind for experiences shared by non-Asian international trainees. Data interpretation was also approached with caution while recognizing that international students might not feel comfortable voicing negative training experiences due to various reasons (e.g., cultural factors, visa status). Finally, triangulation was conducted. An external auditor reviewed the entire project after the data analysis process was completed by the team. The external auditor was previously an international trainee (non-Asian background), earned their doctoral degree in counselling psychology in the US, and is currently a licensed psychologist and a clinical supervisor in a counselling psychology doctoral program. The external auditor examined the research questions and data, as well as the codes and overarching themes from the raw data [43]. Based on the auditor ’ s feedback, the primary research team revisited the themes until agreed adjustments were reached. 5. Results Four themes were identified from the qualitative data. They included (1) challenging aspects of being an international supervisee in supervision, (2) supervisor ’ s multicultural competency or lack thereof, (3) growth-facilitating supervision strategies, and (4) addressing the supervision power differential. 5.1. Challenging Aspects of Being an International Supervisee in Supervision This theme coincided with the first domain of our inquiry. From our data, five major reasons/sources (sub-themes) emerged that contributed to the experienced challenges. They included: (1) language/cultural barriers and political issues, (2) prejudice, microaggressions, and racism from clients, (3) institutional/legal challenges, (4) supervisors ’ lacking knowledge about their supervisees ’ cultural backgrounds and values , and (5) supervisees ’ own cultural beliefs and developed patterns for learning. Specifically, all international supervisees recalled many challenges due to language/cultural barriers and political issues, where they were perceived, for example, as incompetent in therapy by their supervisors and seen as less credible by their clients due to English-ism. A large portion of our participants ( n =7) reported that they had higher turnover rates compared to their American peers due to lack of language proficiency, which severely influenced their initial confidence in therapy and made them question their competence. Referencing prejudice, microaggressions, and racism from clients , international supervisees reported that clients assumed them to be incompetent and declined services ( n =5). Further, international students also reported that their training programs ’ evaluations often focused on the limitations/deficits, instead of the strengths possessed by international students ( n = 7), which have “caused chronic and ongoing problems and stress on me ” (#1). Similarly, institutional and legal challenges captured international students ’ difficulties associated with immigration restrictions and visa issues. For instance, several supervisees ( n =4) reported