IJSP Number 5, 2023

66 enhancing dynamics with international trainees (#6). For example, a supervisor (#4) shared that she asked her international supervisees to share how they viewed and dealt with the power differential culturally and personally before sharing her own view, with an emphasis on the importance of discussing any power differential issues even when it was vague. Similarly, a supervisor (#3) disclosed “I try to understand the international supervisee's own perspective on power, how that will affect us going forward, and accommodate accordingly. I accommodate, not my supervisee.” Another supervisor (#2) reported that they were less likely to challenge or push an international trainee to share in supervision if it was clearly not within their value system to do so. This supervisor stated that “I will however keep challenging if the clinical work needed to be done is at an impasse as a result of an inability to acknowledge their role in the clinical work.” Another supervisor (#6) also reported that, “for multiple reasons, this person might not feel as comfortable speaking up to me, and I feel it's vital I discuss how much I value this person's perspective and input for their development and clinical work. I will say that the power differential is something I feel is important to monitor with all supervisees, but I also feel especially sensitive to it when I am working with trainees from any number of marginalized identities/cultures--whether they are international or American.” On the other hand, some supervisors (# 1 and #5) reported preferences of addressing the power differential issues similarly between the US and international trainees. In particular, one supervisor (#5) noted, “I handle it similarly when discussing power differentials with non-international students and note how they may or may not create issues, inviting them to bring things up as we go. If language skills are a factor, I try to make it clear and upfront how we will handle it…really only has seemed to apply to beginning practicum students and very rare.” The final subtheme was related to taking a not-knowing stance. The majority of supervisors reported that, in the beginning of supervision, they went with their assumptions about the supervisee’s cultural background, instead of spending time to discuss the supervisee’s cultural background or how their clinical interventions were influenced by cultural values. However, many supervisors reported that these assumptions often were proven wrong. Almost all supervisors (100%) commented on the cultural variations among international supervisees, even for those with the same nationality. An example offered by one of the participants (#4) was that “I assumed my trainee did not assert herself and wouldn't challenge a client given her cultural background when in fact it had nothing to do with her assertiveness. We talked openly afterward, and I became aware of my assumption…” This particular example confirmed the need for the supervisor to be open to working with otherness and checking in with their international supervisees, instead of acting on any assumptions they held about the supervisee’s cultural group. Another supervisor (#6) offered their insight that “What I would do differently in that experience is first begin by asking my international supervisee along with the intentions and thoughts behind it. Start there—rather than first expressing my thoughts on it.”