Theory, Methods, and Practice to Advance Equity and Social Justice in School Psychology: Articulating a Path Forward

Abstract

In recent years, school psychology has given increasing attention to issues of social justice and antiracism. While such orientations are not new, the scope and centrality of these movements within the field are, as is the growing appreciation of the need to integrate them across all areas of professional activities and efforts in school psychology. The aim of this special topic section is to create a space for scholarship addressing a broad range of issues relevant to advancing equity and justice in school psychology. In particular, we seek to curate diverse scholarship that expands the ways we conceptualize, design, implement, and interpret school psychology research, as well as how we approach graduate preparation and practice in school psychology to advance equitable and just services for individuals from historically and systemically marginalized backgrounds. The resulting compilation of articles provide insight into how school psychologists can approach scholarship, practice, and professional education to advance antiracism, social justice, and equity. Themes include expanding the nature and scope of school psychology scholarship by confronting the detriments of whiteness and epistemic exclusion; centering equity, healing, and minoritized voices in practice; and leveraging diverse research methods, including participatory approaches, to elevate youth and family voices in addressing some of the most pressing issues in schools.

Impact Statement

School psychology has given increasing attention to issues of social justice and antiracism, with growing appreciation of the need to integrate them across all professional activities. This article contributes important information regarding how these broad efforts can be supported by confronting the detriments of epistemic exclusion and whiteness in scholarship; centering equity, healing, and minoritized voices in practice; and leveraging diverse research methods, including participatory approaches.

Keywords:

• social justice
• antiracism
• school psychology

Research for social justice expands and improves the conditions for justice; it is an intellectual, cognitive and moral project, often fraught, never complete, but worthwhile. - Tuhiwai Smith, 2021, p. 270

In recent years, school psychology has given increasing attention to issues of social justice (e.g., Graybill et al., 2018; Malone & Proctor, 2019) and as of late, antiracism (e.g., García-Vázquez et al., 2020; Grant et al., 2022). While such discussions are not new (e.g., Booker et al., 1989; Hyman, 1979; Ingraham, 2000; Prilleltensky, 1991), the scope and centrality of these movements within the field are (Jimerson et al., 2021). As school psychologists continue to reckon with our field’s history and integrate these commitments into all areas of professional activity, we hold scholarship to be one important mechanism for articulating and facilitating change toward justice. The aim of this special topic is to create a space for scholarship addressing a broad range of issues relevant to advancing equity and justice in school psychology. In particular, we seek to curate diverse scholarship that expands the ways we conceptualize, design, implement, and interpret school psychology research, as well as how we approach graduate preparation and practice in school psychology to advance equitable, just services for individuals from historically and systemically marginalized backgrounds. Ultimately, we hope this special topic will elevate scholarship salient to enhancing the field’s capacity to engage and support all learners and disrupt the historic emphases on relatively homogeneous populations, theories, and methods in school psychology research (Blake et al., 2016; Nastasi et al., 2017).

SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY’S GROWING COMMITMENT TO SOCIAL JUSTICE

Social justice can generally be defined as the fair, equitable, and just distribution of privilege, opportunity, and resources among all individuals, groups, and communities in a society. Concerns for equity and social justice in school psychology are longstanding, albeit somewhat isolated in scholarship (Grant et al., 2022; Graybill et al., 2018; Parris et al., 2019), with Graves et al. (2021) pointing out that practice initiatives oriented toward social justice seem to have outpaced school psychology scholarship on the topic. Although NASP adopted a social justice definition in 2017 and integrated the concept into its professional standards in 2020, the field has remained behind other areas of psychology where diversification and transformation are concerned (e.g., Huff, 2021). Yet the field showed unprecedented levels of engagement around social justice, and particularly racial justice (i.e., creation of systems to create and maintain racial equity; Racial Equity Tools, 2020) and antiracism (i.e., direct, active opposition to racism in all forms from the interpersonal to the institutional), in the wake of international demonstrations for racial justice following seemingly unmitigated police killings of unarmed (and even unconscious) Black Americans (e.g., García-Vázquez et al., 2020; antiracism professional learning groups of White¹ faculty; the School Psychology Antiracism Unconferences). George Floyds’ murder in Minneapolis, MN in May 2020, while the world reeled from the first wave of the novel coronavirus of 2019 (COVID-19) and all of the political, social, economic, and health issues accompanying them, highlighted the deep structural inequities that contributed to injustices in all areas of American society (Sullivan, 2022). Such highly visible episodes of state violence, as well as the corruption enacted in response to the killings of others like Breonna Taylor, Elijah McClain, and Ahmaud Arbery, to name but a few,² spurred worldwide protests for racial justice. The protests lended momentum to racial justice movements like Black Lives Matter and Land Back that have long called attention to the disproportionate and increasing harms of the prison industrial complex and other colonial and white supremacist structures to Black, Indigenous, Latinx, disabled, and sexual minority communities (e.g., Adams et al., 2019).

Troublingly, concern for racial justice among the general White population seemed to quickly wane (Davis & Wilson, 2022) and there have been expansive opposition to racial justice in media, policy, and the actions of private citizens (Crenshaw, 2022; López, 2021; Ward, 2022), termed by some as whitelash (e.g., Bonilla-Silva, 2020), along with related efforts to curtail Indigenous sovereignty, reproductive justice, LGBTQ + rights, and environmental justice via local and national policy and case law (e.g., American Civil Liberties Union, 2023; Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 2022; Sackett et ux. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al., 2023). Nonetheless, many individuals, groups, and associations have continued with their social justice efforts, including within school psychology and psychology and education more broadly (e.g., Maton, 2023).

The 2020 unified statement from the six school psychology professional associations (García-Vázquez et al., 2020) was closely followed by a call to end anti-Asian racism (Truong et al., 2021) as widespread COVID-19 misinformation incited political and interpersonal violence against the Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander (AAAPI) communities. Taken together, these statements called for extensive actions throughout the profession to confront and disrupt the pervasive effects of systemic racism in our field and society. Notably, in the opening lines of the unified statement, the writers emphasized that school psychologists “have an ethical responsibility to engage in social justice and antiracist action” (García-Vázquez et al., 2020, p. 209). This suggests a fundamental imperative for school psychologists to support social justice and antiracism. While the inception of this special topic predated the events that inspired this statement, we, too, approach this work from recognition of the field’s ethical aspirations and obligations related to the dignity, justice, and rights of all people. In particular, NASP’s Principles for Professional Ethics (2020) states, “School psychologists engage only in professional practices that maintain the dignity of all with whom they work. In their words and actions, school psychologists demonstrate respect for the autonomy of persons and their right to self-determination, respect for privacy, and a commitment to just, equitable, and fair treatment of all persons” (p. 42).

These are lofty aims given the historic and contemporary lack of racial, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity in school psychology (Goforth et al., 2021), along with the roots of the field in colonial, white supremacist ideology and systems (Grant et al., 2022).³ Further, although the field has long invoked language of “all” in its standards and aspirations, white centering and associated exclusionary scholarship and practice have been commonplace (Grant et al., 2022; Sullivan, 2021, 2022), limiting potential positive impacts for minoritized groups, and thus challenging the extent to which the field has truly been positioned to support all students in meaningful ways. Moreover, even as representation of some racially minoritized groups within studies has become increasingly common, use of culturally responsive approaches, considerations of social justice, and methods outside of quantitative approaches have remained relatively infrequent (Golson et al., 2022; Grant et al., 2022, Graves et al., 2021; Sabnis, Newman, et al., 2023), suggesting the field has far to go in approximating the ethical obligations noted above.

RECKONING WITH PSYCHOLOGY’S PROBLEMATIC ROOTS

The rapid expansion of considerations for social justice in school psychology has occurred as the broader field of psychology grapples with the roles it has played in perpetuating systemic racism (e.g., Aiello et al., 2021; American Psychological Association, 2021; Association of Black Psychologists [ABPsi], 2021). The origins and influence of psychology are complicated by the myriad ways the discipline has contributed to harm (Aiello et al., 2021; ABPsi, 2021). Cook et al. (2023,p. 215) summarized them as follows:

As a Western-based discipline developed by white men, psychology embodies Eurocentric individualist values such as meritocracy and self-determination (Leong et al., 2017; Vasquez, 2020). It has historically overemphasized the role of individuals, ignoring the role of structure (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). As a result, it contributes to marginalizing and pathologizing people of color, poor people, women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, asexual and other sexual and gender minority individuals, other historically excluded groups, and those holding multiple marginalized and pathologized identities (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020; Vasquez, 2020). Moreover, Eurocentric mainstream Western psychology has ignored the contributions of psychologists of color and marginalized decades of work by the peace, liberation, community, and critical psychology subfields that have advocated for increased attention to structural racism and ways to intervene (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). Mainstream dominant psychology is now poised to reckon with its role in maintaining structural racism and examine its capacity to address and dismantle white supremacy. […] However, psychology, together with allied professions, must first liberate itself.

Furthermore, other scholars have pointed out that psychology’s “roots in White supremacy include the eugenics movement, measurement of intelligence, and the perpetuation of White supremacist and hegemonic science through the assumption of Whiteness” (McCubbin et al., 2023, p. 15; see also Saini, 2019). Whiteness refers to the practices, processes, policies, and structures, often implicit, that assume the dominance and normality of White people and are used to maintain racialized distribution of power, privilege, and material resources (Lindner, 2018; Nkomo & Al Ariss, 2014). Taken together, these features of mainstream psychology have been strong and enduring influences in school psychology as well. Consequently, liberating the field of school psychology necessarily requires interrogating and replacing the ways our field relates to difference and understands the relation of scholarship and practice to whiteness.

Other dimensions of professional activity in the field of school psychology are also noted as critical to examine and change in the ongoing racial and cultural reckoning. Sustainment of whiteness and associated inertia at the leadership level within the field has also been put forth as a relevant concern in understanding both the exclusion noted above and potential for transformation. Indeed, the exosystemic influence of professional organizations, academic journals, and higher education leadership maintain whiteness and reward the status quo (Neville et al., 2001). For example, academic journals, both within school psychology and related fields, have predominantly been led by White, often male, editors who maintain significant control over the peer review process, editorial board membership, and journals’ aims and foci to influence what is published in a given outlet (Fitzpatrick et al., 2023; Roberts et al., 2020). Such power also impacts which methodologies are considered ‘rigorous’ and which research is ‘scientific’ enough to be published (Baffoe et al., 2014). Within higher education, further, standards for promotion are often defined by predominantly White researchers who may demonstrate a preference for certain types of research over others (Griffin et al., 2013). Whiteness also operates in professional organizations, where it shapes policies, practices, codes of ethics, expectations for professionalism, and the less visible interpersonal processes and networking (McKenney, 2022; Nkomo & Al Ariss, 2014; Sue et al., 1999). Note, it is not the presence of White leaders that is the problem, but their adherence to whiteness, often via epistemic exclusion and associated exclusionary practices, that, in turn, upholds systemic racism through their leadership.

As in the health sciences broadly, school psychologists cannot ignore or obscure racism and colonialism as fundamental causes of inequity, nor the detriments of both overt and covert framing of race as a basis for blaming communities for the inequities occasioned on them through white supremacist systems (Boyd et al., 2020). Likewise, we are further cognizant that “science, through the guise of objectivity, has abetted the indignities forced upon nonwhite populations by probing their innate propensity for disease and thus their biologic inferiority” (Boyd et al., 2020, para. 7). Such is a tension in school psychology as a specialty in psychology, widely understood as the study of the mind and behavior (American Psychological Association, 2007), where efforts have been misdirected, often to the detriment of minoritized groups, or at the very least, without meaningful change to outcomes. This is reflected, for instance, in efforts in school psychology and related fields to explain and intervene on educational inequities based on assumptions of deficits within minoritized groups or communities without due consideration of the structural and contextual factors by which systemic oppression operates.

Fifty-five years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. (1968) implored psychologists to do better; thirteen years later, in this journal, Trevor Sewell (1981) asked the same of school psychology, calling attention to school psychology’s complicity in the oppression of individuals from systematically minoritized groups through allegiance to ideas and practices grounded in white supremacy, class warfare, and eugenics enacted in our special education gatekeeper role. However, large-scale change within the mainstream, White majority of the field has been slow to come, often in spite of the ongoing advocacy, scholarship, and practice of school psychologists from racially minoritized backgrounds (e.g., Proctor, 2022; Truscott et al., 2014). In fact, the above critiques are perhaps truer for school psychology than some other areas of psychology where they have been less the legacy and continued basis of much of their professional work, and where there has been greater diversification in both the individuals in the field and the methodological, theoretical, and topical dimensions of their scholarship. Indeed, school psychology’s allegiance to its role as gatekeeper in special education may play a role in its late commitment to social justice given special education’s complex relations to power, ableism, and associated ideology (e.g., Connor, 2019; Powell, 2016; Siuty, 2019).

Arguably, through the continued overemphasis on measurement and cognitive assessment in school psychologists’ roles and time (Goforth et al., 2021; NASP, 2020), school psychology has not yet outgrown the problematic roots discussed above. This is borne out in research showing the many ways school psychology is less diverse and has been later to embrace social justice than other areas of psychology (Grapin et al., 2015; Nastasi et al., 2020; Proctor & Owens, 2019; Speight & Vera, 2009). Of note, the share of racially minoritized school psychologists seems to have only shifted from 11.5% in 1986 (Zins & Halsell, 1986) to 14.1% in 2020 (Goforth et al., 2021), representing “one of the field’s slowest changing characteristics” (Proctor & Owens, 2019, p. 1038).

Unsurprisingly, diversity is often noted as a need for change and a driver of it within the field, with less consideration to the social and ideological undercurrents that impede diversification. We contend that diversification alone is not the answer to school psychology’s white supremacy problem; undoing the structures that make school psychology unappealing or aversive to minoritized individuals is (e.g., Beeks & Graves, 2017; Proctor & Truscott, 2012; Sabnis, Tanaka et al., 2023). This should not be the burden of minoritized graduate students, educators, or practitioners. That is, making school psychology anti-racist and socially just is the responsibility of every member of our field, and especially those who have benefited most from the privileges of whiteness—from hegemonic scholarship and graduate program curriculum to professional practices and norms for professionalism that centered whiteness—namely, the White school psychologists who comprise the overwhelming majority of the field.

Cooke et al. (2023) reminded readers that “Racism is culturally reinforced and operates at three levels; institutional, interpersonal or personally mediated, and intrapersonal or internalized” (p. 215). Attention within mainstream⁴ school psychology research has been largely at the interpersonal level, particularly among other members of educational communities (e.g. Fu et al., 2022; Malone et al., 2022), and rarely focused institutionally or internally until recently (e.g., McKenney, 2022; Miller, 2023; Parker et al., 2022; Proctor & Truscott, 2012; Sabnis, Tanaka, et al., 2023; Sabnis & Proctor, 2022). Recent scholarship has emphasized the importance of antiracism and systems-centered orientations (e.g., Fallon, Robinson-Link, et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2021, 2022 and articles in the School Psychology Review special topic, Reconceptualizing School Psychology for the twenty first Century: The Future of School Psychology in the United States, and articles in it), as well as studies that center critical perspectives and those of minoritized individuals and groups (e.g., Day, 2023; Goforth et al., 2022; Gonzalez et al., 2022; Hines et al., 2023; Proctor et al., 2023; Woods et al., 2023; and articles in the School Psychology Review special topic section on Promoting the Development of Black Males: Supporting Social, Behavioral, Emotional, and Academic Success, as well as articles in the School Psychology Review special topic section on Unlocking the Promise of Multitiered Systems of Support (MTSS) for Linguistically Diverse Students).

NEED FOR SUSTAINED, INTENSIVE EFFORTS FOR JUSTICE

Accountability to the field’s unified commitments and ethical obligations for social justice will require large-scale, sustained efforts to uproot the influence of various systems of oppression within school psychology scholarship, graduate education, and practice through creation of new knowledge and spaces (for discussion of these processes, see Sabnis & Proctor, 2022). Systemic racism is recognized as a fundamental cause of disease, health disparities, and class inequity (Phelan & Link, 2015) and has been called America’s “earliest tradition [that] remains a bloodying force, structuring every facet of US life” (Boyd et al., 2020, para. 1). This includes every facet of our field and the contexts of our work. As such, enacting our ethical obligations and commitments requires critical consciousness, reflexivity, and change in every facet of our work—from graduate preparation and continuing education, both formal and informal, to every area of practice and scholarship—to support justice-oriented praxis and to avoid harm, even if inadvertent. Concerted, consistent action is needed on all levels in order to ensure school psychology scholarship and practice contribute to the common good while avoiding continued white centering, white saviorism, and equity tourism that undermine the depth, coherence, and sustainability of efforts to advance equity and justice (i.e., superficial equity scholarship by previously unengaged individuals without preparation and engagement to do it in ways that actually support justice; Lett et al., 2022; see also Pham et al., 2022; Sullivan, 2022).

This is a multifaceted project that requires confronting the full history of the field, including how past and contemporary initiatives ostensibly oriented toward diversity, inclusion, or equity (DEI) perpetuate(d) exclusion and other harm (e.g., white centering in cultural competence and multiculturalism; Mayorga-Gallo, 2019). A comprehensive reckoning should not be avoided, downplayed with a focus on positive contributions, or whitewashed to obscure the enduring influence of oppressive ideologies, systems, or behaviors in practice and scholarship. As the field explores what it means to engage social justice, it is long past time for school psychology to embrace and enact diversity science. Building off the seminal work of Plaut (2010), Causadias et al. (2023) describe diversity science as:

As a field, the science of diversity, equity, and inclusion would challenge the abstract concept of race; locate the sources of inequalities not on individuals but on social practices, policies, and institutions; and expose the cultural ideologies that perpetuate inequality, such as colorblindness (Plaut, 2010). According to this framework, diversity, equity, and inclusion sciences would challenge and critically examine majority group perspectives, interrogating intergroup dynamics and racial disparities that are often presented as natural, normal, or neutral.

To be clear, this is not just the work of scholars who explicitly ground their work in diversity, social justice, or health/education inequity, but should be an expectation for every scholar that engages issues of difference or diversity within their work—and particularly those in leadership within the field—because of the roles of cultural, history, and ideology in shaping all scholarship, as well as psychological experiences and behaviors generally (Plaut, 2010). Widespread, consistent effort grounded in critical consciousness and reflexivity are necessary to avoid performative activities in which scholars engage transient, superficial, co-opted efforts under the guise of DEI, social justice, or antiracism that ultimately maintain the status quo through maintenance of existing frameworks, approaches, theories, methods and practices that are ineffective or harmful for minoritized groups (Lett et al., 2022; Sullivan, 2022). More generally, efforts to orient professional efforts around equity and justice are more critical than ever in a national context of increasing polarization and constriction of human rights, environmental justice, and academic freedom detrimental to learning and wellbeing.

OVERVIEW OF FEATURED ARTICLES

To support scholarly, professional, and educational efforts to advance equity and social justice, the present special topic section seeks to present diverse scholarship that expands and enhances the way we conceptualize, design, implement, and interpret school psychology research, as well as how we approach graduate preparation and practice in school psychology to advance equity in the ways we engage and serve students, families, and communities from historically marginalized backgrounds. Although the focus is on enhancing equitable and just school psychological practices and scholarship, we encouraged interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary scholarship and collaborations as critical to the advancement of theory, methods, and practice in the field. Through open calls for submissions, we sought to curate a diverse collection of articles to inform how the field continues to advance equity and justice through our professional activities. As editors of this special topic section, we are mid-career and senior scholars engaged in scholarship, graduate education, and leadership in school psychology. We represent a variety of privileged and minoritized statuses, along with our shared experience as both students and faculty in school psychology programs, that we bring to our professional work. Our professional activities span a range of interdisciplinary topics and methods with shared commitments to social justice, antiracism, and equity-oriented research and practice. These commitments were the impetus for this special topic. The resultant 10 articles address how to expand and enhance school psychology scholarship; present frameworks and approaches to enhance practices and supports for wellbeing; and present empirical investigations related to equity and justice.

POSITIONING SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY SCHOLARS TO ADVANCE JUSTICE AND EQUITY

A critical area of focus in advancing these stated goals is in the production and dissemination of scholarship that advances justice and equity. Three articles in this special topic section seek to better position scholars within the field to engage in diverse scholarship to promote equity and justice for all children, youth and families. In particular, these authors unpack common detriments and limitations scholarship within the field and present orientations and approaches that can be leveraged to address the harms and constraints of white centering, white privilege, and epistemic exclusion to foster research consistent with antiracist commitment and epistemic and methodological diversity.

Grapin and Fallon (2022) discuss the role of white privilege in the conceptualization, execution, dissemination, and translation of research in our field. They propose an ecological model for conceptualizing and dismantling white privilege in the context of scholarship. Drawing from a diverse and broad literature base, they describe macrolevel and microlevel influences on scholars’ research across the stages of research process: (a) research inputs, (b) transformations, (c) research outputs, and (d) applications of research to practice and provide recommendations for challenging this privilege in school psychology scholarship.

Sabnis and Newman (2023) provide exemplary guidance in how to push forward our efforts to engage in social justice research in schools. Crucially, they describe how many of the scholarly issues identified above, and the limited development of social justice research in particular are “partially a result of school psychology’s self-imposed epistemological isolation” (p. XX) and argue for an expansion of acceptable epistemologies within the field. Sabnis and Newman review the epistemology of constructionism and provide examples of its application in school psychology research.

Finally, in a commentary research practice in school psychology, Arora et al. (2023) urge scholars to prioritize reflexivity, the critical analysis of how one’s identity and values influence their scholarship, a practice which remains uncommon or even discouraged within the field. Arora and colleagues challenge the notion of objectivity in school psychology research, review the literature on reflexivity, and present recommendations for the field as they engage in the conceptualization, execution, and dissemination of scholarship.

Taken together, these authors apply critical lenses to the scholarship of our field and identify varied ways in which habits and practices within the field are counter to antiracism and social justice. They explore how various epistemic, ideological, and social forces have limited the school psychology and identify needed changes to expand and elevate research within school psychology, with recommendations for all stakeholders in the research process.

FRAMEWORKS AND APPROACHES TO ADVANCE JUSTICE IN PRACTICE

Advancing justice in school practice requires conceptual innovations that help school psychologists understand their work and potential practice foci differently. Compared to the traditional frameworks for practice in the field, four articles provide innovative, hopeful models of practice. Each discusses the limitations and harms of common approaches to practice and describes alternatives that acknowledge history and systems, and honor partnership and voice to support more favorable engagement and outcomes for learners from minoritized groups.

McCall et al. (2023) call for a reframing of extant SEL curriculum to be more expansive by focusing on the social context and systems that affect the classroom, school, and community. They argue that current conceptualizations of SEL have perpetuated systems of oppression and failed to meet the needs of our diverse student population. They describe how to shift from an individual to community-oriented focus with a focus on necessary systems level changes. Edyburn et al. (2023) present an equity- and intersectional justice-minded framework for training future school psychologists to support school-based mental health. Relying on theories of intersectionality, critical race theory, social determinants of health, and radical healing, these authors propose how to intervene on social factors at the systems and societal levels to promote equity in child mental health. Addressing the long-standing issue of exclusionary discipline practices for the Black community, Fallon, Veiga, et al. (2023) argue that multitier systems of support for behavior have to prioritize racial equity and healing in schools. They review the historical context of this work and propose ways to strengthen this framework by supporting the adults in the systems in which oppression is maintained. Finally, Holman et al. (2023) presents the collaborative/therapeutic assessment model as a way for school psychologists to work toward antiracism in the psychoeducational assessment process. They discuss the historical and current racist problems with traditional assessment approaches and offer concrete techniques to advance this important area in schools.

RESEARCH ON PRACTICE ADVANCEMENTS TO SUPPORT EQUITY AND JUSTICE

Advancing justice in school practice requires critiquing existing practices and moving beyond them. The three remaining articles in this collection present studies that provide insight into how we can better support equity and justice in schools. Rasooli et al. (2023) systematically reviewed the theoretical bases and validity evidence for quantitative measures of teachers and students’ perceptions of classroom fairness and justice. They examine the strengths and limitations of these measures and provide recommendations for improving research in this area. Supporting efforts to develop increasingly culturally relevant interventions for school-aged youth, Kurtz et al. (2023) describe the process of adapting Merrell’s Strong Kids curriculum. Using focus groups methodology, they obtain input from stakeholders, integrate the feedback to appropriately modify the curriculum and present initial data on its effectiveness. Finally, Rocha et al. (2023) illustrate the use of youth-led participatory action research (YPAR) as a methodology for further social justice research in schools. After reviewing critical theoretical research underpinning this approach, they provide a description of a YPAR project and discuss its role in informing youth-led advocacy to support youth mental health and wellness in their community during the first year of COVID-19. Both Kurtz et al. (2023) and Rocha et al. (2023) provide critical examples of underused methodologies within published school psychology scholarship.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The current articles in this special topic collection provide multiple examples of how to confront the history and limitations of scholarship and practice and orient around more equitable and just alternatives. These articles challenge us to critically examine what and how we engage as school psychologists and offer recommendations for improving the alignment of our scholarship, practice, and graduate education with approaches, frameworks, theories, and practices more consistent with the field’s ethical obligation to social justice and our antiracist commitments. We view these articles as a part of the larger efforts needed to align our field with justice. As suggested above, reckoning and righting school psychology’s relationship to its history and rooting out the inequitable and unjust influences on practice and research is a major undertaking that goes far beyond the work here. Further, although these initial articles in this special topic section are primarily concerned with issues related to systemic racism and antiracism within the field, we welcome future scholarship engaging and challenging all systems of oppression (e.g., colonialism, cisheterosexism, ableism, xenophobia, capitalism), anti-oppression, anti- and de-colonization, queering, and all manner of professional activity to support liberation and healing. Through these collective efforts and many yet to come, we can begin to rectify harms in and out of the field to improve our relationships and support for the students, families, and communities we engage.

DISCLOSURE

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Amanda L. Sullivan

Amanda L. Sullivan, PhD, is the Birkmaier Educational Leadership Professor and director of the School Psychology Program in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Her research focuses on identifying education and health disparities affecting students from minoritized backgrounds, understanding (in)equity in and effectiveness of the educational and health services they receive, and exploring how ethics and law shape professional practices and students’ experiences. Twitter: @DrSullivanAL

Prerna Arora

Prerna Arora, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Education in Teacher’s College at Columbia University. Her research focuses on issues of access and quality of care for historically underserved youth and adolescents, including focusing on identifying risk and protective factors in the development of depressive disorders among ethnic minority and immigrant-origin youth; barriers to help-seeking among ethnic minority and immigrant-origin youth and families; and developing and implementing culturally-informed school and community-based prevention and intervention programming for youth internalizing disorders.

Samuel Y. Song

Samuel Y. Song, PhD, is a Professor in the College of Education at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. His scholarship and research focuses on strategies that promote healthy school cultures and climates for minoritized students, community action research, and, integrating social justice in the field of school psychology. Twitter: @SamuelYSong

Shane R. Jimerson

Shane R. Jimerson, PhD, is a Professor in the Department of Counseling, Clinical, and School Psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara and Nationally Certified School Psychologist. His scholarship focuses on understanding and supporting the social, emotional, behavioral, academic, and mental health development of youth and also understanding and advancing the field of school psychology internationally. Twitter: @DrJ_ucsb

Notes

1 We capitalize white only in reference to individuals, recognizing the debate surrounding this decision (e.g., Daniszewski, 2020; Wong, 2020), and use the uncapitalized form when referring to ideology, systems, and practices.

2 Since 2020, police have reported killings of over 180 unarmed Black, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Latine individuals, not including over 140 individuals for whom race was not reported, as detailed at https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/. As noted in this database, police departments only report only one-third of officers’ fatal shootings through official channels (i.e., the FBI) and even this database is incomplete and includes contested and indeterminate official reporting regarding un/armed status.

3 Note, we reference white supremacy and colonialism throughout, not because they are the only systems of concern, but because we understand them as the basis for most other systems of oppression (e.g., ableism, cisheteropatriarchy, transphobia), while also recognizing that these all can arguably be encompassed under the overarching system of capitalism (Maton, 2023; McClean, 2020).

4 Here, we refer to school psychology scholarship in school psychology journals in recognition of the historic limitations by leaders to the topics, populations, methods, and theories prioritized and featured therein, often at the exclusion of minoritized scholars and communities and diverse ways of knowing.