Cultural Humility in School and Educational Psychology: Implications for Practice

Abstract

This introductory article from the guest editors provides the rationale and goals for a theme issue of School Psychology International on the topic of “Cultural Humility in School and Educational Psychology: Implications for Practice.” The nine articles appearing in this theme issue are briefly previewed. The articles draw upon theory as well as data collected across the globe covering different key school constituencies, such as students and teachers. Collectively, these articles advance methodological and conceptual scholarship and shed light on the need for future research, particularly work that further develops and refines measurement tools and helps to clarify ways in which cultural humility principles can be brought to practice effectively with populations across the globe.

Keywords

Cultural humility school psychology educational psychology social justice

Cultural humility has slowly emerged in the field of school and educational psychology¹ as an important professional disposition that enhances interpersonal interactions, decenters power differentials, and helps school psychologists engage in socially just practices (Fisher, 2020). Notably, there has been a surge of research and advocacy in school psychology centered around the broad concept of social justice in the past 20 years in many parts of the world (Schanding, 2024). We, the special issue guest editors, view cultural humility as an essential component of social justice, focusing on the internal work school psychologists must engage in (e.g., self-appraisal and self-reflection) to work with diverse students and families more effectively and to promote systems change (Fisher, 2020; Goforth, 2016). By drawing on the adoption of social justice as a core value in the field and examining the benefits and limitations of research in this area, this special issue promotes the burgeoning research and practical applications of cultural humility to enhance social justice in school psychology practice.

Social Justice Research

There are different global lenses for defining social justice and its applications to school psychology practice. Some central ideas relate to thinking and acting systemically, centering children's rights, working in a culturally responsive manner, disrupting oppression, and embedding approaches that allow all children to learn, grow, and thrive in a safe school environment (Shriberg et al., 2024). Social justice has permeated the profession, with integration into ethical standards (e.g., International School Psychology Association [ISPA], 2021) and practice guidelines (e.g., National Association of School Psychologists [NASP], 2020) as well as special theme issues across several journals (e.g., School Psychology Review and School Psychology International), highlighting substantial global acceptance of this equity-focused work. In fact, some research that promotes social justice-related concepts once viewed as controversial has become increasingly mainstream—a welcome development; nevertheless, many specific concepts underlying social justice remain overlooked in school psychology, with a particular dearth of research conducted outside of the United States (US). This theme issue seeks to address that gap.

The increased focus on social justice has benefited the field by both promoting more equitable school practices and increasing visibility and access for researchers committed to this work. For example, in the US, there has been the emergence of an ever-growing research base that speaks to the experiences of students of color, both in the K-12 space (e.g., Fu et al., 2024) and in school psychology training and practice (e.g., Proctor et al., 2018). Relatedly, the broader acceptance of social justice-related work in peer-reviewed outlets has allowed for the dissemination of a richer body of work, carried by talented researchers from minoritized backgrounds, that speaks directly to the root causes of injustice and strategies to promote equity as viewed by those most impacted (e.g., Collins et al., 2023). There is also growing research that examines ways school psychologists can be leaders and active change agents in promoting positive systems change and disrupting current and historic structures that perpetuate harm (Castillo et al., 2026).

Yet this growing body of work has limitations as well. First, most school psychology social justice research either has been conducted in the US and/or does not have a particularly global lens. Given that much cutting-edge social justice work is being done outside of the US (e.g., Hatzichristou et al., 2020; Pillay, 2020), a cumulative school psychology social justice research base that is largely confined to the US is problematic. US-based research presents only a limited view of the world and potentially sends a message that global research is not important, which demonstrates a lack of cultural humility about what U.S. scholars and practitioners can learn from those with different perspectives and lived experiences. Second, there are many concepts related to social justice (e.g., cultural humility, implicit bias, cultural responsiveness, and critical theory) that are often presented together but are, in fact, distinct aspects of this work worthy of study in their own right. However, the understanding of these constructs and their relation to each other and to social justice is highly nuanced; without empirical research that helps us to understand these distinct concepts and their interconnectedness, we run the risk of confusing readers and writing articles that provide a lot of terminology but little specific guidance on how to enact key concepts in practice.

The Need for School Psychology Research That Centers Cultural Humility

The concept of cultural humility, which has been discussed in medical, social work, and counseling psychology research for more than 20 years (e.g., Choe et al., 2019; Foronda et al. 2016), is just beginning to permeate school psychology as a complement to social justice and cultural competence. For example, 10 years ago, in their seminal multicultural counseling text, Sue and Sue (2016) stated that “cultural humility as a dispositional orientation may be equally important as cultural competence” (p. 63); nevertheless, cultural humility is notably absent from ISPA's and NASP's professional training standards and ethical codes. While presumably school psychologists possess a strong capacity for empathy and perspective-taking, as well as a desire to support all children regardless of the extent to which these children share their individual identities, no one is an expert in the lived experience of persons from all intersectional backgrounds. Although school psychologists should hold considerable expertise in a variety of topics, we must recognize that this expertise is shaped by our own experiences and worldviews. We are always in a position where we need to learn and grow. A precursor to action, cultural humility is a concept that has gained increasing currency within the helping professions as a professional disposition and way of being that can lead to enhanced outcomes reflective of social justice (Fisher, 2020). Cultural humility involves equally valuing the experiences, views, and expertise of others in all interactions—students, families, teachers, and invested community members, to name a few—when considering services, supports, and intervention (Goforth, 2016). This commitment to fundamentally respecting others and avoiding dehumanization (Choe et al., 2019) centers school psychologists as facilitators, recognizing their own limitations and sharing their own expertise while having a “keen awareness of how culture shapes all individuals’ experiences and perspectives, including the impact of power, privilege, and oppression” (Fisher, 2020, p. 53).

In an often-cited concept analysis of cultural humility, Foronda et al. (2016) drew from 62 articles in education, medicine, nursing, and anthropology. The authors highlighted two concepts—diversity and power imbalance—as antecedents to the need for cultural humility. They then identified five key elements of exhibiting cultural humility: (a) openness, (b) self-awareness, (c) egoless, (d) supportive interaction, and (e) self-reflection and critique. According to the authors, outcomes of exhibiting these five attributes are: (a) respect/mutual empowerment/partnerships (these concepts overlapped); (b) optimal care; and (c) lifelong learning.

Writing from a school psychology lens, Goforth (2016) identified intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects of cultural humility. The intrapersonal dimension involves self-awareness of one's own cultural beliefs and values and potential biases these might cause. The interpersonal aspect “is related to being open to others and engaging with them in a humble way. This engagement involves having the practitioner be open to the student's and family's perspective and moving away from being the expert in the relationship” (Goforth & Pham, 2023, p. 13).

The concept of “moving away from being the expert” can be a challenge for school psychologists. Being seen as an expert can be alluring but also may be intimidating, particularly to school psychology graduate students or newer practitioners. Finding the balance between being confident enough to know that we have value but also humble enough to know that we do not have all the answers can be liberating. Not feeling like one needs to be the expert not only supports cultural humility, but potentially puts one in a more authentic position to support social justice, as one can then be free to think about the “bigger picture” of what is happening in a specific scenario or setting, whose interests are being served, whose voices should be centered in data collection and decision-making, and how systemic change can be facilitated to support human rights, dignity, and equity.

Process for This Theme Issue

As guest editors, we had several goals for this theme issue on cultural humility. The first was to further establish and understand cultural humility as a distinct concept, particularly as applied to the work of school psychologists. The second related goal was to highlight research that was either conducted outside of the US or was conducted in the US but with clear global implications. After an initial screening of abstracts in November 2024, all full-length manuscripts were first submitted in Spring 2025. These manuscripts underwent the typical peer-review process, with each article ultimately receiving a decision letter from the two guest editors, in consultation with the journal's editor. In addition to considering the overall merits, central criteria for selection for this specific theme issue were that (a) cultural humility was a primary variable/topic and (b) the work had the potential to inform global practice.

Ultimately, enough articles were accepted for a two-part theme issue—one focusing on cultural humility as it relates to practice and one focusing on training and/or research. The present issue represents part one and features the nine articles focused on cultural humility in practice. Collectively, the research described in these articles involved data collection for individuals or settings across 10 countries and three continents. Five of these articles describe empirical studies or systematic reviews that include data collected outside of the US. The next two describe empirical studies with data collected in the US, and the last two are conceptual articles.

Empirical and Systematic Review Articles Including Data Collected Outside of the United States

The first article (Chen et al., 2025) goes straight to the source–students–to learn about their perceptions of their teachers’ cultural humility. Students also self-rated their emotional and behavioral functioning. Specifically, the authors surveyed 871 students in grades 7–9 in schools in Taiwan, with results indicating that student and teacher characteristics predicted students’ perceptions of teacher cultural humility and their own behavioral adjustment. A number of other relations across variables were found, with exciting potential ramifications for utilizing student perspectives to better understand ways in which teacher cultural humility may be positively impacting student experiences.

The importance of cultural humility among teachers was also central to this issue's second article, authored by Emam et al. (2026). Their study focused on developing and validating a teacher cultural humility scale with a sample of teachers (N = 688) from Egypt, Kuwait, and Qatar. Their study also included measures of teachers’ religiosity, agency, and multicultural teaching. Structural equation modeling yielded several intriguing findings for future study, with a key finding being that teachers’ cultural humility was indirectly associated with multicultural teaching via teacher religiosity.

One of the main goals of this theme issue is to decenter Western framing of topics germane to school psychology, with cultural humility as a key theory and strategy to break down this dominance. The third article in this issue, authored by Hamsho et al. (2026), focused on ways that a cultural humility lens may be beneficial for supporting children with autism (and their families). The authors coordinated and analyzed data from a semi-structured panel discussion featuring presenters from Afghanistan, Iran, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Panelists’ responses shed light on the importance of understanding local context (e.g., knowledge and perception of autism, availability and quality of autism-focused services) amidst broader cultural, historical, and societal factors that impact these children and families.

The last two articles in this issue that drew on data outside of the US focused on social-emotional learning (SEL). Yuan et al. (this issue) performed a systemic review of universal school-based SEL programs that were developed in Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) countries and adapted or otherwise implemented in non-WEIRD countries. Seventeen studies met criteria and were evaluated in regard to program planning, implementation, and evaluation using the five cultural humility attributes from Foronda et al.'s (2016) model. The authors found relatively more evidence of cultural humility (e.g., wanting to learn about the local context) in the planning stage but much less evidence during implementation and evaluation (e.g., rare power sharing, reciprocal learning, community-facing dissemination, or discussion of how culture and measurement affect program delivery and evaluation).

In light of Yuan et al.'s findings, the fifth article is particularly noteworthy and timely. Specifically, Perez et al. (this issue) reported on an adaptation of the Coping Power program–which was developed in the US and is associated with SEL—for implementation in Guadalajara, Mexico. Similarly to Emam et al. (this issue), data were collected from teachers, but in this case, the method was focus groups and individual interviews with 13 teachers directly involved with implementation. The focus groups took place in two phases, the first being pre-intervention. Teacher feedback at the pre-intervention phase led to some curriculum adaptation that was then piloted by some of these teachers. Two months after the intervention began, several of the participating teachers were interviewed to obtain their perspective on the feasibility and usefulness of the Coping Power program. Findings were nuanced, including but not limited to the importance of collaborative problem-solving for implementation challenges and the family's role as a critical cultural factor in SEL.

United States-Based Empirical Studies

This theme issue contains two empirical studies in which data were collected in the US. First, Nygaard et al. (2025)'s work focused on evaluating an adaptation of the Bounce Back for Classrooms program in an urban, Mid-Atlantic school district. Using a multi-method design incorporating quantitative and qualitative methods and involving data collected from nine clinicians and 22 teachers, they examined similarities and differences between these two participant groups, respectively, in regard to their critiques of the intervention. For example, teachers found the intervention to be more culturally relevant than did the clinicians, and both groups described the need for some adaptations.

The second US-based empirical study in this issue, led by Srisarajivakul et al. (2026), explored teachers’ self-ratings of their cultural humility as well as other attributes and contextual factors. Specifically, in a national sample of 545 teachers, the authors conducted latent profile analysis based on indicators of cultural humility, mattering, self-efficacy, multicultural teaching competencies, school climate, and job satisfaction. This led to a three-class solution (i.e., “normative,” “culturally engaged,” and “culturally disengaged” groups). Interestingly, teachers with a “culturally disengaged” profile had the lowest scores in multicultural competence but relatively higher self-ratings in cultural humility. Considerations regarding the benefits and challenges of self-report cultural humility measures are discussed.

Conceptual Articles

Finally, this theme issue contains two conceptual articles, both focused on the experiences of immigrants to the US, that center cultural humility and that are highly related to practice. First, Viriyasatien et al. (2026) reviewed scholarship on immigrant LBGTQ + youths’ experiences in the US, with an interest in ways in which mindfulness-based interventions in schools may have a positive impact on outcomes for these students, particularly if such interventions are implemented from a cultural humility framework. This paper speaks directly to the current hostile climate in the US toward immigrant youth generally and LGBTQ + immigrant youth more specifically. Drawing from Foronda et al.'s (2016) cultural humility framework and focusing explicitly on intersectional identities related to immigrant LGBTQ + youth, these authors suggest action steps for implementing mindfulness-based interventions (for before, during, and after the intervention).

The last article is by Lim and Yang (2026) and focuses on Asian American immigrant families. Critiquing existing literature as not adequately addressing the sociocultural complexities of the school experience for Asian immigrant families, the authors propose a model framed around cultural humility. They describe five key content-related factors (e.g., social support among parents) and three key method-related factors (i.e., open awareness, empowered involvement, and respectful support) as vital components of an expanded conceptualization of multi-tiered systems of support approaches that are responsive to this specific population.

Potential Next Steps

These nine articles expand the breadth and depth of the global school psychology cultural humility literature. Yet, much work in this area is still needed, particularly research that draws directly from the intended beneficiaries of the work done by school psychologists. We hope that this theme issue will be a spark for future global collaboration that centers the voices of students, families, and educators. Notably, culturally humility is conceptualized and measured differently across studies (as evidenced by differences in scale content and informants); ultimately, further work is needed to better understand the assessment of cultural humility across the globe. These articles also provide several useful examples of how components of cultural humility can be embedded in interventions. We believe this is a crucial step not just because this will enhance school psychology practice, but also because it may help to further elucidate specific ways in which one can center cultural humility. Similarly, we also hope that these articles will help school psychologists continue to self-reflect, adapt their practice in ways that reflect a humble, global orientation, and use their skills to move school systems toward models that are culturally affirming and socially just.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We have thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated this opportunity to review and support such outstanding scholarship. We think that this scholarship—in combination with the articles to appear in the second part of this special issue of School Psychology International—significantly advances the school psychology literature related to cultural humility. Theme issues take a village. We first thank the amazing authors for their outstanding scholarship. We also are deeply appreciative of the anonymous labor put forward by the over 40 reviewers who provided feedback on these nine articles and all other articles considered for this two-part issue. Your care and attentiveness made these articles stronger. Finally, we owe a great debt to this journal's Editor-in-Chief, Sally Grapin, who championed this theme issue at every step, providing direct support and copious encouragement throughout.

ORCID iDs

David Shriberg

Emily S Fisher

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

David Shriberg, PhD, is a Professor of Education, Affiliated Faculty of the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism, and Chair of the Department of Applied Psychology in Education and Research Methodology at Indiana University. His research interests center on supporting Jewish youth in schools and bringing a global lens to social justice principles in school psychology.

Emily S. Fisher, PhD, is a professor of school psychology at Loyola Marymount University. She teaches courses focused on counseling, mental health, and social justice, and her research interests include school-based supports for LGBTQ + students and cultural humility in school psychology practice.

References

Castillo

J. M.

Fidler

Schaffer

G. E.

(2026). Organizational consultation and systems change. In Garbacz

S. A.

Newman

D. S.

Erchul

W. P.

Sheridan

S. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of research in consultation: Empirical foundations for educational and human sciences (3rd ed., pp. 405–430). Routledge.

Chen

M. T.

Luh

H. J.

Chang

Y. P.

Chang

Y. L.

Chang

J. F. W.

(2025). Cultural humility and Taiwanese junior high school students: Effects on teacher-student relationships, school climate, and behavioral outcomes. School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343251392622

Choe

Srisarajivakul

Davis

D. E.

DeBlaere

Van Tongeren

D. R.

Hook

J. N.

(2019). Predicting attitudes towards lesbians and gay men: The effects of social conservatism, religious orientation, and cultural humility. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 47(3), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091647119837017

Collins

T. A.

La Salle

T. P.

Rocha Neves

T. P.

Foster

J. A.

Scott

M. N.

(2023). No safe space: School climate experiences of Black boys with and without emotional and behavioral disorders. School Psychology Review, 52(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2021.2021783

Emam

M. M.

Eid

Ahmed Hassanein

E. E.

Hemdan

Al-Salmi

Ismael

Al Qalhati

(2026). Bridging belief and action: The mediating roles of teacher religiosity and agency in the relationship between cultural humility and multicultural teaching in Arab educational contexts. School Psychology International. Advance onlne publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034326142123

Fisher

E. S.

(2020). Cultural humility as a form of social justice: Promising practices for global school psychology training. School Psychology International, 41(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034319893097

Foronda

Baptiste

D. L.

Reinholdt

M. M.

Ousman

(2016). Cultural humility: A concept analysis. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 27(3), 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659615592677

Leff

S. S.

Carroll

I. C.

Brizzolara-Dove

Campbell

(2024). Racial microaggressions and anti-racism: A review of the literature with implications for school-based interventions and school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 53(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2022.2128601

Goforth

A. N.

(2016). A cultural humility model of school psychology training and practice. Trainers’ Forum, 34(1), 3–25.

10.

Goforth

A. N.

Pham

A. V.

(2023). Culturally responsive school-based practices: Supporting mental health and learning of diverse students. Oxford University Press.

11.

Hamsho

Asaro-Saddler

Andersen

Patzarian

Ghazali

(2026). We need our own movement: Embracing cultural humility to reframe Western perspectives of autism for global contexts. School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343261421237

12.

Hatzichristou

Lampropoulou

Lianos

(2020). Social justice principles as core concepts in school psychology training, research and practice at a transnational level. School Psychology International, 41(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034319892031

13.

International School Psychology Association. (2021). Code of ethics. https://www.ispaweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/ISPA-Code-of-Ethics-2021.pdf

14.

Lim

J. H.

Yang

(2026). A Cultural humility framework for engaging with Asian immigrant families in multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS). School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343261421243

15.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2020). The professional standards of the National Association of School Psychologists. https://www.nasponline.org/standards-and-certification/nasp-2020-professional-standards-adopted

16.

Nygaard

M. A.

Mullin

Franco

M. P.

Goodwin

A. K.

Cox

Lever

(2025). Employing cultural humility to adapt a classroom-based trauma-focused prevention program. School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343251389535

17.

Pillay

(2020). Social justice implications for educational psychologists working with orphans and vulnerable children in South Africa. School Psychology International, 41(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034319893005

18.

Proctor

S. L.

Kyle

Fefer

Lau

Q. C.

(2018). Examining racial microaggressions, race/ethnicity, gender, and bilingual status with school psychology students: The role of intersectionality. Contemporary School Psychology, 22, 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-017-0156-8

19.

Schanding

G. T.

(2024). A school psychology for all: Realizing evidence-based practice through social justice. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 39(4), 324–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735231224047

20.

Shriberg

Schumacher-Martinez

Durgin

(2024). Social justice and school psychology. In Hatzichristou

Nastasi

B. K.

Jimerson

S. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of school psychology in the global context: Transnational approaches to support children, families, and school communities (pp. 41–58). Springer.

21.

Srisarajivakul

E. N.

Thornton

K. B.

Choe

E. J. Y.

McPhee

(2026). Cultural humility and multicultural teaching competencies: Using a person-centered approach to explore teacher thriving and burnout. School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034326142192

22.

Sue

D. W.

Sue

(2016). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Wiley.

23.

Viriyasatien

Myers

Haslem

Heidelburg

(2026). Centering intersectional cultural humility in mindfulness-based interventions for immigrant lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth. School Psychology International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343261421242