May 2008
For the requirements in place in 2006-2008, click here.
For the
requirements in place in 2005-2006, click
here.
For the requirements in place in 2004-2005, click
here.
For the requirements in place in 2003-2004, click
here.
For the requirements in place in 2002-2003, click
here.
For the requirements in place in 2001-2002, click
here.
For the requirements in place in 2000-2001, click
here.
INTRODUCTION AND
OVERVIEW
The present program is the natural extension and development of a doctoral level clinical psychology training program that has had APA approval since 1948. The goal of the program is to train students to become competent in both the scientific and applied arenas of clinical psychology. The core curriculum, taken by all students, emphasizes a basic foundation in clinical psychology across the lifespan. In the student's second or third year in the program, the student chooses a cognate within clinical psychology (see Year 3 and 4 below).
Sample Course Schedule
Year 1, Fall (9 credits)
Year 1, Spring (10 credits)
Year 2, Fall (10-12 credits)
Year 2, Spring (9 credits)
Year 3 and 4
Students in the clinical program must choose an area of specialty, called a cognate. The content of the cognate could be neuropsychology, child clinical psychology, statistics/methodology, or other area agreed on by the student and the doctoral guidance committee. The cognate should be integrated into the doctoral plan of study including the course plan, dissertation topic, outside research experiences, and clinical activity, as appropriate to the content area in order to provide the student with expertise in that area. At minimum, the cognate must include one extra course chosen by the student and the guidance committee. It is expected that in many cases it may involve more courses or projects than this. It is ordinarily expected that the dissertation will also at least partially reflect the cognate area, but it may not if the student has more than one specialty. The plan for the cognate should be written and attached to the doctoral plan of study and submitted to the department by the fall of the 3rd year in the graduate program.
Year 3, Fall (6-9 credits)
Year 3, Spring (6 credits)
Year 4, Fall (6-9 credits)
Year 4, Spring (6-9 credits)
Year 5, Fall
Year 5, Spring
Year 6
MASTERS PROGRAM
M.A. Research Project and M.A. Guidance Committee
As soon as the student has decided upon an M.A. research project topic, she or he is to form an M.A. Guidance Committee. Preferably this is done by the end of the first semester of graduate study, and it is required that it be done by the end of the first week of Spring classes at the latest. The temporary advisor functions as the M.A. Guidance Committee chairperson until this committee is formed.
The M.A. Guidance Committee consists of no less than three faculty members, at least two of whom must be members of the Clinical Interest Group. Rules about this committee, which also apply, are set forth by the Department of Psychology as follows: 2 of the 3 members must be regular faculty in the Department of Psychology, only 1 of the 3 may be an Adjunct Faculty Member in the Department of Psychology, and only 1 of the 3 may be an Emeritus Professor. See the Graduate Handbook for more information and definition of these titles.
The M.A. Guidance Committee has the important function of working with you to jointly plan your course work through the first 30 credits and working with you on your M.A. research project.
Timetable for Completion of the M.A. Research Project
Year 1 (Masters thesis proposal)
First week of Spring Semester: Latest date by which the student has chosen an M.A. research project topic in consultation with his/her advisor.
February 1: Latest date by which, in consultation with his/her advisor, the student has determined the methodology/design for his/her study.
April 1: Latest date by which the student completes the research proposal, in consultation with his/her advisor, and sends it to the two other committee members. The proposal should be between 10-15 pages long, including Introduction, Methods, and Proposed Data Analyses.
April 15: Latest date by which the two committee members provide written feedback on the proposal to the student and the student's advisor.
If revisions are needed, the student must respond accordingly. He/she may treat the written comments from the committee members as researchers treat journal reviews. That is, the student may provide a rationale, in a cover letter, for why some of the requested changes are unnecessary or inappropriate. The student also details, in this letter, changes requested that are appropriate and that have been used as a basis for revising the proposal. Both the letter (describing those changes made and those not made) and the revised proposal are written with the agreement, support, and consultation of the advisor.
May 15: Latest date by which the proposal is approved by the advisor and the two committee members. An oral defense is not required but may be held at the discretion of the committee.
Year 2 (Masters thesis)
February 1. Latest date by which the student completes the Masters thesis and sends
it to the committee members. The thesis should be written as a journal article
in length and scope. The committee members must respond with
written feedback within 30 days of receiving the student’s completed project,
not including University holidays.
March 1. Latest date by which the student receives written comments from the committee. The committee will also indicate, via the Committee Chair, whether the thesis is approved or whether revisions are necessary in order for it to be approved. If revisions are indicated, then the student responds by way of a revised document accompanied, if the student so wishes, by a letter that details the rationale for revisions or for declining to make certain revisions. A thesis defense meeting is not required but may be held at the discretion of the committee.
April 1. Latest date by which the final research project with revisions must be approved by the committee. Also, latest date by which the student is to email a copy of Masters project to Clinical Interest Group faculty and students so that all may read it in preparation for Research Presentation Day.
April 15 (approximate): Research Presentation Day. The Clinical Interest Group (all students and faculty) attend a day-long presentation of Second Year Students' research projects. Students will give oral presentations and answer questions. This is scheduled at a regular Wednesday CIG meeting as close to April 15 as possible.
Note that any student who neither meets these deadlines nor is approved for an extension (see below) risks receiving a failing grade in PSY 890.
Two Year Rule for Completion of the M.A. Research Project
Students are expected to complete their M.A. research project by the end of their second year of graduate study. The advisor and student should be aware of any problems by early- to mid-Fall Semester of the student's second year and make all efforts to get the project back on schedule.
However, if the student is behind in the preparation of either the proposal or final thesis, the student must petition, in writing, the full Clinical Interest Group faculty for an extension of the April 15th proposal deadline in year 1, or the March 1st or April 1st final thesis deadlines in Year 2. The faculty will decide if an extension will be granted. Ordinarily, the maximum extension will be one month. .
If the student has not completed the project by the agreed deadline, he/she will be put on probation and given a deadline by which to complete the project or face dismissal for inadequate progress. During a probationary period, the student cannot register for any courses except for PSY 890 in order to focus on completing the project.
Students with M.A. earned elsewhere. If the student completed an acceptable research thesis in psychology as part of master's work at another institution, the program will review whether the MA can be transferred. The advisor and one other clinical faculty member will be asked to judge whether the previous work qualifies or whether the student needs to demonstrate additional research competence at the MA level. If approved, a copy of the thesis and a letter documenting the faculty's judgment of acceptability must be filed in the Department Graduate Office by the student.
Students with MA earned elsewhere who did not complete a data-based thesis as part of their prior master's work, or whose previous thesis work is judged not acceptable, must demonstrate research competence. This is usually a thesis-equivalency project completed during the first year that the student is enrolled in the clinical psychology graduate program at MSU.
DOCTORAL PROGRAM
The clinical faculty meets at the end of the Spring Semester to review all Second Year Students’ progress. The student's MA thesis Guidance Committee will make a recommendation to the clinical faculty as to whether the student should or should not be admitted to the doctoral program. Students who have demonstrated competency in the skills needed at the MA level and readiness for doctoral work, who meet the course grade requirements outlined in the Graduate Handbook, and who are recommended by the MA Thesis Guidance Committee, will be admitted to the doctoral program by a majority faculty vote.
Doctoral Program Guidance Committee and Doctoral Plan of Study
The Doctoral Program Guidance committee has three main functions. It approves your program of study, it conducts comprehensive examinations, and it approves your internship placement. Of the four faculty required on this committee, the chairperson and at least one other member, preferably two, must be voting members of the Clinical Interest group. The doctoral guidance committee should be formed as soon as possible after completion of the masters thesis, and no later than the fall semester of year 3. The doctoral guidance committee will meet with the student to review the student’s written doctoral plan of study. The written doctoral plan of study should include the following elements: (a) a brief description of career goals, (b) a brief summary of the anticipated dissertation topic at that time, (c) the courses to be completed, and (d) the timeline on which remaining requirements are expected to be completed. If applicable, it may also include a written plan for practicum activities. The guidance committee will review the plan, looking for direct connections between the career plans and the other elements of the training plan. The Comprehensive papers, dissertation, courses, practicum, internship, and other experiences should all be chosen so that they form a coherent training program for the specific career path the student wants to take. Each of these aspects of the training should build some competence or skill that will be necessary for the student to be successful in their career.
Ordinarily this plan is reviewed at the same meeting at which the proposal for the comprehensive paper is reviewed (see below).
Doctoral Dissertation Committee
In addition to departmental requirements, it is recommended that two members of the doctoral dissertation committee be voting members of the Clinical Interest Group. It is also strongly recommended that one member of this committee is from outside of the Psychology Department. See the Departmental Graduate Handbook (Sec 2.2.5) for more details about committee composition.
Comprehensive Examinations
The Comprehensive Examination policy was adopted on
The two requirements for the Comprehensive Examination are as follows:
1. First Author Publication: The student’s MA thesis or a similar empirical paper will be submitted for publication with the student as first author. The student should submit this paper to his/her guidance committee along with information about the journal of submission and the submission date. Successful completion of this part of the Comprehensive Examination is not contingent upon the paper being accepted for publication; the paper merely needs to be submitted for publication for successful completion.
2. Comprehensive Paper: The student will write a Comprehensive Paper that is a theoretical and empirical literature review that ties together at least two areas of research relevant to the student's doctoral training program in clinical psychology (e.g., neuropsychological factors and exposure to child abuse as they relate to the development of antisocial behavior in youth) in a manner that meets the student’s training goals and is judged by the guidance committee to have scholarly merit. The goals of this paper will be to (a) develop a meaningful integration of science and practice as it relates to a specific area(s) of clinical psychology, (b) increase the student’s breadth of understanding of the field of psychology as whole as well as his/her depth of understanding of two specific literatures, and (c) ensure that the student has a firm grasp of the conceptual and theoretical basis for his/her dissertation.
A. Format
The Comprehensive Paper should be a thematic review of the literatures that is integrative and critical (i.e., not an annotated bibliography). Furthermore, the Comprehensive Paper must include a discussion of the clinical implications of the paper’s major conclusions.
B. Procedures
1. Comprehensive Paper Proposal
Before beginning the Comprehensive Paper, the student will submit a Comprehensive Paper Proposal to his/her guidance committee. This proposal will consist of a 500 word description of the two foci of the Comprehensive Paper, as well as two separate reference lists that detail the vast majority of the two literatures that will be reviewed and summarized in the Comprehensive Paper. The reference lists should be thorough and comprehensive. A 1-page maximum outline of the essay is allowed but not required at the proposal stage.
The Comprehensive Paper Proposal will be reviewed by the doctoral guidance committee. Typically, the committee will meet with the student to discuss the plan and any needed amendments. The guidance committee will evaluate both the appropriateness of the topic and of the reading list. The guidance committee must approve the plan before the student proceeds. This is ordinarily done at the same time as the guidance committee reviews and approves the doctoral plan of study and associated paperwork (see above).
2. Comprehensive Paper
The Comprehensive Paper should represent the student’s own work. The student’s advisor may provide input into the development of the comprehensive paper topic as well as the reference list prior to sign off by the guidance committee. However, after approval of the Comprehensive Paper Proposal by the guidance committee, the student will work independently on the writing of the Comprehensive Paper without further input or consultation from the faculty. In this way, the Comprehensive Paper will function like a take-home comprehensive examination. It is also expected that students not seek active help from other colleagues on this essay. It is recognized that some conversation about the topic will occasionally occur in the course of carrying out scholarly duties in the program (e.g., courses, lab meetings, conferences, and so on) as occurs with all scholars. Students are expected to recognize and abide by the spirit and intent of the project, which is an independent scholarly essay that reflects their own thinking and writing.
The guidance committee will review and evaluate the Comprehensive Paper according to explicit criteria detailed below. The Chair of the guidance committee will be responsible for compiling feedback from the guidance committee into a written document that will be provided to the student. This document will contain: 1) descriptive summaries of the committee’s view of the strengths and weaknesses of the paper; 2) the final overall score assigned to the paper; and 3) the grade assigned to the paper that corresponds to the overall score. The Chair of the guidance committee will meet in-person with the student to discuss this feedback. The written feedback must be presented to the student within six weeks of the date of the original paper submission, unless the paper is submitted during the summer term. If it is submitted during the summer term, feedback must be provided within 6 weeks of the beginning of fall term.
Based on the overall score, one of three grades will be assigned to the Comprehensive Paper by the guidance committee (please note - the numeric scores in parentheses are described in the scoring section below):
Pass (1-2.0): No revisions are necessary; the student has successfully passed the Comprehensive Paper requirement.
Revisions Required (2.1-4.0): The student must revise the Comprehensive Paper and address the concerns raised in the guidance committee’s written review. The revised Comprehensive Paper will be reviewed by the guidance committee using the procedures outlined above.
Fail (4.1 - 5.0): The Comprehensive Paper fails to meet the minimum criteria outlined below. The student must write a new version of the paper to be re-submitted to the guidance committee for a new review. The new Comprehensive Paper will be reviewed by the guidance committee according to the procedures outlined above.
Only one re-submission of the Comprehensive Paper will be allowed. The procedures for reviewing the re-submission will be identical to those for the original submission detailed above, with the exception that the revision will only be graded as “Pass” or “Fail”. No further revisions will be requested or accepted. A grade of “Fail” on the second re-submission indicates that the Comprehensive Paper requirement has not been successfully met.
All Comprehensive Papers will be graded according to the criteria outlined below. After reviewing these areas, each guidance committee member will provide an overall “score” of the paper using the following 1-5 scale:
Guidance committee members may give scores
in-between these anchor points in order to accurately depict their level of
concern or enthusiasm. Scores will be based on the following criteria.
1) Abstract requirements:
2) Introduction
requirements: The goal(s) of the review must be clearly stated. Thus,
readers should be able to answer the questions:
3) Literature review
requirements:
4) Conclusion section
requirements:
5) Reference section
requirements:
6) Formatting
requirements:
To maintain adequate progress and thus good standing in the program, both part 1 and 2 must be successfully passed by December 1st of the student’s fourth year in the program. If both parts of the exam are not passed by this date, the student will be required to defer internship for one year and the new deadline for successful completion of both parts of the Comprehensive Examination will be set by the guidance committee; it will be no later than December 1st of the student’s fifth year in the program. If the Comprehensive Examination is not successfully passed by this second date, the faculty will meet to decide whether the student will be allowed to remain in the doctoral program. Exceptions to this timeline will only be given in response to substantive evidence of extreme extenuating circumstances. Further, all exceptions must receive prior approval (i.e., prior to the December 1st deadline) by the Clinical Interest Group faculty.
In order to meet this deadline and allow ample time for a potential revision, it is recommended that the Comprehensive Paper be initially submitted to the guidance committee for review by March 15th of the student’s third year in the program. The reason for this suggested deadline is that it allows for a six week review prior to end of spring semester, and allows ample time for the student to make any needed corrections in time for the Dec 1st final deadline.
Dissertation Proposal and
Dissertation
The dissertation proposal is written under the supervision of the dissertation chairperson. It is ordinarily expected that the dissertation proposal will be written and submitted to the committee in fall of Year 4. It must be formally approved (signed off) prior to application for internship. If the proposal is not completed by the end of fall semester in Year 5, the student may be considered to be making inadequate academic progress, unless an adequate rationale has been provided for a longer time period to completing it.
The final dissertation is intended to reflect independent empirical
scholarship by the doctoral candidate. It is orally defended in a public
meeting attended by the doctoral committee, a Dean’s Representative (as
required by the College), and interested parties. It is formatted and filed
following procedures of the
Practicum Requirement and Policy on Externship Clinical Experiences
I. Practicum Class (PSY 994)
Practicum takes place under the auspices of the MSU Psychological Clinic.
Requirements for practicum are at the end of this section.
All hours accrued by participating in practicum can be listed on the APPI form that students submit as part of their internship application.
Students are required to complete 3 years of practicum. A year is defined as 12 months. (Rarely, there may be valid reasons why a “year” is defined as less than 12 months, for example, if a student is completing his/her last year of practicum and his/her internship begins on July 1.)
Students must complete their first year of practicum during their second year in the graduate program. Typically, a student completes years 2 and 3 of the practicum following the first year of practicum. However, this is not a condition of the program.
Any interruption in 3 years of continuous practicum training for any reason (e.g., being out of residence for a period of time), has to be approved by the Clinic Director, the DCT, and the student’s advisor. The student should propose a plan of activity, including a rationale for the activity (e.g., if it is an externship, per the requirements of that, listed below), as well as plans for client care. In these instances, the presumption is that clients will be terminated and reassigned and new clients picked up upon return to practicum.
After the required 3 years of practicum, students who wish to do additional years are still expected to see clients and complete assessments, but the specific case load and requirements can be individually tailored in consultation with the Director of the Clinic.
II. Externships
1. An externship is defined as a clinical experience at a community agency, organization, or
practice that is not under the auspices of or arranged by the Clinical Psychology Interest Group or the MSU Psychological Clinic.
2. An externship is not required, although students may sometimes wish to supplement their
practicum training with an externship experience.
3. Students may not engage in any externship until they have completed their first year of
practicum at the MSU Psychological Clinic.
4. Students may engage in externships while they are enrolled in practicum or when they are
not enrolled in practicum.
course credit. One practical implication of this is that, per APPIC (Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers; http://www.appic.org/) guidelines, the hours a student accrues on an externship will be listed as “other” clinical hours on the APPI (internship application) form; they cannot be listed as practicum hours.
comprehensive project for students admitted prior to Fall, 2005), including practicum requirements as described above.
7. Students wishing to do an externship (paid or unpaid) must notify the DCT and his/her
advisor and present a proposal about the externship prior to beginning or scheduling this experience.
8. The proposal shall consist of 2 parts.
It is also suggested that the student talk with the DCT about issues of physical safety and liability while at the externship and financial issues that might arise. For instance, regarding safety—if the student goes to another country for an externship, is the country one that the university considers safe for students to travel to, does the State Department have safety warnings for American citizens traveling to this county? Regarding finances—will the time away from the university affect the students’ eligibility for a university stipend or fellowship?
It is likely that most externship proposals will meet with the approval of the DCT and the advisor; however, the student is advised that this will not always be the case. Sometimes concerns about the quality of the supervision, liability issues, etc. may lead to a rejection of the application.
Practicum Year 1. During the academic year and summer, students are required to keep a caseload of 3-4 psychotherapy cases. During the academic year, students are required to conduct 4 assessments (1 child, 1 learning characteristics, 1 adult neuropsychological case, 1 choice) and 1 group.
Practicum Year 2. During the academic year and summer, students are required to keep a caseload of 3-4 psychotherapy cases. During the academic year, students are required to conduct 4 assessments (1 child, 1 learning characteristics, 1 adult neuropsychological case, 1 choice) and 1 group
Practicum Year 3. During the academic year and summer, students are required to keep a caseload of 3-4 psychotherapy cases. During the academic year, students are required to conduct 2 assessments of student’s choice and 1 group
Practicum Year 4 and beyond. If the student chooses to enroll, he or she will create a plan each year for his or her practicum experience that is tailored to his or her career plans. The plan would be approved by the doctoral guidance committee and by the clinic director. The deadline for proposals will be decided by the clinic director in accord with the needs of the clinic (e.g., planning for supervision, budget, etc).
Exceptions to the above plan are rare but they can sometimes be arranged if the student submits a written practicum plan to the guidance committee and it is approved by the guidance committee and the Clinic Director. Students in their 4th year of practicum and beyond will default to the 3rd year plan unless an alternative plan is approved sufficiently in advance (typically by end of spring semester of the third year).
Advanced practicum students (4th year and beyond) may have therapy supervision in a group format due to limited resources.
It is understood that these students will help, in rare instances where this is needed, to keep particular Clinic experiences viable, but every effort will be made to accommodate individual plans and allow students to have the experience they desire.
Other considerations:
1. Additional assessment experiences may be available in the summer if there is supervision available.
2. During the academic year and the summer session, if a student's hours fall consistently below the expectations stated above, the Clinic Director reserves the right to assign one or more activities (group or individual treatment or assessment) to that student in order to adhere to Clinic policy.
3. The Clinic is open all year; thus, clinical work is required all year long. The Clinic will be closed for two weeks at the end of August. Students can take reasonable, additional vacation time during the summer as needed.
Supervision
There are 3 components to supervision during the academic year.
1. Students are assigned a clinical supervisor for ongoing
one-to-one supervision of therapy cases. Students generally meet with therapy
supervisors for one hour per week.
2. Students are assigned a clinical supervisor(s) for
supervision of assessment cases. Meetings with assessment supervisors are
scheduled on an as needed basis.
3. Students are required to attend weekly case conference meetings that last 1.5 hours.
During the summer months (May – August), clinical supervision may continue with the same academic year supervisor on a one-to-one basis, or, sometimes, due to vacations and time commitments of supervisors, students may be placed in weekly group supervision sessions.
IV. Credit Hours for Practicum
Practicum credits - minimum 8, maximum 14.
Year 1:
Fall
2 credits
Spring
2 credits
Summer 1
credit (unless waived, please contact Clinic Director)
Year 2 and beyond:
Fall
1 credit
Spring
1 credit
Summer 1
credit (unless waived, please contact Clinic Director)
Other Program Requirements
Human subjects policy: Student research is always submitted to the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) for its review and approval before any project is begun. Information on how to do so is at the IRB website at http://www.humanresearch.msu.edu. In regard to master's thesis or dissertation work, a copy of the IRB approval letter must be placed in the student's file in the Psychology Department Graduate Office. All research, whether it involves the collection of new data or the analysis of existing data sets, requires IRB approval.
Internship: All students complete an APA-approved clinical internship. This is typically an off-campus 2000 hour internship placement that meets both American Psychological Association internship requirements and that also satisfies the student's Doctoral Guidance Committee requirement that the internship training will complement the emphasis area training already received. In terms of internship placement, internships are as an integral component of the doctoral training experience that completes the competencies with regard to clinical skills necessary for the Ph.D. in clinical psychology. An approved dissertation proposal and completed comprehensive exams are prerequisite for application to internship programs. Program faculty and the Director of Clinical Training will not submit letters of recommendation unless both of those requirements are fulfilled. The Director of Clinical Training meets with students applying to internship during the summer prior to application in order to explain interest group procedures and APPIC guidelines. Information packets are always available from the clinical secretary.
Professional Development, Service, and Professional Comportment: Students are expected to engage in lifelong learning and to develop habits of professional self development via participation in the field, attendance at professional meetings, participation in interest group and departmental activities, and participation in service committees that carry out program functions, such as the diversity committee, admissions committee, or faculty search committee. Doing so is a valuable opportunity to learn about and to influence program activities. Although it is not a formal requirement, students should anticipate some professional service during graduate school and all are strongly encouraged to serve on at least one service committee during their time in program.
Student Review and Adequate Progress in the Clinical Psychology Graduate Program
We expect that all students admitted into our program will complete their degrees, and the vast majority do so. The path to getting a master's and doctoral degree involves a lot of hard work, but we hope our students find the work intellectually exciting and rewarding. Master's and doctoral degrees require extensive interaction between faculty and students. The faculty members in the clinical program are expected to work closely as mentors and advisors so that students can graduate in a timely fashion and enter into a fulfilling professional career. Communication between students and faculty is vital.
The clinical program requires each student who has not yet gone on internship to prepare a yearly, written self-evaluation form (SEF) summarizing his/her progress to date as well as plans for the coming year. Faculty advisors write feedback letters to students commenting on the progress and plans described in the self study. The Director of Clinical Training reviews each letter. Annually, the faculty meets and progress of each student is discussed based on the student self evaluation and advisor letter, course grades, and quality of work. Any remediation needs are communicated to the student in writing, with specific timelines. The review emphasizes progress on core competencies that underlie the program. As a guideline, a set of competencies are appended at the end of this handbook.
Once-a-year contact between a student and his/her faculty advisor is a minimum requirement, yet not sufficient for adequate progress to occur. Students are encouraged to stay in touch with the faculty advisor and committee members on a regular basis. Your faculty advisor needs to know when your graduate work is proceeding well and also when it is not. Personal problems or life circumstances sometimes interfere with a student's ability to complete degree requirements in a timely fashion. Faculty members can, if informed, provide necessary support and problem solving in order to minimize the delays in degree completion and to prioritize the objectives.
Making good progress toward degree completion is a priority for every student and advisor. Those students who do not meet timeline requirements or competency expectations may be placed on probation and asked to remediate, or may be denied promotion to the doctoral program. If a written request for remediation or a probationary period has not been satisfactorily addressed, students may be dismissed from the program. Doctoral level students must be deemed to be making adequate progress by the advisor, the Guidance Committee, and the clinical faculty on an annual basis in order to stay in good standing in the program. Those who exceed university deadlines for completion of the degree (see "Academic Programs" at http://www.reg.msu.edu/ucc/AcademicPrograms.asp) will be required to reapply for admission to the program. Students who have been dismissed from the program due to a lapse in meeting required timelines will be evaluated for admission together with the pool of first-time applicants of the year they apply for readmission.
The following competencies serve as guidelines for
student evaluation.
A. Evidence Based Thinking
In
research and clinical writing, do analyses or data report reflect the
hypotheses, predictions, or
problems described in the introduction?
In research and clinical writing, do conclusions reflect
the data?
In research, do conclusions and discussion adequately
consider related findings?
In research and clinical writing, are limitations on the
degree of confidence in the findings
appropriately considered and reflected for the reader?
Does student formulate a research or clinical question
that is (a) answerable, (b) relevant, and (c)
useful to the field, the client, and/or society?
B. Effective Written Communication (Research Documents, Clinical Reports)
Is it precise, yet readable?
Is student able to focus a clinical document on a core
hypothesis or formulation, a “bottom line”
that is clear?
For research, is literature reviewed current while also
recognizing appropriate history of idea and
what has already been known and done?
For clinical practice, is knowledge of literature
reflected in decisions and formulations?
For research and clinical practice, are appropriate data
bases searched to answer relevant
questions?
For research, does the literature review reflect a
conceptual argument (rather than just an
annotated bibliography); does study suggest a
mechanism/process (not merely
descriptive)?
Are measurement reliability and validity addressed
(clinical and research reports)?
Is measurement selection appropriately justified and
alternatives considered? Are best practices in
terms of measurement considered and utilized (clinical
and research reports)?
C. Effective Oral Communication:
Is case presentation clear, to the point, and
informative?
Is presentation of case material to supervisor or to case
conference well articulated, specific, well
selected, and guided by an understanding of self, patient,
context, and literature?
Are explanations of research in research meetings,
colloquia, and at conferences clear, well
articulated, well informed, and interesting?
D. Effective Handling of Data
Are “best practices” of data analysis implemented?
Is missing data appropriately handled?
Are covariates appropriately selected?
Are clinical data accurately scored and recorded?
E. Effective Professional and Interpersonal Skills
Is a positive working relationship formed with clients
and colleagues?
Able
to engage in shared decisions with clients, colleagues, instructors?
Are disagreements with colleagues handled in constructive
and collegial fashion?
Are mechanics handled adequately (timeliness with
meetings and reports, returning of calls to
clients, and so on)?
Is time management appropriate, and when a deadline or
commitment cannot be met, is this
anticipated and a mutual solution arrived at with
affected parties?
Is appropriate ownership/responsibility and initiative
demonstrated with regard to solving
problems and obtaining information in practice and
research?