APA Will Pursue Accreditation of Master's Level Programs

[mypointlesspov]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Per the Div. 16 email I received:

"Dear Division Colleagues,

We are writing to let you know that, in a historic moment, the APA Council of Representatives (CoR) approved for APA to pursue accreditation of master’s level programs in (health service) psychology. This development is expected to lead to licensure for master's level practitioners.

APA is only at the start of this process. Education and training issues, as well as licensure issues (e.g., scope of practice, title) are all in development. However, we wanted to reassure you that Division 16 has been and will continue to be involved in this process. We are following what this could mean for school psychology programs and practitioners - including new opportunities and unintended consequences. Also, we are in communication with NASP; of course, the division will continue to support specialist level competencies.

Please let us know if you have any questions. "

 

[psych1420]

What does this means? "Masters level" psychologists?

 

[G Costanza]

It means folks with a masters in health psychology will introduce themselves to clients as “psychologists”, further confusing our scope of practice.

 

[Rivi]

 

[barryggg]

This is sort of confusing for a Canadian. Is APA trying to accredit Masters level School Psychology programs?

 

[bcliff]

Accreditation and licensure are two different things. I think APA is trying to extend its grasp to include both doctoral and masters level training programs. How states reconcile with this in terms of licensure will likely vary state to state, just as it does for doctoral level providers.

 

[barryggg]

While accreditation and licensure are not the same thing, it be naive to think that the former will not lead more states being open to Masters-level Psychologists.

 

[bcliff]

While accreditation and licensure are not the same thing, it be naive to think that the former will not lead more states being open to Masters-level Psychologists.

That’s true, but this has been the case for a while now. OR, WV, and TX (to my knowledge) already have some form of independent psychological practice available at the masters level. Accreditation may allow for there to be increased standardization at this level of training. I echo feedback from others that a consistent term should be introduced and used consistently; I’m still aggravated that “medical psychologist” became the omnibus term for “prescribing psychologists.” I think terms like “limited licensed psychologist” and “psychological associate” are currently used in some jurisdictions.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

While accreditation and licensure are not the same thing, it be naive to think that the former will not lead more states being open to Masters-level Psychologists.

I don't think its naive at all. As mentioned, accreditation and licensure is completely separate. Aside from social work, there are a range of programs that typically lead to masters-level licensure. The terms used to describe these practitioners include counselor, LPC, LCPC, psychotherapist but outside of WV never psychologist. I see no reason that accrediting programs would lead to any changes in current state laws.

At the moment, you can find tons of practitioners licensed at the masters level that also received some sort of doctoral degree and call themselves Dr. Similarly, most people don't understand the difference between degrees and licensure. As a psychologist, I strongly believe we need to distinguish our training compared to other degrees and professions. However, I don't see the accreditation process muddying the waters anymore than they are currently.