Should we have a standard set of courses/curriculum in psych?

[psychstudent5]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed ad nausea, but I haven't seen too many posts on it. While reading http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=971690 and noticing the varied requirements and structure for substance abuse and diversity courses, it made me reflect on conversations I had with other graduate students about program curriculum. There seems to be a lot of variations in the courses clinical programs teach with some devoting an entire course on diversity while others try to weave in it in the program with no designated course. During one of the seminars I attended on internship, I recall my DCT making the prediction that APA will soon (in the next 10-15 years) require programs to have a standard set of courses. He likened it to how medical programs are set up, saying that they all take the same courses. I'm not sure how valid that is since I don't know enough medical students and doctors. Nevertheless, it's something I mentally revisited throughout graduate school. Although APA requires programs to cover certain topics, it leaves a lot of room for programs to determine how to incorporate them into the program curriculum. Do you think each program must teach the same courses to be accredited (whether by APA or PCSAS?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

APA already does require certain individual courses, actually (e.g., biological, social, and cognitive psych; diversity; ethics). I wouldn't at all be surprised if these become even more regimented in the future, though, given that the diversity requirement only hit within the past few years. Then again, I think APA's time would be better spent ensuring that the programs they accredit are adequately placing their students into internship spots, and prior to that, are providing adequate resources to make said students competitive for internship in the first place.

 

[LivingOffLoans]

All accredited programs should have some healthy level of standardized training, but I think that it is nice to have some variation between programs in the coursework to distinguish them (this could play to the attractiveness of an institution too). If I were a program director, I would want my faculty to use their areas of expertise (especially if they are well known) that would set us apart from competing programs.

 

[MBellows]

APA already does require certain individual courses, actually (e.g., biological, social, and cognitive psych; diversity; ethics). I wouldn't at all be surprised if these become even more regimented in the future, though, given that the diversity requirement only hit within the past few years. Then again, I think APA's time would be better spent ensuring that the programs they accredit are adequately placing their students into internship spots, and prior to that, are providing adequate resources to make said students competitive for internship in the first place.

And pass the EPPP without issue. There honestly shouldn't be a damned thing on that test that you didn't learn in your educational experience from a decent school.

 

[Pragma]

And pass the EPPP without issue. There honestly shouldn't be a damned thing on that test that you didn't learn in your educational experience from a decent school.

Definitely agree with this point, but also want to note that the test is extremely flawed. I passed it but what a waste of time and energy on crap that is 90% irrelevant to my clinical practice.

As to the standardized course issue - I think it is a step in the right direction. However, as a prof, I can say that the quality and depth of a course can vary considerably by prof. We aren't guaranteeing that students get a good education by requiring a course called "X" but at least we are guiding programs to at least pay lip service to each topic.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

And pass the EPPP without issue. There honestly shouldn't be a damned thing on that test that you didn't learn in your educational experience from a decent school.

👍

It almost seems like they just wanted to come up with a test that would be needlessly onerous to pass so that they could tout adequate numbers of failures each year, rather than developing it for purposes of assessing actual competence to practice psychology.

I'd also be quite happy to see more psych programs (and/or internships) having classes/experiences available in professional development, business practices/billing, and perhaps even legislative representation. As things currently stand, had I not worked with a couple particular supervisors in grad school, I probably could've made it through my program without ever once hearing anything about billing codes, reimbursement-related legislation, and the like (this isn't a knock on my program, mind you; rather, just my way of saying that these issues universally don't get nearly as much play as they should during training).

 

[MBellows]

Definitely agree with this point, but also want to note that the test is extremely flawed. I passed it but what a waste of time and energy on crap that is 90% irrelevant to my clinical practice.

Most of the people who I have come across who have had trouble with it were people from Argosy and other independent 'professional' schools. It comes across as interesting that people who graduate their program have trouble passing after multiple tries and students at the UNT Clinical Health program (kind of a 'meh' quality PhD thus far if you look at the stats) pass it in lieu of master's comps.

 

[MBellows]

I'd also be quite happy to see more psych programs (and/or internships) having classes/experiences available in professional development, business practices/billing, and perhaps even legislative representation.

While I just made a post bashing independent professional schools, the only program that I reviewed with classes on this was in that category.

As for legislative representation, I feel that's a mixed bag that needs to be addressed in a way that protects psychologists but doesn't unnecessarily harm other professionals. I've seen several states in the past years push through laws that have taken some levels of testing that master's level clinicians (LPC typically) have traditionally used with relatively unquestioned competency. Personally, I blame NASW for that more-so than I blame the APA because they started this whole mess of legislating their way into a protected profession rather than proving themselves in an open market.

 

[Ollie123]

Personally, I prefer how PCSAS is approaching it - making things more outcome-based rather than input-based. As Pragma noted above, having a course titled "Diversity issues" can mean many things. not all of which are likely to be useful for clinical practice (or anything else). I think having a "Checklist" of requirements is the wrong way to go and part of how we got in this mess. I could open a school operating out of a van tomorrow that included all the right courses and topics but it wouldn't be a quality education.

The direction PCSAS is moving is towards outcome assessments. In other words, they leave it up to the school how they get students there as long as they can provide evidence their graduates meet a certain level of competence. Obviously that is a long-term goal as it is a significant departure from how the system is currently set up, but I think we are far better off pushing in that direction than just requiring additional coursework when (frankly) that's probably the least important part anyways.

 

[Pragma]

Personally, I prefer how PCSAS is approaching it - making things more outcome-based rather than input-based. As Pragma noted above, having a course titled "Diversity issues" can mean many things. not all of which are likely to be useful for clinical practice (or anything else). I think having a "Checklist" of requirements is the wrong way to go and part of how we got in this mess. I could open a school operating out of a van tomorrow that included all the right courses and topics but it wouldn't be a quality education.

The direction PCSAS is moving is towards outcome assessments. In other words, they leave it up to the school how they get students there as long as they can provide evidence their graduates meet a certain level of competence. Obviously that is a long-term goal as it is a significant departure from how the system is currently set up, but I think we are far better off pushing in that direction than just requiring additional coursework when (frankly) that's probably the least important part anyways.

Would it be down by the river? 😀 No hatin' on vans!

I generally agree with you, but I also think that the only way we can use outcome assessments is if we have good outcome assessments. How can we tell if someone is "culturally competent" for example? Is there a good test for that, or should we rely on the judgment of clinical supervisors (who may have much more of an incentive to say "yup, they're competent" than not)? I'll be interested to see how this develops, because I am strongly in favor of giving programs some independence. My own program had its own reputation and areas of emphasis, and I still strongly identify with their approach to educating graduate students.

Maybe I am just hating on the EPPP, but I don't think it would be predictive of anything aside from lack of preparedness, and I'd like to see some more meaningful forms of outcome assessment developed. For example, board certification in neuropsychology via ABPP has a great system. I think we ought to strive for something centralized like that for doctoral students covering basic areas of competency.

 

[MBellows]

Would it be down by the river? 😀 No hatin' on vans!

I generally agree with you, but I also think that the only way we can use outcome assessments is if we have good outcome assessments. How can we tell if someone is "culturally competent" for example? Is there a good test for that, or should we rely on the judgment of clinical supervisors (who may have much more of an incentive to say "yup, they're competent" than not)? I'll be interested to see how this develops, because I am strongly in favor of giving programs some independence. My own program had its own reputation and areas of emphasis, and I still strongly identify with their approach to educating graduate students.

In behavioral intervention we use single subject research designs to track the progress. Perhaps it's not too far off base to treat psychology students like children with autism.

 

[Ollie123]

I agree fully.

I'm in no position to be making this change but ideally I'd like to see licensure involve things like written case conceptualizations and accreditation could entail things like submitting sample reports by students, client demographics (which I guess is still input, but I think more useful than requiring courses), etc. MBellows I assume was joking regarding the single subject designs being used to track students, but I actually think having students track their clients in such a fashion as part of the educational requirements could also be a helpful means of assessing outcomes. Relying on supervisors is obviously not ideal, though I point out it is perfectly in line with relying on courses where instructors have the incentive to say "Yup, they're competent". I think the point of accreditation is to have competence verified by an independent body but this is obviously tricky to do. I don't have any easy answers, I just don't think an accrediting body adding new required courses is going to contribute much towards producing better psychologists. If that is our goal, I'd like to see us getting a little more creative.

 

[Psychadelic2012]

Anectdotally, the programs that market themselves as "culturally competent," complete with specific coursework and such, seem to be at the very bottom of actual cultural competence. The programs or schools that I've experienced who are the most cutting edge and open? They have no need to advertise it or their classes. Fascinating.

 

[coldsweat]

Personally, I prefer how PCSAS is approaching it - making things more outcome-based rather than input-based. As Pragma noted above, having a course titled "Diversity issues" can mean many things. not all of which are likely to be useful for clinical practice (or anything else). I think having a "Checklist" of requirements is the wrong way to go and part of how we got in this mess. I could open a school operating out of a van tomorrow that included all the right courses and topics but it wouldn't be a quality education.

The direction PCSAS is moving is towards outcome assessments. In other words, they leave it up to the school how they get students there as long as they can provide evidence their graduates meet a certain level of competence. Obviously that is a long-term goal as it is a significant departure from how the system is currently set up, but I think we are far better off pushing in that direction than just requiring additional coursework when (frankly) that's probably the least important part anyways.

I wholly agree that assessments of outcomes, and not input, is the appropriate manner for evaluating programs. I'm in school psychology and I've witnessed a shift towards outcome assessments in this field as well. Specifically, the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) is focusing more on outcomes when evaluating programs. For example, I know of one program that lost it's approval partly because students were not assessing the outcomes of their services. The program provided excellent training in psychoeducational and behavioral assessment, but the students were not trained to monitor the progress of these students post-assessment. With budget cuts in schools, professional school psychologists are becoming aware that they need to show evidence for the effectiveness of their services as well.

 

[MBellows]

MBellows I assume was joking regarding the single subject designs being used to track students...

I'm glad someone picked up on that.

 

[Pragma]

Anectdotally, the programs that market themselves as "culturally competent," complete with specific coursework and such, seem to be at the very bottom of actual cultural competence. The programs or schools that I've experienced who are the most cutting edge and open? They have no need to advertise it or their classes. Fascinating.

Well, I for one only trust a program if they give you a plaque indicating that you are "Culturally Competent" and nothing further

 

[MBellows]

Well, I for one only trust a program if they give you a plaque indicating that you are "Culturally Competent" and nothing further

My plaque came with a ticket to Django.

 

[Pragma]

My plaque came with a ticket to Django.

Are you sure it was a ticket, or was it a 50% off coupon after you pay your tuition? 😀

 

[MBellows]

Are you sure it was a ticket, or was it a 50% off coupon after you pay your tuition? 😀

Meh. The tuition is paid for; the loans are a different story. Give me 3 years.