Your advice for an Educational Psychologist

[madpsych78]

That is exactly what I was saying. The confusion arises when states create an exception for School Psychologists who are licensed at a masters level with less stringent requirements which is what many or probably most School Psychologists or Educational Psychologists are.

While this is true, I don't think that aligns with the point I am trying to make. I'll speak primarily for Texas as that is where I am at now, and there are some things unique to Texas, although some of my points may apply to other states in the U.S. as well. In Texas, specialist level school psychologists are called Licensed Specialists in School Psychology and this license allows them to practice within their scope in the public schools. Interestingly (and I just learned this recently), LSSPs cannot practice school psychology within the private schools with just the LSSP credential, although there has been a bill proposed to change this which is currently under review. Right now, however, psychological services in private schools in Texas are provided either by an LP or by an LPA (Licensed Psychological Associate), who works under the supervision of an LP.

Although doctoral level school psychologists who practice in the public schools have the LSSP credential, they also have the option of becoming a Licensed Psychologist. They do not need an LP to practice in the public schools; however, they do need it to provide psychological services in other settings, including agencies, hospitals or private practice, and, as stated, private schools. Obviously, the LP option is not available to master's or specialist's level practitioners. For more information, I've attached the link here for Texas: https://www.tsbep.texas.gov/how-to-become-licensed

My point was that attaining the LP is not only available to practitioners with a clinical psychology degree. You have to have a doctoral degree in psychology but the rules (at least in TX) don't specify beyond that in terms of degree. It's not called a "Licensed Clinical Psychologist" or a "Licensed School Psychologist" (unless you count the LSSP); it is just "Licensed Psychologist."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[barryggg]

While this is true, I don't think that aligns with the point I am trying to make. I'll speak primarily for Texas as that is where I am at now, and there are some things unique to Texas, although some of my points may apply to other states in the U.S. as well. In Texas, specialist level school psychologists are called Licensed Specialists in School Psychology and this license allows them to practice within their scope in the public schools. Interestingly (and I just learned this recently), LSSPs cannot practice school psychology within the private schools with just the LSSP credential, although there has been a bill proposed to change this which is currently under review. Right now, however, psychological services in private schools in Texas are provided either by an LP or by an LPA (Licensed Psychological Associate), who works under the supervision of an LP.

Although doctoral level school psychologists who practice in the public schools have the LSSP credential, they also have the option of becoming a Licensed Psychologist. They do not need an LP to practice in the public schools; however, they do need it to provide psychological services in other settings, including agencies, hospitals or private practice, and, as stated, private schools. Obviously, the LP option is not available to master's or specialist's level practitioners. For more information, I've attached the link here for Texas: https://www.tsbep.texas.gov/how-to-become-licensed

My point was that attaining the LP is not only available to practitioners with a clinical psychology degree. You have to have a doctoral degree in psychology but the rules (at least in TX) don't specify beyond that in terms of degree. It's not called a "Licensed Clinical Psychologist" or a "Licensed School Psychologist" (unless you count the LSSP); it is just "Licensed Psychologist."

Great post.

I think you're talking about the larger point that people are not aware of how other states/countries handle registration, so they just assume.'not same as me...not qualified'.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Great post.

I think you're talking about the larger point that people are not aware of how other states/countries handle registration, so they just assume.'not same as me...not qualified'.

There are two issues.
1. The use of the term psychologist

2. The competence (no matter what you are called) to ethically perform a given task.

You are confusing these two. You do not qualified (trained, experienced, etc.) to perform the tasks you claim to perform. You've previously claimed medical setting expertise at a hospital, neuropsychological training, personality assessment competence, and skills needed to work within a school setting. Now you're adding an SMI population to the unique skills/groups with whom you need expertise to ethically provide services. I would question a doctoral-level psychologist who claimed to be competent in that many entirely different areas and you don't even have that level of training. Licensure and title does not mean competence or ethical qualification. You don't seem to get that. You keep saying "I am a psychologist" as if that means your training experience is equally rigorous and comprehensive. It is not. You keep assuming that "I am a psychologist" also means that you are competent. It does not.

So yes, you have less training and your training does not appear to sufficiently cover the things you are not doing. That is the definition of not qualified.

 

[barryggg]

There are two issues.
1. The use of the term psychologist

2. The competence (no matter what you are called) to ethically perform a given task.

You are confusing these two. You do not qualified (trained, experienced, etc.) to perform the tasks you claim to perform. You've previously claimed medical setting expertise at a hospital, neuropsychological training, personality assessment competence, and skills needed to work within a school setting. Now you're adding an SMI population to the unique skills/groups with whom you need expertise to ethically provide services. I would question a doctoral-level psychologist who claimed to be competent in that many entirely different areas and you don't even have that level of training. Licensure and title does not mean competence or ethical qualification. You don't seem to get that. You keep saying "I am a psychologist" as if that means your training experience is equally rigorous and comprehensive. It is not. You keep assuming that "I am a psychologist" also means that you are competent. It does not.

So yes, you have less training and your training does not appear to sufficiently cover the things you are not doing. That is the definition of not qualified.

I'm not confusing the two. I understand the difference.

I never claimed I had experience at a hospital or neuropsychological training. unless, it was a joke and I was being sarcastic.

 

[Justanothergrad]

I'm not confusing the two. I understand the difference.
I never claimed I had experience at a hospital or

My apologies, I assumed you had since you were willing to argue about the validity of assessments in those contexts with psychologists who specialize in behavioral medicine.

or neuropsychological training. unless, it was a joke and I was being sarcastic.

I've had some training in neuropsych.

https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/personality-measure-as-part-of-assessment-battery.1235879/
Anyway. I'm tired of your trolling.

 

[barryggg]

My apologies, I assumed you had since you were willing to argue about the validity of assessments in those contexts with psychologists who specialize in behavioral medicine.




https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/personality-measure-as-part-of-assessment-battery.1235879/
Anyway. I'm tired of your trolling.

Yes..like administering/interpreting the SNST.

 

[psych.meout]

Yes..like administering/interpreting the SNST.

Ok, for what purpose(s) are you administering an using the Stroop? What are the referral questions and how does the Stroop help you answer them? What exactly is your scope of practice?

 

[barryggg]

Ok, for what purpose(s) are you administering an using the Stroop? What are the referral questions and how does the Stroop help you answer them? What exactly is your scope of practice?

You'd have to pay me my hourly fee.

 

[niceman]

http://www.cpa.ca/accreditation/PTlicensingrequirements/
So you happen to be in a province that has the least stringent requirements to become a psychologist.

I'm from a country where two years of education can make you a psychologist, no post-masters supervision required. When I worked with the clinical/school psychologists there, they were lousy at their jobs. That's the reason why I came to the US for the training I think I need to become a competent psychologist. In your words, I think I chose to waste at least 3 years of my life for training I don't need because I would still take courses in psychotherapy and assessment and attend workshops in my home country.

I believe the other posters have been kind enough to point out what you need ideally, but as your provincial psychological college doesn't seem to strive for that, I think it'll be best if you take your questions there so you can receive training that's deemed appropriate in your province. Another ethical thing to do is

I don't see how people in this forum view America as the only gold standard; I see how someone is unwilling to see the benefits of other systems. I can see everyone has ethics here. Just that the levels differ and some have rather low levels that may not even qualify as ethical.

 

[barryggg]

I also don't really like neuropsych as a whole..it's quite boring. But I absolutely LOVE to diagnose neuropsych issues.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I also don't really like neuropsych as a whole..it's quite boring. But I absolutely LOVE to diagnose neuropsych issues.

:troll: