SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
| GOAL: Effective Teaching |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Faculty demonstrate high levels of teaching effectiveness. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Students rate the Teaching Assistants using IDEA. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| A summary IDEA score at or above the institution mean is considered to be satisfactory. Consistent with IDEA recommendations, converted averages on IDEA evaluations that are in the gray box (middle 40%) are considered to be "effective teaching." All faculty have students evaluate each of their classes during the Fall and Spring semesters using the IDEA teaching evaluations. The IDEA system focuses on students' perceptions of learning 12 specific objectives, and the system solicits students' feedback on their own learning progress, effort, and motivation, as well as their perceptions of the instructor's use of 20 instructional strategies and teaching methods. In addition, the system surveys instructors regarding their overall goals and highlights for them in the analysis and report. The system adjusts evaluation scores for five areas beyond the instructor's control, such as class size, student motivation, effort and work habits, and disciplinary difficulty. The scores are then compared to national norms. Teaching effectiveness is assessed by: Overall Ratings and the average student agreement with statements that the instructor and class were excellent. |
| Finding |
|
|||
| There were ten sections of Introductory Psychology taught by five doctoral students and one section each of Human Sexuality and Learning taught by one doctoral student during the 2013-2014 academic year. With respect to IDEA forms, on the 5-point scale for the total summary score, the range for the TAs was 3.8-4.6 with a mean of 4.25 for the fall semester and 3.6-4.8 with a mean of 4.13 for the spring semester. In looking at the t-scores for Summary IDEA scores compared with the discipline, teaching ability for the fall semester ranged from 42-57 with a mean of 51.33 and for the spring a range of 33-61 with a mean of 48.83. To an extent, the low means were due to one individual TA. It is unfortunate but she did not do well with respect to her teaching. If we eliminate her score for the fall, the mean goes from 51.33 to 53.2 and for the spring, from 48.83 to 52.00. |
| Action |
|
|||
|
We are happy with the job that was done by the doctoral TAs this past academic year. With a new group of TAs starting in the fall 2014 semester, we will require that they: 1. attend the University Teaching Conference prior to the start of the academic year; 2. meet bi-weekly with the coordinator of Introductory Psychology TAs to discuss issues and problems that arise. Also, TAs will be instructed to use activities in and out of class that show how what is being presented and learned is germane to the lives of the students taking the class. For each topic, we will come up with an assignment in which the materials presented can be used in the students' everyday lives. The faculty member in charge of the TAs will attempt to spend more time with them to try and ferret out any problems and issues before they arise. |
| GOAL: Ability To Conduct Empirical Research |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Students will demonstrate the ability to design, carry out, prepare, and submit for publication to scientific journals or for presentation at scientific paper sessions original research. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
|
Students will prepare manuscripts for publication in scientific journals or presentation at national conventions. Acceptance for publication or presentation will be the indicator. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| At least 50% of the students beyond their first year will have materials accepted for publication or presentation at a national conference. First year students will be engaged actively in research projects sponsored by program faculty. Students will review feedback from journal editors or conference program individuals with their faculty research mentors to determine how to revise the manuscript or presentation proposal to address weaknesses and resubmit. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
Presently, 100% of currently enrolled students second year and beyond have at least one publication in a refereed scientific journal or a presentation at a national conference, from 1998 when 61% had authored publications. 78% of first year students are funded as Research Assistants while all (100%) of the students in the program are actively involved in research projects with program faculty. An area of concern is diversity of research experience for our students. |
| Action |
|
|||
|
Efforts have been successful in funding students who enter the program at the BA/BS level as Research Assistants. A number of program faculty are working with the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs to identify and apply for appropriate funding through various agencies and programs. This past year, 31 students were funded to attend and present their work at the National American Psychology-Law Society convention. In an era of ever tightening budgets, additional efforts will be made to expand available travel funds for student presentations. Additionally, to provide experience with diverse research, we will encourage students to seek mentors outside, as well as inside, the program faculty. Such experiences will provide a wealth of research projects and additional learning. |
| GOAL: Broad Knowledge Of Psychology |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Students will demonstrate a core understanding of the scientific foundation of psychology, including biological, social, developmental, and cognitive/affective bases of behavior, history and systems of psychology, psychological measurement, research methodology, techniques of data analysis, and issues of cultural and individual diversity. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
|
Students will demonstrate a broad-based knowledge of the scientific bases of behavior as measured by: 1. performance in preparing and defending either a Major Area Paper (MAP) or taking/passing Doctoral Comprehensive Examinations (DCEs); 2. performance on an external, standardized examination, the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
1. Students are expected to complete successfully the Major Area Paper (MAP) or Doctoral Comprehensive Exams (DCE). A committee of faculty will determine if a student has done this successfully. Topics for students' MAPs must be pre-approved by the Program Faculty and must cover at least 3 broad areas of psychology. The DCE gives the student 24 hours in which to analyze a clinical case and answer specific questions, as well as review a selected research article. An unsuccessful MAP requires a student to take the DCE. Unsuccessful completion of the DCE requires the student to retake it. The student has one attempt to retake the DCE; a second failure triggers program dismissal. 2. Students are expected to sit for and pass the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). Eighty percent of students who take the EPPP will pass it. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
1. During the past year, 3 students successfully completed a MAP. For the DCE, 100% (2/2) passed the Research portion and 50% (1/2) passed the clinical portion. 2. According to the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB), from 2007 - 2012, 32 of our graduates have taken the EPPP to date and 100% have passed (most recent data available). |
| Action |
|
|||
| Program faculty were quite enthused with the results of the EPPP as we had one of the highest pass rates in the country. If less than 80% of students achieve licensure within 5 years of graduation, intervention would include faculty consultation and planning to address program deficiencies. External consultants (e.g., associated faculty, clinical supervisors, and DCTs from other accredited programs would be consulted as needed). At the present time, 90% of students who are 5 years beyond graduation hold state licenses. |
| GOAL: Effective Clinical Practice |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Students must demonstrate skills in the service delivery in broad and general clinical areas. |
| Action |
|
|||
|
We are assessing each student's clinical competence every semester. The group assessing the students is made up of program faculty chaired by the Director of Clinical Training and includes each person who has supervised the students' work during the semester. We have no control over how many APA-approved internships are available. Yet, we can make sure our students are so well-prepared that they are able to impress internship directors with their skills and competence. |
| GOAL: APA Accreditation |
| Objective |
|
||||
| This program will retain APA accreditation by assembling all paperwork, submitting an annual report, and responding to all questions/requests from APA Committee on Accreditation (CoA). |
| Action |
|
|||
|
In 2014, APA submitted a request for two areas which need a narative response by September 1, 2014. In addition, the usual annual report will be submitted by that time. Specific items for response: 1) The program is asked to clarify how it adequately engages in program self-study and makes necessary progammatic changes based on the data provided, and which specific section(s) of the comprehensive exam are relevant to measuring student competency. 2) Provide additional distal data that demonstrate the program's achievement of its goals and objectives, consistent with Domain F.1(a) of the Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation and Implementing Regulation (IR) C-32. |
| Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement" |
|
| Update on Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement" |
|
1. We revised our annual survey of graduates to include ratings of how well their doctoral training prepared them for conducting psychological assessments providing psychological treatment, conducting forensic assessment, conducting research, evaluating and using research to inform their work, providing clinical supervision Consulting with colleagues/agencies, working in a multicultural environment, and engaging in legal risk management. 2. Our annual survey was modified to increase student input regarding areas of improvement. Our survey asked them to identify strengths and weaknesses of our masters-level courses, doctoral-level courses, research opportunities and mentorship, clinical training and supervision, program administration, and the training program environment. We have added separate items asking for specific suggestions or recommendations related to masters and doctoral course, research mentorship, and clinical training. 3. Two faculty members have secured grants in the past year. Dr. Schmidt received a grant for $19,250.00 from the Hogg Foundation (funded one doctoral student) and Dr. Cramer received a grant for $6,566.00 from the Griffith School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Visiting Scholars Program. 4. This year we reduced our offers of admission from nine to seven, which should enhance research and training opportunities, and will reduce class sizes. 5. Unfortunately, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) has not updated their data regarding Examination of Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) pass rates since 2012. Our program was at 100% at that time. Our annual survey of graduates revealed 100% of respondents (N = 29) who had taken the EPPP had passed the exam. 7. Of our graduates who have pursued postdoctoral fellowships, 73% have trained at sites that have a heavy forensic emphasis. Also, 85% of our graduates are employed in settings with a heavy forensic emphasis. |
| Plan for Continuous Improvement |
|
1. We will continue to seek additional grant funding to enhance our financial position.
2. We will strive to maintain a match rate of 100% for predoctoral internships at APA-accredited sites. 3. Strive to maintain our pass rate of 100% for the Examination of Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP; licensing examination). 4. We strive to maintain a rate of at least 70% with respect to graduates pursuing postdoctoral training and employment in settings with a strong forensic emphasis. |