Assessment : 2011 - 2012 : Educational Programs :
Clinical Psychology PhD
5 Goals 5 Objectives 3 Indicators 3 Criteria 3 Findings 5 Actions
|
GOAL: Broad Knowledge Of Psychology
|
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Broad-based Knowledge Of Psychology As A Science
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Comprehensive Examinations And The EPPP
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
Passing Doctoral Comprehensive Examination (either MAP Or DCE) And Passing The EPPP For Licensure
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, two students successfully completed MAPs. For the DCE, 83% (5/6) successfully passed the Research section and 100% (6/6) passed the Clinical portion.
2. According to the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB), 31 of our graduates have taken the EPPP to date and 100% have passed. We are unable to obtain just one year of data from the ASPPB to determine specific strengths and weaknesses for this year. However, the few weaker areas we have been able to identify are not specifically related to clinical practice. Tangentially, we have noticed that some students express less enthusiasm for courses that are not specifically clinical.
|
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|
Broad Based Knowledge Actions
|
|
|
|
|
The student who failed to pass the Research portion of the DCE will be mentored to increase knowledge in the research area and retake the examination in the fall.
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.
Department faculty have determined to raise awareness and appreciation for areas that are not solely clinical in an effort to show the relationship between these areas and clinical practice. Faculty have determined to create a rubric to assess awareness and appreciation for the non-clinical areas.
|
|
GOAL: Ability To Conduct Empirical Research
|
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Students Will Be Able To Evaluate And Conduct Psychological Research
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Preparation Of Research Materials For Publication/Presentation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Students will prepare manuscripts for publication in scientific journals or presentation at national conventions. Acceptance for publication or presentation will be the indicator.
|
| Criterion |
|
|
Research Materials Accepted For Publication Or Presentation
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
Second Year Students Research
|
|
|
|
|
Currently 95% of students second year and beyond who are currently enrolled have at least one publication in a refereed scientific journal or a presentation at a national conference. 66% 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 resesarch experience for our students.
|
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|
Empirical Research Actions
|
|
|
|
|
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 28 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.
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Providing Effective Undergraduate Classroom Instruction
|
|
|
|
|
|
Faculty demonstrate high levels of teaching effectiveness.
|
|
Indicator
|
|
|
Individual Developmental Education Assessment (IDEA)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Students rate the Teaching Assistants using IDEA.
|
| Criterion |
|
|
PhD Students As Teaching Assistants
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
Ph.D. Students As Teaching Assistants
|
|
|
|
|
With respect to doctoral students serving as TAs within the Department, Ph.D. students served as instructors in 8 class sections (7 Introductory and 1 Abnormal) during the 2011-2012 academic year. Criterion for success was based upon scores on the IDEA forms. In the fall, each student had acceptable (gray box or above) scores with respect to Summary Evaluation of his or her course; three of the four students had acceptable scores with respect to Excellent Teacher. Means for the students were 50.0 and 48.0, respectively for the categories. Means for the entire Department faculty were and 51.0 and 49.0, respectively for the categories.
In the spring 2012 semester, each student had acceptable (gray box or above) scores with respect to Summary Evaluation of his or her course; two of the four students had acceptable scores with respect to Excellent Teacher. Means for the students were 48.75 and 47.50, respectively for the categories. Means for the entire Department faculty were and 52.0 and 49.0, respectively for the categories.
Also, in looking at specific items on the student evaluations, it seemed relatively consistent that we should "involve students in more hands-on projects. . . and real-life activities." The scores on this item were not bad, they were just lower that the other items.
|
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|
Ph.D. Students As Teaching Assistants
|
|
|
|
|
The performance of the Ph.D. students serving as TAs was reasonable and was less than one jnd from the Department faculty as a whole. We did have some concern about one particular TA who scored the lowest among the cohort, we identified the problem, and are working with that student to better her scores in the future.
Overall, the continuing and new TAs for the upcoming academic year will be required to attend the College Teaching Conference in August and will be required to meet with the coordinator of the TAs at least bi-weekly during the semester to deal with issues and deal with solutions.
Lastly, during the meetings with the TA faculty facilitator (the Chair in this case), 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.
|
|
GOAL: Effective Clinical Practice
|
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Acquire The Skills And Ability To Practice Clinical Psychology
|
|
|
|
|
|
Students must demonstrate skills in the service delivery in broad and general clinical areas.
|
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|
Effective Clinical Practice Actions
|
|
|
|
|
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. In addition, faculty are surveying other doctoral programs throughout the country to see if there are better/more appropriate instruments that can be adopted for these assessments.
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.
|
|
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).
|
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|
APA Accreditation Actions
|
|
|
|
|
The final accreditation report contained 5 specific questions to be addressed by September 15th. This will be done along with the Annual Report.
Specific questions/issues that are being addressed are:
1) Demonstrate how students are exposed to the current body of knowledge in theories and methods of consultation;
2) Clarify which evaluations and MLAs are clearly related to assessing student competencies while currently in the program;
3) Provide a revised B.2 Table to include the specific courses that are required for each competency and provide aggregate data for students currently in the program that demonstrate achievement of the goals, objectives, and competencies;
4) Provide aggregate data to demonstrate that students are meeting the minimal levels of achievement identified in the revised B.2 Table;
5) Clarify how the data on program alumni are directly aligned with the program’s stated goals and objectives and demonstrate this linkage in a clear format.
|
|
With respect to our students demonstrating a broad and general knowledge of psychology, the data show that we have reached an acceptable level at the present time. However, in an effort to improve that level, we are now offering a number of our basic courses annually rather than biannually to reduce class size and increase individual attention.
Program faculty will seek additional funding to support student research and to ensure that students are able to partake in national conferences.
Teaching effectiveness was listed as reasonable. We do have some clear concerns and are dealing with those either on an individual basis or with changes to the entire system. We expect to improve the process by assessing more closely individual TAs. To this end, we have altered the organization so that the department chair is now charged with supervision of the TAs and the organization of the Introductory Psychology course. He will meet with each TA on a bi-weekly basis, addressing TA concerns and offering solutions to issues brought forth by students in the class. In addition, all TAs will be required to attend the annual College of Humanities and Social Sciences Teaching Conference. The TAs also will hand out mid-term evaluations to their students and address any concerns that may arise from those evaluations.
The APA Commission on Accreditation has recommended specific changes in program websites to assist prospective students in comparing programs We are in the process of rearranging materials and post additional outcome data to increase transparency.
|