Accreditation Site Visitor Training Materials As presented at COA Site Visitor Workshops - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 106
About This Presentation

Accreditation Site Visitor Training Materials As presented at COA Site Visitor Workshops


The site visitor's responsibility usually terminates upon ... Site Visitors should communicate with programs only through APA until CoA decision is final. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:238
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 107
Provided by: www272


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Accreditation Site Visitor Training Materials As presented at COA Site Visitor Workshops

Accreditation Site Visitor Training MaterialsAs
presented at COA Site Visitor Workshops
  • This material may serve as a refresher for
    current site visitors, but new site visitors must
    be trained and approved. Contact the
    Accreditation Office for information on upcoming
    workshops and requirements for becoming a site

Accreditation Site Visitor Workshop Learning
  • The workshop will enable participants to
  • Use the Guidelines and Principles for
    Accreditation (GP) to review program structure
    through application of Domains A-H.
    Specifically, participants will be able to
  • -Explain how a program meets accreditation
    eligibility requirements. (Domain A) -Review and
    discuss a programs specified philosophy of
    education and training. (Domain B)
  • -Describe all resources available to the
    program. (Domain C)
  • -Review and discuss how the program addresses
    cultural and individual differences and
    diversity. (Domain D)
  • -Discuss the nature of student-faculty
    relations. (Domain E)
  • -Review and discuss how the program ensures
    self-assessment and quality enhancement.
    (Domain F)
  • -Discuss the quality and sufficiency of all
    public materials representing the program.
    (Domain G)
  • -Discuss the programs relationship with the
    accrediting body. (Domain H)
  • Conduct interviews with training directors,
    department chairs, faculty and staff, interns and
    students, and agency administrators.
  • Review and assess the accuracy and completeness
    of the self-study report in terms of consistency
    with the GP, and determine what additional
    information must be collected during the site
    visit to supplement program materials.
  • Write a site visit report according to the domain
    by domain format in the GP.
  • Discuss potential critical incidents that may
    occur during a site visit.

2007 Committee on Accreditation
  • Graduate Departments of Psychology/ COGDOP (four
  • Clinical Psychology/ CUDCP (two seats)
  • Counseling Psychology/ CCPTP (two seats)
  • School Psychology/ CDSPP (two seats)
  • Schools of Professional Psychology/ NCSPP (two
  • Postdoctoral and Internship Centers/ APPIC (two
  • Professional Practice/ BPA, CAPP (four seats)
  • General Public/(two seats)
  • Graduate Students of Psychology/ APAGS (one seat)

2008 Commission on Accreditation
  • Graduate Departments of Psychology/ COGDOP (four
  • APS/BSA (one seat)
  • BEA/NCSPP (one seat)
  • Clinical Psychology/ CUDCP (two seats)
  • Academy of Clinical Science (one seat)
  • Counseling Psychology/ CCPTP (two seats)
  • School Psychology/ CDSPP (two seats)
  • Schools of Professional Psychology/ NCSPP (two
  • Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (total - 6
  • APPIC (three seats)
  • Internships not specified (2 seats)
  • Postdoctoral residencies not specified (1 seat)
  • Professional Practice/ BPA, CAPP (four seats)

  • Voluntary Internal (Self-Study) and External
    (CoA/Site Visit) Evaluation in order to
  • Protect public interest
  • Improve quality of programs
  • Publicly recognize quality programs
  • Foster innovation in education and training

Scope of Accreditation
  • Doctoral Training Programs in substantive
    professional areas
  • Clinical, Counseling and School
  • Other Developed Practice Areas
  • Combinations of 2 or 3 of the above areas
  • Doctoral Internship Programs in Professional
    Psychology (10, 12, 24 Months)
  • Post-Doctoral Residencies (See Implementing
    Regulation C-11 (a))
  • Traditional Practice Programs
  • Specialty Practice Programs
  • Integrated Practice Programs

Types of Accreditors
  • Regional Accreditors
  • National Accreditors
  • Programmatic Accreditors (Specialized and
    Professional) - CoA is a programmatic Accreditor
    recognized by
  • US Department of Education
  • Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)

Guiding Principles of Accreditation
  • Broad and general preparation for entry level
  • Integration of science and practice
  • Evaluation in light of programs own education
    and training model, providing this model is
    consistent with
  • Principles generally accepted as appropriate to
    the profession
  • The model, mission, goals and objectives of the
    sponsor institution or agency
  • Local, regional and/or national needs and
  • The evolving knowledge base of the area of
    emphasis in professional psychology for which the
    program prepares its students.

Outcome Oriented Evaluation Process
  • The clarity, consistency, and appropriateness of
    institutional or program goals and objectives
  • The quality of education and training outcomes in
    relation to these goals/objectives
  • The ability of a program actually to achieve its
    goals/objectives and
  • The likelihood that such outcomes can be
    consistently maintained.

Overview of the Accreditation Operating
  • Program application for initial/periodic CoA
  • Assignment to a review cycle (for continuing
  • Submission of the Self-Study following provided
    outline and instructions
  • Preliminary review of self-study and feedback to
  • Decision Re Site visit and selection of site
  • Site visit
  • Site visit report and program response
  • CoA Decision

Purposes of Site Visit and Role of the Site
  • A site visit is an assessment of a programs
    quality and its consistency with its stated
  • The site visitors responsibility usually
    terminates upon completion of the report.
    Occasionally the Committee may request
    clarification of some matter prior to making its
    decision. Site Visitors should communicate with
    programs only through APA until CoA decision is
  • It is not the role of the site visitor to provide
    expert consultation regarding program emphases or
    personnel needs or to make prescriptive
    programmatic recommendations.

Site Visitor role continued...
  • Address all aspects of each domain and support
    with data. Maximum benefit is obtained when the
    report adds both specific data to that already
    provided by the self-study and evaluation of the
    less tangible features of a program whose
    variance could not otherwise be captured.
  • The site visitor must maintain objectivity and be
    a neutral observer. The role is sensor not

Key Concepts
  • What is the programs philosophy and model and
    does this fit within the home institution (Domain
  • How does the program link the science and
    practice of professional psychology (Domain B)?
  • How does this model lead to goals, objectives and
    measurable competencies (Domain B)?

Key Concepts continued...
  • How well does the program prepare students to
    achieve those competencies as reflected through
    outcome data (Domain F1.a linkage of Domain B
    with Domain F)?
  • How well does the program prepare students to be
    competent in those areas designated by the GP
    (Domain F1.a)?
  • Does the program have the resources to achieve
    its goals (Domain C)?

Key Concepts continued...
  • Does the program educate and train students to
    become professionals in a diverse and
    multicultural society (Domain D)?
  • How does the program (faculty and students)
    engage in reflective self-examination and
    enhancement (Domain F)?
  • Does the program make sure all of its public
    information is accurate (Domain G)?

Key Concepts continued...
  • How does the program make sure that all students
    are informed of the programs policies and
    procedures (Domains A, E, and G)?

Overview of Accreditation Domains
  • A. Eligibility of Program and Setting
  • B. Program Philosophy, Objectives, Curriculum
  • C. Program Resources
  • D. Cultural and Individual Differences and
  • E. Student-Faculty Relations
  • F. Program Self-Assessment and Quality
  • G. Public Disclosure
  • H. Relationship with Accrediting Body

Domain AEligibilityAs a prerequisite for
accreditation, the programs purpose must be
within the scope of the accrediting body and must
be pursued in an institutional setting
appropriate for the education and training of
professional psychologists.
  • Highlights (Domain A)
  • A1. Program offers doctoral education and
    training in professional psychology including
    preparation for practice.
  • A2. Program sponsored by an institution of higher
    education that is accredited by a nationally
    recognized regional accrediting body in the U.S.
    or is a member in good standing of the
    Association of Universities and Colleges of
  • The APA CoA is currently phasing out
    accreditation of programs in Canada.
  • Continued...

(Domain A)
  • A3. The program
  • Is an integral part of the mission of the
    academic unit in which it resides
  • Is represented in the institutions budget
  • Has sufficient students and necessary facilities
    to ensure meaningful interaction, support, and

(Domain A)
  • A4. The program
  • Requires 3 full-time academic years of graduate
    study (or the equivalent) and completion of an
    internship prior to awarding the doctoral degree
  • At least 2 of the 3 years must be at the
    institution (or the equivalent)
  • At least 1 year must be in full-time residence
    (or the equivalent)

(Domain A)
  • A5. Program engages in actions that indicate
    respect for and understanding of cultural and
    individual diversity as reflected in its
    recruitment and retention policies for faculty
    and students, curriculum and field placements,
    nondiscriminatory policies and operating
    conditions, and avoidance of actions that
    restrict program access on grounds irrelevant to
    success. The definition of diversity includes but
    is not limited to
  • Age
  • Disabilities
  • Ethnicity
  • Gender
  • Gender Identity

(Domain A)
  • Language
  • National origin
  • Race
  • Religion
  • Culture
  • Sexual orientation
  • Social economic status
  • A6. Formal written policies are available
  • Admissions and degree requirements
  • Financial and administrative assistance
  • Student performance evaluation, feedback,
    advisement, retention termination decisions
  • Due process and grievance procedures for students
    and faculty

Domain BProgram Philosophy, Objectives, and
CurriculumThe program has a clearly specified
philosophy of education and training, compatible
with the mission of the sponsor institution, and
appropriate to the science and practice of
psychology. The programs education and training
model and its curriculum plan are consistent with
this philosophy.
  • Highlights (Domain B)
  • B1. Program publicly states a philosophy and
    model of training consistent with the sponsoring
    institutions mission that emphasizes
  • Integration of science and practice
  • Education that is sequential, cumulative, and
    graded in complexity
  • B2. Program specifies objectives in terms of
    competencies expected of graduates consistent
  • Programs philosophy and training model
  • Substantive area of professional psychology that
    is represented
  • An understanding of legal, ethical, and quality
    assurance principles

(Domain B)
  • B3. Program implements a coherent curriculum that
    enables students to demonstrate substantial
    understanding of and competence in the following
    areas (see Implementing Regulation C-16, Broad
    General Preparation for Doctoral Programs)
  • (a) The breadth of scientific psychology
  • Biological aspects
  • Cognitive and affective aspects
  • Social aspects
  • History and systems
  • Psychological measurement
  • Research methodology
  • Techniques of data analysis

C-16. Evaluating Program Adherence to the
Principle of Broad and General Preparation for
Doctoral Programs(Committee on Accreditation,
November 2001)
  • The Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation
    of Programs in Professional Psychology (GP)
    stipulate, in section II, B., 1., that
    preparation at the doctoral level should be broad
    and general. According to the GP, this
    preparation should be based on the existing and
    evolving body of knowledge, skills, and
    competencies that define the declared substantive
    practice area(s) and should be well integrated
    with the broad theoretical and scientific
    foundations of the discipline and field of
    psychology in general.

IR C-16 continued...
  • Accredited programs ensure the competence in
    these content areas including the history of
    thought and development in those fields, the
    research methods, and the applications of the
    research. Demonstrating that the program is
    consistent with the GP in this regard would
    preclude coverage only of
  • a narrow segment of the aspect of the content
    area (such as biological basis of gerontology,
    race relations, preschool learning)
  • the application of these aspects of the content
    area to practice problems or settings (such as
    cognitive therapy group therapy, multicultural

IR C-16 continued...
  • Further, it is expected that the program will
    insure understanding and competence in these
    content areas at the graduate level.
  • It is recognized that there are a variety of ways
    in which programs achieve this component of their
    program requirements, and that there are multiple
    points in the curriculum sequence at which these
    experiences may be placed.

(Domain B)
  • (b) Foundations of practice in the programs
    substantive area including
  • Individual differences
  • Human development
  • Dysfunctional behavior/psychopathology
  • Professional standards and ethics
  • (c) Diagnosing or defining problems through
    assessment and implementing intervention
    strategies (including empirically supported
    procedures) including exposure to the current
    body of knowledge in at least the following
  • Theories and methods of assessment and diagnosis
  • Effective intervention
  • Consultation and supervision
  • Evaluating the efficacy of interventions

(Domain B)
  • (d) Issues of cultural and individual diversity
    relevant to all of the above.
  • (e) Attitudes essential for life-long learning,
    scholarly inquiry, and professional
    problem-solving in the context of an evolving
    body of scientific and professional knowledge.

(Domain B)
  • B4. Program requires adequate and appropriate
    practicum experiences that include
  • a) Placement of students in settings committed to
    training with appropriate and adequate
    supervision that provide a wide range of training
    experiences including empirically supported
  • b) Integration of the practicum component with
    other program elements including provision of
    adequate forums for the discussion of the
    practicum experience
  • c) Appropriate sequencing, duration, nature, and
    content of the practicum experiences consistent
    with the programs goals and objectives
  • d) Justification of the sufficiency of the
    practicum experiences for internship preparation

(Domain B)
  • Note Program is responsible for documenting how
    students achieve knowledge and competence and for
    setting minimal levels of acceptable achievement
    in the above areas (B1-4).

Domain CProgram ResourcesThe program
demonstrates that it has resources of appropriate
quantity and sufficiency to achieve its education
and training goals and objectives.
(Domain C)
  • C1. Program has an identifiable core faculty (see
    Implementing Regulation C-18, Core Faculty)
  • Includes a designated psychologist leader(s) with
    appropriate credentials and experience
  • Who function as an integral part of the academic
  • Sufficient in number for the necessary academic
  • Have theoretical perspectives and
    academic/applied experiences appropriate to the
    programs goals and objectives
  • Demonstrate competence and credentials congruent
    with the programs goals and objectives
  • Are available and function as role models for
  • Note In addition to core faculty, other
    individuals with faculty appointments may augment
    and expand the students educational experiences.

C-18. Core Faculty in Doctoral Programs(Committee
on Accreditation, June 2003 Updated May 2005)
  • To clarify the term core faculty and to
    provide the basis for a fair, reliable, and valid
    measurement process to determine the core faculty
    time available for the program, the following
    guidelines are provided.
  • 1. Core faculty must be consistent with the GP,
    C.1., as quoted above.
  • 2. Core faculty must be composed of individuals
    whose education, training, and/or experience is
    consistent with his/her role in the program in
    light of the substantive area in which the
    program seeks accreditation.

IR C-18 continued...
  • 3. Core faculty must be composed of individuals
    whose primary professional employment (50 or
    more) is at the institution in which the program
    is housed, and to whom the institution has
    demonstrated a multi-year commitment (as
    supported by an examination of the history of
    appointments in the program or by contracts).
  • 4. Core faculty must be identified with the
    program and centrally involved in program
    development, decision-making, and student
    training. Identified with the program means
    that each faculty person is included in public
    and departmental documents as such, views himself
    or herself as core faculty, and is seen as core
    faculty by the students.

IR C-18 continued...
  • 5. At least 50 of core faculty professional
    time must be devoted to program-related
    activities. That means, for example, that a
    faculty person who is 50 at the institution
    would need to have 100 of that time spent as a
    core faculty. (The day per week institutions
    often allow for professional development
    activities such as research, consultation, or
    practice is not intended to be added to or
    subtracted from this calculation. That is, a
    100 core faculty person in an institution with a
    consultation policy should be thought of as a
    100 person, not 125 or 80, regardless of the
    activities done on that day.) A full time
    9-month or 11-month core faculty person are both
    seen as 100. Core faculty activities directly
    related to the doctoral program include
    program-related teaching, research, scholarship,
    and/or professional activities

IR C-18 continued...
  • supervision of students research, students
    dissertations, and students teaching activities
    mentoring students professional development
    providing clinical supervision monitoring of
    student outcomes teaching in a masters program
    that is an integral part of the doctoral program
    and developing, evaluating, and maintaining the
    program. Core faculty activities not directly
    related to the doctoral program and not seen as
    aspects of the core faculty role include
    undergraduate teaching in general and related
    activities teaching and related activities in
    terminal masters or other graduate programs and
    clinical work or independent practice not
    directly associated with training such as at a
    counseling center.

IR C-18 continued...
  • In addition to core faculty, programs may also
    have associated program faculty, contributing
    faculty, and adjunct (visiting, auxiliary, or
    other) faculty.
  • Consistent with the programs model, the
    psychology doctoral program faculty, and in
    particular, the core faculty, needs to be large
    enough to advise and supervise students research
    and practice, conduct research and/or engage in
    scholarly activity, attend to administrative
    duties, serve on institutional or program
    committees, provide a sense of program
    continuity, be assured of appropriate class
    sizes, provide sufficient course offerings to
    meet program goals and objectives, and monitor
    and evaluate practicum facilities, internship
    settings, and student progress.

(Domain C)
  • C2. Program has an identifiable body of students
    at different levels of matriculation who
  • Are sufficient in number for meaningful peer
    interaction and socialization
  • By interest, aptitude, and prior achievement are
    qualified for the program
  • Reflect through their intended careers and
    professional development the programs
    philosophy, goals, and objectives

(Domain C)
  • C3. Program has additional resources needed to
    accomplish its goals and objectives including
  • Financial support for educational and training
  • Clerical and technical support
  • Training materials and equipment
  • Physical facilities
  • Student support services
  • Access to or control over practicum training
    sites appropriate to the programs training
    model, goals, and objectives

(Domain C)
  • C4. If the program is a consortium of multiple
    independent entities then there is a formal
    written consortium agreement that articulates
  • Nature and characteristics of the participating
  • Rationale for the consortial partnership
  • Each partners commitment to the program and its
    philosophy, model, and goals
  • Each partners obligations regarding
    contributions and access to resources
  • Each partners adherence to central control and
    coordination of the training program
  • Each partners commitment to uniform
    administration and implementation of the program
    including student admission, financial support,
    training resource access, performance
    expectations, and student evaluations

Domain DCultural and Individual Differences and
Diversity The program recognizes the importance
of cultural and individual differences and
diversity in the training of psychologists.
These include, but are not limited to, age,
disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity,
language, national origin, race, religion,
culture, sexual orientation, and social economic
(Domain D)
  • D1. The program
  • Has made systematic and long-term efforts to
    attract and retain students and faculty from
    differing ethnic, racial, and personal
    backgrounds (see A.5 for definition of diversity)
  • Ensures a supportive learning environment for
    training diverse individuals who represent a
    broad cultural and individual spectrum
  • Avoids actions that restrict program access on
    grounds irrelevant to success in graduate
    training (see Footnote 4 for exceptions)

Footnote 4
  • This requirement does not exclude programs from
    having a religious affiliation or purpose and
    adopting and applying admission and employment
    policies that directly relate to this affiliation
    or purpose so long as
  • (1) Public notice of these policies has been
    made to applicants, students, faculty, or staff
    before their application or affiliation with the
    program and
  • (2) the policies do not contravene the intent of
    other relevant portions of this document or the
    concept of academic freedom.
  • These policies may provide a preference for
    persons adhering to the religious purpose or
    affiliation of the program, but they shall not be
    used to preclude the admission, hiring, or
    retention of individuals because of the personal
    and demographic characteristics described in
    Domain A (and referred to as cultural and
    individual diversity). This footnote is intended
    to permit religious policies as to admission,
    retention, and employment only to the extent that
    they are protected by the United States
    Constitution. It will be administered as if the
    United States Constitution governed its

(Domain D)
  • D2. Program has a thoughtful and coherent plan to
    provide students with relevant knowledge and
    experiences about the role of individual and
    cultural diversity in psychological science and

Domain EStudent-Faculty RelationsThe program
demonstrates that its education, training, and
socialization experiences are characterized by
mutual respect and courtesy between students and
faculty, and that it operates in a manner that
facilitates educational experiences.
(Domain E)
  • E1. The program
  • Recognizes the rights of students and faculty to
    be treated with courtesy, respect, collegiality,
    and ethical sensitivity
  • Informs students of these principles and of their
    avenues of recourse should issues arise
  • E2. Faculty members are accessible to students,
    provide guidance and supervision that encourages
    timely completion, and serve as role models who
    promote students acquisition of relevant
    knowledge, skills, and competencies.

  • (Domain E)
  • E3. Respect for cultural and individual diversity
    is demonstrated in accordance with the definition
    of cultural and individual diversity in Domain A5.

(Domain E)
  • E4. Upon admission students are given written
    policies and procedures regarding requirements,
    expected performance, program continuance, and
    termination procedures. Students receive, at
    least annually, written feedback on the extent to
    which they are meeting the programs requirements
    and expectations including
  • Timely, written notification of all problems and
    opportunity to discuss them
  • Guidance regarding steps to remediate all
    problems (if remediable)
  • Written feedback on the extent to which
    corrective actions have or have not been
    successful in addressing the issues of concern

(Domain E)
  • E5. Programs keep records of all formal
    complaints and grievances filed since the last
    accreditation site visit and make these available
    as part of the CoAs periodic reviews.
  • Note Programs must adhere to institutional
    regulations and applicable local, state, and
    federal statutes concerning due process and fair

Domain FProgram Self-Assessment and Quality
EnhancementThe program demonstrates a
commitment to excellence through self-study,
which assures that its goals and objectives are
met, enhances the quality of the professional
education and training obtained by its students,
and contributes to the fulfillment of its sponsor
institutions mission.
  • Highlights (Domain F)
  • F1. With appropriate involvement of students, the
    program engages in regular, ongoing self-studies
    that address
  • Its effectiveness in achieving goals and
    objectives in terms of outcome data while
    students are in the program and after completion
  • NOTE F1(a). is particularly important as it
    reflects student achievement in accordance with
    Department of Education and CHEA regulations

(Domain F) F1(a)
  • Consistent with the spirit of the GP, each
    program defines its goals, objectives and
    competencies. To reflect the outcome-oriented
    nature of the process, those competencies
    outlined in Domain B should be linked to
  • Aggregate outcome data on student competencies
    while in the program and
  • Aggregate outcome data gathered from program
  • Thus, for each competency stated in Domain B,
    there should be some aggregate data on student
    success with that competency.

(Domain F.1)
  • How its goals and objectives are met through the
    programs educational and training processes
  • Its procedures to maintain current achievements
    or to make program changes as necessary

(Domain F)
  • F2. Program periodically and systematically
    reviews its goals and objectives, training model,
    and curriculum, and related outcome data relative
  • Sponsoring institutions mission and goals
  • Local, state, regional, and national needs for
    psychological services
  • National standards of professional practice
  • Evolving body of scientific and professional
  • Graduates job placements and career paths

Domain GPublic Disclosure
  • The program demonstrates its commitment to public
    disclosure by providing written materials and
    other communications that appropriately represent
    it to the relevant publics.

(Domain G)
  • G1. Program describes itself accurately and
    completely in documents available to current and
    prospective students and other publics
  • Descriptions of the program should include
  • Goals, objectives, and training model
  • Requirements for admission and graduation
  • Curriculum
  • Faculty, students, facilities, and other
  • Administrative policies and procedures
  • The kinds of research and practicum experiences
    it provides
  • Its education and training outcomes
  • Accreditation status including name, address, and
    telephone number of the CoA is included

(Domain G)
  • G2. Information is presented in a manner that
    allows applicants to make informed decisions
    about entering the program.
  • (See Implementing regulation C-20)

IR C-20 General Outcomes
  • In all public information, programs should
    include education and training outcomes as well
    as information that will allow applicants to make
    informed and comparative decisions. The Committee
    believes that all doctoral programs should
    therefore minimally provide the following
    information regarding education and training
    outcomes and accurate program descriptions to
    potential students in its public documents
    including its website, if it has one As of
    January 1, 2007 - time to program completion
    costs (tuition and fees) internship acceptance
    rates fellowships and other funding available
    student attrition rates and, beginning January
    1, 2008 licensure outcomes. These are further
    defined below
  • 1. Time To Completion
  • In their public materials, programs should
    provide the mean and the median number of years
    that students have taken to complete the program
    from the time of program entrance. These data
    should be provided for all graduates over the
    past seven years. Where applicable, these
    measures should be provided separately for
    students who began the program as bachelor level
    graduates and those who began with advanced
    standing (e.g., after having completed a separate
    master's program in psychology). The program
    should also provide the percentage of students
    completing the program in fewer than five years,
    five years, six years, seven years, and more than
    seven years.
  • 2. Program Costs
  • Programs are expected to make available the
    costs (i.e., tuition and fees) per student for
    the current first year cohort. This information
    should include full time student tuition, tuition
    per credit hour for part time students, and any
    fees assessed to students beyond tuition costs.
    Programs may also provide information regarding
    current adjustments to tuition including, but not
    limited to financial aid, grants, loans, tuition
    remission, assistantships, and fellowships.

IR C-20 continued...
  • 3. Internships
  • Programs are expected to provide data for at
    least the most recent seven years of graduates
    showing their success in obtaining internships.
    These data should show the number and percentage
    of students in the following categories
  • Those who obtained internships
  • Those who obtained paid internships
  • Those who obtained APPlC member internships
  • Those who obtained APA/CPA accredited internships
  • Those who obtained internships conforming to
    CDSPP guidelines (school psychology only)
  • Those who obtained two year half-time internships
  • NOTE In calculating the percentages, the
    program must use the total number of students
    applying for internship that year.
  • 4. Attrition
  • Programs are expected to report the number and
    percentage of students who have failed to
    complete the program once matriculated. These
    data should be calculated by dividing the number
    of matriculated students who have left the
    program for any reason by the total number of
    students matriculated in the program. These data
    should be provided for all students who have left
    the program in the last seven years or for all
    students who have left since the program became
    initially accredited, whichever time period is

IR C-20 continued...
  • 5. Licensure
  • This section EFFECTIVE January 1, 2008 and for
    published materials for 2008-2009
  • Reporting of program licensure data is an
    expectation of the US Secretary of Educations
    National Advisory Committee on Institutional
    Quality and Integrity for program accreditors,
    including the APA Committee on Accreditation.
    Programs are expected to report the number and
    percentage of program graduates who have become
    licensed psychologists within the preceding
    decade. This percentage should be calculated by
    dividing the number of students who have both
    graduated and become licensed psychologists
    within the 8 years spanning the period of 2-10
    years post-graduation by the number of doctoral
    degrees awarded by the program over that same
    period. That is, the figures reported by a
    program for 2007 would be number of students who
    graduated from the program during the period
    1997-2005 and who have achieved licensure divided
    by the number of students graduating from the
    program during that same 8-year period. Program
    licensure rates are to be updated at least every
    three years.
  • Programs may interpret their licensure rate in
    light of their training model and program goals
    and objectives.

Domain HRelationship with Accrediting BodyThe
program demonstrates its commitment to the
accreditation process by fulfilling its
responsibilities to the accrediting body from
which its accredited status is granted.
(Domain H)
  • H1. Program abides by the CoAs published
    policies and procedures.
  • H2. Program informs the CoA in a timely manner of
    changes in its environment, plans, resources, and
    operations that could affect program quality (see
    Implementing Regulation C-19, Notification of
    Changes to Accredited Programs).
  • H3. Program pays necessary fees to maintain
    accredited status.

C-19. Notification of changes to accredited
programs(Committee on Accreditation, February
2005 revised October 2006 )
  • In accordance with Domain H.2 of the Guidelines
    and Principles and Section 4.7(b) of the
    Accreditation Operating Procedures, all
    accredited programs (doctoral, internship and
    postdoctoral residencies) whether under a single
    administrative entity or in a consortium, must
    inform the accrediting body in a timely manner of
    changes that could alter the program's quality.
  • The Committee on Accreditation must be informed
    in advance of major program changes such as
    changes in model, degree offered,
    policies/procedures, administrative structure,
    faculty resources, supervision resources, area of
    emphases, or tracks/rotations. In the case of
    doctoral programs, this includes changes in the
    areas of emphasis. For internship/postdoctoral
    programs, this includes new, additional, or
    eliminated rotation or training sites. For
    example, consortium programs must inform the CoA
    of any substantial changes in structure, design
    or training sites.

IR C-19 Continued...
  • Programs must submit a detailed description of
    the proposed change(s) and the potential impact
    upon the relevant accreditation domains. The CoA
    will review the program change(s) and may request
    additional information or a new self -study. In
    the case of a substantive change (such as a
    change in consortium membership), the committee
    may also determine that a site visit is needed to
    assess whether the revised program is consistent
    with the GP. Upon completion of this review,
    the committee will note the proposed change and
    include the information in the next scheduled
    review or inform the program of any needed
    immediate additional actions.

IR C-19 continued...
The only exception to the policy of informing the
Committee in advance is the occurrence of an
unavoidable event beyond the reasonable control
and anticipation of the program (e.g.,
educational/training site unexpectedly
withdrawing from a consortium because of
financial crisis). In such circumstances, it is
incumbent upon the program to immediately inform
the CoA in writing of the change and to include
in its notification a proposed plan for
maintaining program consistency with the GP.
The committee will then proceed as
above. Consultation on program changes is
available from the Office of Program Consultation
and Accreditation.

Preparation by Members of the Site Visit Team
  • When contacted by a program to schedule a visit,
    assure you have adequate time in your calendar to
    complete the entire site visit, including the
    report. Keep in mind the visit itself lasts two
  • Review conflict of interest policy to assure none
    exists regarding the program to be visited.
  • The Chair of the visiting team should coordinate
    the teams schedule, travel plans, and local
    arrangements with the program.
  • Prior to the visit, review the current GP , CoA
    procedures, and Implementing Regulations so you
    can represent them faithfully and avoid
    idiosyncratic interpretations.
  • Continued...

  • Review the programs Self-Study report in detail
    and plan questions/areas of concern.
  • Review the inquiry sent to the program by CoA
    following their review of the Self-Study to
    further refine your site visit focus.
  • All communication should be treated as
    confidential and transmitted only by means that
    are secure.
  • Prior to the visit, each visitor should review
    the HIPAA and State Privacy Laws and sign the
    Site Visitor Confidentiality Agreement

Avoid Conflict of Interest
  • Avoid even the appearance of a conflict of
    interest with the program. The responsibility to
    determine any possible conflict, actual or
    apparent, lies equally with the program and the
    site visitors. Examples of possible conflicts of
    interest are
  • Former employment at the program
  • Having been a former student at the program
  • Family connection with the program
  • Having an old friend at the program
  • Having a former classmate on staff at the
  • Having a close professional acquaintance with a
    member of the staff at the program and
  • Having a former student at the program.

Conduct of Site Visit
  • Pre-Site Visit Planning Session
  • Team meets the evening before the visit begins
  • share impressions of the program
  • review CoA concerns or additional information
  • plan the teams division of work
  • review the planned schedule and
  • make initial plans for the site visit report.
  • Continued...

  • First-Day Meeting for Site Visit Team
  • Schedule a meeting mid-to-late-day to review and
    discuss the following
  • the data gathered
  • initial impressions
  • changes required for the next days schedule
  • substantive areas yet to be addressed
  • plans for conducting the closing conference and
  • the timetable for writing the site visit report.

Decorum of Visit
  • Visitors are expected to give full and objective
    attention to the work of the visit during their
    time with the program and institution.
  • Be prompt for meetings and interviews and remain
    for the entire visit. Departure may not be
    scheduled prior to the final close of business.
  • Socializing with program staff or students must
    be avoided.
  • Visitors must limit personal free time and be
    available for all meetings.
  • All program material is to be treated as

  • Do not give the impression that a decision has
    been reached, offer solutions to problems or
    program concerns, or imply criticism of the
  • Members of the team are not to give the
    impression that any interview is pro-forma.
  • Be particularly sensitive to the potential for
    conflicting demands placed upon students during
    the visit.

  • When conducting interviews, remember that the
    site visitor must maintain objectivity and be a
    neutral observer. Please avoid
  • Providing expert consultation regarding program
    emphases or personnel needs or making
    prescriptive programmatic recommendations.
  • Being seen as an advocate for change.

Interviews with the Training Director/Departmental
  • When meeting with the training director, the team
    should seek information about
  • an overview of the program
  • unique characteristics of program as related to
    the GP and program model
  • opportunities for program enhancement as related
    to the GP and program model
  • long-range plans for the program
  • faculty and student morale
  • clarification of the programs training model
  • the method of faculty decision making
  • the method of delegation of responsibility
  • matters unique to this program and
  • matters unique to the training directors role.

  • When meeting with the Department Chair, the team
    should seek information about the following
  • how the program fits within the overall
  • adequacy of resources provided to the program
  • department investment in the program
  • morale of faculty and students
  • the administration stance toward the program
  • the method of department decision making
  • the commitment to cultural/individual diversity
  • the policies to promote professional/academic
    growth of the faculty.

Interviews with University Administrator
  • When conducting an interview with
    university/agency administrators the team should
    seek information about
  • the place of the program in the institutions
    master plan
  • financial resources and problems
  • the programs contribution to the mission of the
    institution and
  • planned changes, if any, for the program.

Interviews with Faculty
  • Site visitor should obtain information about the
    following from each member of the programs
  • the persons role in the program
  • teaching load, courses taught and clinical
  • clinical supervisory load
  • involvement in dissertation committees
  • unique characteristics of program as related to
    the GP and program model
  • opportunities for program enhancement as related
    to the GP and program model
  • view of administrative leadership
  • Continued...

  • research productivity, as appropriate to the
    program model
  • morale and satisfaction with position
  • tenure/promotion issues
  • program decision making
  • questions unique to that persons vita
  • their understanding of the programs model,
    processes and outcomes and
  • involvement in the self-study process.

Interviews with Students
  • When meeting with students the site visitor
  • Acquaint students with the purposes and
    procedures of the site visit
  • Assure students of anonymity
  • Discuss students understanding of the programs
    goals, processes, and outcomes and
  • Be sensitive to the conflict students may have
    about the accreditation process.
  • Continued...

  • Seek student perceptions of the following
  • program strengths and weaknesses
  • morale and dignity
  • student familiarity with professional and ethical
  • general satisfaction with the program
  • opportunity for student interaction
  • availability of faculty/staff
  • program decision making and student input
  • discrimination and sexual harassment issues

  • faculty support for research, as appropriate to
    the programs model
  • financial support
  • finding a mentor
  • integration of practicum experiences
  • preparation for the internship and/or entry into
    profession and
  • what they would change about the program?

Interviews and Domains

(No Transcript)
Closing Conference
  • When conducting the closing conference, the site
    visit team should
  • present the unique characteristics of program and
    the opportunities for program enhancement
  • request any correction of facts and
  • request program interpretations of the data

Site Visit Report
  • Preparation of the site visit report should
    consider the following
  • Agree upon an outline of the report, respective
    writing assignments and date for submission to
    APA (i.e., must be within 30 days of the site
  • Follow the principles outlined in the Quick
    Reference Guide for doctoral programs so that the
    report addresses each item of the Guidelines and
  • Chair is responsible for the final report all
    members of the team should develop and have a
    copy of the reports outline.

  • Preferred reports are concise and comprehensive
    and convey the observations and elaboration of
    the site visit team regarding the extent to which
    the program is consistent with the provisions of
    the domains of the GP.
  • Do not evaluate - cite observations, information,
    and statements that explain or clarify,
    consistent with the GP and program model - Be a
    sensor rather than a censor.
  • No further interaction with the program except
    through APA office until CoA decision is final.

What would you do?
  • Quiz yourself with these potential uncomfortable

1. Sexual Harassment
  • In a meeting with the graduate students late on
    the first day of the site visit, the team gleaned
    that there may be a sexual harassment problem in
    the program. One of the advanced graduate
    students alludes to inequities in practicum
    assignments. When queried, she suggests that the
    individual making the assignments is partial to
    certain female students and when pressed, admits
    that these women are both attractive and tolerant
    of suggestive language and touching that makes
    her uncomfortable. When comments from the other
    students are solicited, their discomfort and
    silence are telling. Given the clarity of the
    grievance procedures endorsed by the University
    and the program, the team is confronted with
    discerning whether or not students feel empowered
    to use them.
  • What would you do?

2. Impaired Faculty
  • During the course of the first day of the visit,
    it becomes apparent that one of the faculty
    members who teaches a core graduate course is not
    doing an adequate job. Her syllabus is complete
    but the students report that she never covers the
    majority of topics about which they are assigned
    readings. When they express concerns that she is
    falling further behind schedule with each class,
    she upbraids them for focusing on learning to
    tests. Yet, she insists on sticking to the
    examination dates specified on the syllabus and
    is angry with the students for their poor exam
    performance. She chastises them publicly for
    their inability to master complex materials
    without her explanation, and her anger with her
    classes verges on verbal abuse. The students are
    clearly afraid of her and express concern about
    their inadequate preparation in the substantive
    area she teaches. The DCT and chair both report
    that their efforts to get her to address the
    students concerns are met with unbridled fury
    but they have no one else on the faculty
    available to teach this critical course. When
    she is not enraged, her demeanor is sluggish and
    her affect flat.
  • What do you do?

3. Anonymous Communications
  • A. You are chairing a site visit to the clinical
    doctoral program at Podunk State. The night
    before the visit you get a phone call at the
    hotel. The caller says he is a former faculty
    member in the program but does not wish to be
    identified by name. He states that he resigned
    from the program because of serious exploitation
    of students by other members of the faculty.
    Students are alleged to be serving without pay to
    generate fees in the private practices of these
    faculty and are, in one instance, serving as
    unpaid research assistants whose contributions to
    faculty research and publications are never
    acknowledged. The caller says that he tried to
    call attention to these abuses, but the
    Department Chair and the Dean did not want to
    hear about them and the DCT was one of the chief
    offenders. He does not wish to be identified
    since he fears reprisals. He depends on
    referrals from members of the department to
    sustain his practice.
  • How should you respond to this communication?

  • B. Right after leaving the internship site visit
    you receive a letter. The writer identifies
    herself as a recent former intern but does not
    wish to give her name. She states that she still
    needs recommendations from the internship. She
    describes a situation in which interns were
    compelled to generate large numbers of billable
    hours from patients and that their performance
    ratings were based in large part on the number of
    paid hours. The time spent in direct clinical
    service put the interns work week well beyond 40
    hours and was at the expense of training
    activities and time for paper work. Supervision
    time was not commensurate with the number of
    clinical hours. The writer reports that her
    attempts to protest this situation were
    ineffective and other interns were reluctant to
    protest for fear of jeopardizing evaluations.
  • How should you respond to this letter?

4. Inappropriate Site Visitor Behavior
  • A. In the course of the site visit, you become
    aware that another member of the team seems to
    have a close acquaintance with one of the program
    faculty. Upon inquiring, you discover that they
    were colleagues and close friends at another
    program. Later you are aware that they are
    spending a lot of time in private conversation
    and arrange to meet socially at the end of the
    visit. In conferences among site team members,
    this visitor expresses opinions about aspects of
    the program that seem quite at variance with the
    rest of the teams observations. He is quite
    insistent that his opinions be included in the
    final report.
  • How should you respond?

  • B. At the conference among the site visit team
    members the evening before the site visit ends,
    Dr. Paltry announces that he will need to leave
    to catch a plane at 1100 the following morning.
    It is a large and complex program and the
    schedule calls for a full two days of visit. Dr.
    P. insists that he must leave at that time. He
    has a site visit coming up on a grant submission
    and he also has family obligations. He cannot be
    dissuaded from his plans and leaves on the second
    morning, missing the interview with the students,
    the visit to the department clinic and the exit
  • What is the responsibility of the other visitors?

5. Conflicts of interest discovered at the last
  • A. You have agreed to be a site visitor to
    Program X. A visit has been scheduled and travel
    arrangements have been made. As you prepare for
    the visit, while reading the self-study
    materials, you discover that the newly appointed
    Director of Clinical Training is a former student
    of yours.
  • What do you do?
  • B. This is your first site visit. Your chair is
    a seasoned site visitor. During your first
    meeting, which is with the DCT, the Chair of your
    team in his opening remarks indicates that he is
    a long-time graduate of the program. He then
    goes on to talk about what it was like in the
    program when he was a student.
  • What do you do with this information, and how do
    you handle the interview?

6. Faculty who denigrate the program
  • You have been given the responsibility for
    interviewing significant members of the core
    faculty. You are spending some time with Dr.
    Jones who teaches assessment. Dr. Jones tells
    you that he has been passed over for a promotion,
    that the program does not value its professional
    faculty, and that in a recent faculty meeting,
    the DCT tried to prepare for the site visit by
    laying out a list of problems and instructing the
    others present that under no circumstances were
    faculty members to mention any of these topics to
    the site visitors. All who attended were to say
    only what had been agreed upon.
  • What do you do with this information, and how do
    you handle the interview?

7. Collusive relationships between the site
visitors and the program
  • You are a member of a site visit team visiting
    Program B. As you meet with the different
    constituents of the program it becomes apparent
    that there are clearly different agendas. There
    is a clear split in the facultys perspective of
    the direction in which the program should go.
    One faction is clearly supportive of the DCT and
    the direction of the program. The other faction,
    which is highly vocal and persuasive in its
    argument begins to win over members of our team.
    When the team meets for its discussion, you
    observe that your colleagues, in the language of
    the vocal faculty, are making the same arguments
    they have put forth. You now find yourself a
    minority of one.
  • What do you do?

8. Dismissed (and disgruntled) faculty and
  • You are visiting a counseling program. The chair
    of the visiting team has been sent a letter from
    a former student of the program two days before
    the visit. In the letter, the student has
    written that he has been terminated from the
    program. He stated that his termination was a
    result of his voicing unpopular opinions in class
    and rampant homophobia among the faculty and
    students alike. With his request to be heard, he
    has enclosed two glowing letters about his
    capabilities from an adjunct faculty member and
    from a practicum supervisor. The team
    chairperson has asked you to spend some time with
    the student who, when you see him, makes
    allegations about a lack of any real evaluation
    criteria in student evaluations.
  • What do you do with this information, and how do
    you handle the interview?

9. Site Visitor Advocacy
  • A. During your meeting with the training
    director of an internship program, this
    individual tells the site visit team that the
    higher administration is considering cutting the
    support for the program. Th
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)