Tag Archives: Professional Development

Deadline Extended to Join APAGS Leadership!

You could be here! Pictured are members of the 2014-2015 APAGS Committee, and staff liaisons.

Great news: Are you interested in joining APAGS leadership? The APAGS Committee is still accepting applications for a Member-at-Large position. This position would focus on a number of issues affecting APAGS members, and in particular serve as the point person for Membership Recruitment and Retention issues.

Timeline: If you apply and get slated for this position, you’ll run an election during the month of April by trying to get the online vote of fellow APAGS members. Your term of service would begin this August and you’d serve for two years, through August 2018. You must be in school through at least Spring 2017 to be eligible.

Next steps: For information on eligibility and application materials, please go to our website. All applications must be submitted to apags@apa.org by 11:59PM EST on 2/15/16.

Graduate Students Have Rights. APAGS Just Spelled Them Out.

What rights should psychology graduate students expect no matter where or what they study? (Image source: Julia Manzerova on Flickr. Some rights reserved.)

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard a graduate student in psychology discuss aspects of their training or education that seemed inequitable, I could pay back all my loans.

Too often in graduate school, students come across situations in which they believe their rights have been infringed upon in some way. When this occurs, many students feel at a loss for how to advocate for themselves and what they can or should be able to reasonably advocate for. The result for many students is dissatisfaction, frustration, and occasionally leaving a training program or experience.

The APAGS Committee has honed in on this student concern over the past year and opted to move forward with creating a student “bill of rights.” This was a very detailed process that included a literature review of various student right documents from across the world, drafting lists of rights based on this literature and our own experiences, and completing many revisions with input from APAGS leaders and many outside resources.

At long last, the APAGS Committee voted in December to approve a document titled, “Position Statement on the Rights of Psychology Graduate Students.” The Committee is planning to distribute these rights across various platforms and to a variety of constituents. The Committee is even considering bringing the document to APA’s Council of Representatives for consideration as an official policy document! That’s a huge step, and we will keep you posted.

In the meantime, we hope that students, programs, and other interested parties can use this document to their benefit. Use it to advocate for your own rights and thereby create a program or training experience of the highest caliber. If you have other ideas and reactions, we would love to hear from you. Leave a comment below!

Here now is the text of our position statement, which is also available on our website.

Position Statement on the Rights of Psychology Graduate Students

Preamble

The American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS) deems the rights described in this document to be indispensable to the fair, equitable and respectful treatment of every psychology graduate student throughout their education and training. The protection of these rights fosters the highest quality graduate training experience. APAGS considers these rights essential, not aspirational, and we urge graduate programs to implement these rights in their unique settings and training environments. We encourage current and prospective students to utilize these rights in making informed graduate program selections and in advocating for themselves as issues arise.

1. Institutional Environment

1.1 Right to respectful treatment by faculty members, colleagues, staff, and peers.

1.2 Right to have professional and personal information handled in a sensitive and respectful manner such that personal information is only disclosed when it is deemed necessary for educational or training purposes, and that students are informed prior to any such disclosure (See Ethical Standard 7.04).

1.3 Right to affordable insurance inclusive of health, vision, dental, and mental health care coverage.

2. Program Policies

2.1 Right to publicly available, accurate, and up-to-date descriptions of costs, the availability of financial support, and the likelihood of ongoing support throughout training (e.g., percent of students with full and partial financial support during year one, year two, etc.; available funding options), to be provided prior to or immediately following the program’s interviews for prospective students (See Ethical Standard 7.02).

2.2 Right to accurate and up-to-date information from research advisors and thesis/dissertation committee members on professional factors that could impact student training, career development, and timely program completion.

2.3 Right to access and exercise formal written policies regarding leave and accommodations as they pertain to pregnancy, parenting/caregiving, bereavement, medical or mental illness, and disability.

2.4 Right to access and exercise formal written policies and procedures regarding academic and placement/internship requirements, administrative procedures, evaluation, advisement, retention, average “time to degree,” and termination (See Ethical Standard 7.02).

2.5 Right to express opinions and have representation on campus committees relevant to professional development, with voting privileges where appropriate.

2.6 Right to exemption from new graduation or program requirements, developed after admission, that might result in a delay of graduation.

3. Professional and Educational Training Opportunities

3.1 Right to appropriate professional training (e.g., teaching, research, clinical practice) in the current standards and practices of the discipline and specialty area (See Ethical Standard 7.01).

3.2 Right to be evaluated by faculty consistent with current ethical practices in employment, progression through the program, and grading, solely on the basis of academic performance, professional qualifications, and/or conduct (See Ethical Standard 7.06).

3.3 Right to quality mentorship.

3.4 Right to change advisors and committee members for professional and personal needs.

3.5 Right to receive timely, ongoing feedback on all areas of trainee competency and the opportunity to address growth areas with support from faculty.

3.6 Right to co-authorship in publications when the student has made significant contributions of ideas or research work (See Ethical Standards 8.11 and 8.12 a-c).

3.7 Right to freely communicate and collaborate with other academic colleagues.

3.8 Right to lead, assemble, and participate in organizations and activities outside the academic program.

3.9 Right to engage in self care as a routine practice throughout training (See Ethical Standards 3.05 and 3.06).

4. Work Environment

4.1 Right to fair compensation for services provided during training (e.g., graduate, teaching, and research assistantships).

4.2 Right for students providing services during training (e.g., teaching, research, clinical, and administrative graduate assistantships) to enjoy the recognitions, rights, privileges, and protections afforded to employees under state, provincial, territorial, and national labor laws.

4.3 Right to study and work in an environment free of exploitation, intimidation, harassment, or discrimination based on one’s student status, race, ethnicity, skin color, national origin, religion, political beliefs, economic status, age, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, pregnancy or parental status, disability, medical or mental health conditions, ancestry, citizenship, military veteran status, or any other identity salient to the individual in admissions and throughout education, employment, and placement (See Principle E and Ethical Standards 3.01, 3.02, 3.03, 3.08).

4.4 Right to work under clearly expressed and mutually agreed-upon job descriptions and work or training conditions.

4.5 Right to perform only those tasks that relate to academic program requirements, professional development, and/or job duties.

4.6 Right to provide constructive and professional feedback to supervisors, directors, administrators, and staff concerning the quality and content of supervision

5. Appeals and Grievances

5.1 Right to clearly defined official grievance procedures and informal complaint procedures.

5.2 Right to whistleblower protection for exposing professional, ethical, or legal violations (See Ethical Standard 1.08).

5.3 Right to due process for any accusation of violation or infraction.

5.4 Right to be free of reprisals for exercising the rights contained in this document (See Ethical Standard 1.08).

A Few Good Reasons Why the Internship Crisis Might Get (Slightly) Better

Internship is stressful, so let us bask in some good news for a moment.

For the past 18 years, APPIC has produced forward-looking best-case scenarios about the internship match for doctoral students in clinical, counseling, and school psychology using a point-in-time profile of applicants, doctoral internship sites, and open spots on New Year’s Eve.

APPIC predicts that the imbalance between the number of applicants and positions — what APAGS and others call a crisis — will continue to improve, as it has in 2015 and 2014.

Here is what APPIC shared recently* with the psychology education and training community:

There are currently only 148 more registered applicants than available positions (compared to a difference of 498 last year and 1,148 only four years ago)
Approximately 200 students withdraw from the Match each year after registering (for a variety of reasons, such as not having received any interview offers, deciding to delay their internship another year, seeking or obtaining a position outside the APPIC Match, etc). This suggests that the number of positions in the 2016 Match could equal, or even slightly exceed, the number of students who submit a Rank Order List. “Please note, however, that this does not mean that all applicants will get placed, nor will all positions get filled.”
As a result, the 2016 APPIC Match will likely show the closest balance between applicants and positions of any APPIC Match to date.
The number of accredited positions, while significantly improved this year, is far lower than the number of registered applicants. (APAGS reported on match rates using just data from the APA Commission on Accreditation on match day 2015).

APPIC reminds us that it has provided a snapshot as of December 31, 2015, and that numbers change each day.**

APPIC’s optimism is corroborated by Robert Hatcher’s new article in APPIC’s academic journal. Hatcher predicts that “even if the internship growth rate slowed to less than 1%, match rates would be in the mid-90% range by 2018” (2015). The article does paint some complications that we’ll be paying attention to.

Crave even more good news this week? APA just announced that “psychology graduate students now have access to 55 new APA-accredited internship slots, thanks to the accreditation of 11 internship programs that received funds from APA’s internship stimulus package. The new slots were created after APA’s Commission on Accreditation was able to accredit 17 internship programs in October. Eleven of those programs were internship stimulus grantees and the additional six programs will also provide a number of internship slots, but those numbers are not yet available.”

APAGS is well aware that while we have some optimistic news before us, not all qualified doctoral students who desire an internship will receive one, and not all doctoral programs and types are matching their students to accredited programs at comparable rates. APAGS has committed substantial resources to address these concerns, and we’ll continue to see that other groups do the same, until the crisis is effectively ended.

If you want to help address the internship crisis as an advocate, go to http://on.apa.org/internshipcrisis to learn how.

Notes:

*All APPIC information presented here, and much of the verbiage, was provided by APPIC in listserv announcements in January 2016.

**For numbers wonks: As of December 31, 2015, the total numbers of applicants and internship sites registered to participate in the 2016 APPIC Match were: 3,940 registered applicants, 3,792 positions offered by 786 registered internship sites (744 of these registered sites are APPIC members). Compared to last year at this time, these numbers reflect a decrease of 223 applicants, an increase of 127 positions, and an increase of 14 internship sites. Furthermore, the number of APA- and CPA-accredited positions has increased by 231. Compared to four years ago at this time, which was the year of the worst imbalance between applicants and positions: The number of registered applicants has decreased by 418 (4,358 to 3,940); The number of registered positions has increased by 582 (3,210 to 3,792); The difference between the numbers of registered positions and applicants has decreased by 1,000 (1,148 to 148); The number of registered APA- or CPA-accredited positions has increased by 590 (2,366 to 2,956); The number of registered internship sites has increased by 74 (712 to 786); The number of registered APPIC-member internship sites has increased by 77 (667 to 744).

Integrated Healthcare and the Current State of Affairs

Experts from around the world met in November 2015, in Washington, D.C., to participate in a 2 ½-day summit, “Global Approaches to Integrated Health Care: Translating Science and Best Practices into Patient-Centered Healthcare Delivery”.

Approximately 85 psychologists, physicians, public health workers and policy analysts met in person for the interdisciplinary summit as well as more than 400 virtual attendees from around the world, who viewed the proceedings via a live video simulcast. Two APAGS representatives, Justin Karr and Jerrold Yeo, attended the summit and provide their impressions and thoughts on this experience below.

Justin Karr

Dr. Tor Levin Hofgaard, the President of the Norwegian Psychological Association, spoke at the Summit and clarified a famous statement that he once made, in which he claimed that, “we should have psychologists at IKEA.” He meant that psychologist should be located where people are already going, decreasing stigma around mental health care and increasing the normality of seeing your psychologist. Integrated healthcare bears a special importance for health service psychologists, as we aim to collaborate with other medical professions by incorporating mental and behavioral health services into primary care. Ideally, psychological services can become as commonplace and de-stigmatized as a standard medical check-up, where people have a professional attend to their mental health within the same setting where they receive other medical services.

As a student, I saw the Summit as both awe-inspiring and daunting. The evidence promoting an integrated healthcare model is astounding. With cost-savings, improved health outcomes, and even higher clinician satisfaction ratings, there is an overwhelming amount of published research supporting the implementation of integrated healthcare. During a working group session of the Summit, one presenter actually stated, “We don’t need any more research,” clarifying that there is more than enough research to support moving forward with implementation. However, many barriers stand in the way of actualizing more widespread integrated services, including many changes that need to occur in funding structures, healthcare policies, current practices and educational standards.

Although the barriers are significant, the Summit left me with great optimism, as leaders across fields and occupational sectors came together to help make integrated healthcare a more common reality for the patients we serve. Dr. Arthur C. Evans, the Commissioner of Philadelphia’s Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Service (DBHIDS), shared one of his favorite sayings at the Summit, “Inherent in every community is the wisdom to solve its own problems.” As a community psychologist, he quoted this statement during a panel on special populations, emphasizing the involvement of local community members in the policy-making that directly affects their lives; however, I feel it also applies to our community as healthcare professionals. As Health Service Psychologists, we are members of the healthcare community, and with our colleagues across disciplines, we possess the wisdom to actualize integrated health care and support the well-being of the patients and clients that benefit from our services.

I look forward to seeing the continued integration of healthcare in my remaining time as a student, and over the course of my life as a psychologist. However, I do not see myself as merely an observer, but as a part of this change. As students, we will inherit many of the impending reforms coming to our clinical practice, and we must ensure that we voice both our support and concerns as these changes will surely impact our training and careers. Students must be actively engaged in the decision-making that determines training standards; not only during our graduate education, but also throughout our careers.

One discussion at the Summit emphasized the need to change patient expectations, where healthcare consumers expect access to integrated services every time they enter into a primary care facility. In the same light, we as students must expect effective training in collaborative practice that operates across disciplines. As consumers of graduate education, we are significant stakeholders in this enterprise, and we must have opportunities within our training to experience modern healthcare models in a way that best prepares us to work with other disciplines. In turn, I look forward to not only the changes that occur in practice following this Summit, but also the changes that will occur in education. As we prepare for an improved integration of care, I hope that we, as the next generation of psychologists, will become more appreciative of our fellow healthcare disciplines throughout our training; and in the same light, I hope that other disciplines will become more appreciative of health service psychology, understanding the unique and essential role of psychological services in the true integration of care.

Jerrold Yeo

Although the atmosphere of the summit was a little intimidating as it was well-attended by many key people in the field, I felt welcomed as a student representative attending the conference. I had never seen so many leaders of psychology from diverse cultures and backgrounds in the same room, and bouncing ideas and thoughts off them in addition to the networking experience felt surreal.

A number of points stuck with me as I listened to the many keynote speakers and panels throughout the summit. Listening to how different healthcare systems work in different countries and learning about the differences between them helped make me more aware of any challenges that I might face as a soon-to-be professional, (e.g., reimbursement, payment systems and Medicaid to aid lower-income families). It was also fascinating to hear a possibly controversial argument about not needing any more research on integrated care; but the take home message that I got from that was that we are doing good research on the topic, but have not been able to implement it as effectively as we would have liked.

It was also very interesting to hear the patient perspective at a professional summit like this. I think it provided a very real touch to the whole summit as we get reminded of why we do this: for the people. E-patient Dave, who is an activist for healthcare transformation through participatory medicine and personal health data rights, also reminded us that we should try to engage patients in their own treatment, to empower them to find out more about their own difficulties and make informed decisions.

Many times during the summit I questioned myself: “What am I doing here? As a student, what can I do?” These questions kept running through my mind as I attempted to socialize and network with these high-flying professionals. Only during the second part of each day did my question get answered. The second half of each day was devoted to small group discussion and brainstorming. Justin and I were split up into different groups so that we could provide a unique student perspective. Personally, I advocated for the education of the general public from a young age to expect integrated care, which appeared to be well received. Where we shined was that we, as students, were able to provide a perspective that could complement the policy changes that the leaders in the field were proposing.

Through this summit, I think that I became inspired to become more involved in the advocacy of integrated care and provide more comprehensive services to my clients. As a student attending this summit, it became clear to me that, as future leaders in the field, we have to pave the way for psychology to be a part of the integrated care system by establishing important connections with other professions and advocating for psychology to be used more effectively and efficiently in the provision of health care services.

Editor’s Note: Justin Karr (University of Victoria) is the current APAGS Member-at-Large for Membership Recruitment/Retention and Jerrold Yeo (University of Denver) is a former member of the APAGS Convention Committee.

Tackling the Internship Crisis Through Legislative Advocacy

The Texas State Capitol Building. (Source: StuSeeger on Flickr. Some rights reserved.)

They say everything is bigger in Texas, but there is at least one exception: The window for getting new legislation introduced and passed is tiny! Despite the fact that the legislature only meets for 140 days every two years, the Texas Psychological Association (TPA)–with the help of its Student Division–was able to find legislative sponsors for the “Intern Bill” and mobilize TPA members and their representatives to support it.

This bill authorizes licensed psychologists to delegate services to a pre-doctoral psychology intern under their supervision. Allowing licensed psychologists to delegate services to their interns is the first in a series of steps toward making internships more sustainable. As the Director of the TPA’s Student Division, I was given the opportunity to play a key role in advocating for this legislation.

Climbing the legislative ladder

At my first TPA Board of Trustees meeting as the Director of the Student Division, I learned they were planning to find legislators to sponsor the Intern Bill. After having seen the video created by APAGS about the internship crisis, I was well aware that the lack of internships for qualified doctoral students had reached alarming proportions, with up to 29 percent of applicants not matching during the last five years. I coordinated with TPA’s Grassroots committee to mobilize students to support this bill and ended up becoming personally involved in advocating for this legislation.

My efforts began by mobilizing the Student Division’s Board of Directors and Campus Representatives to begin spreading the word to colleges and universities across Texas about this bill and what it could do for psychology students. One of the difficult things about advocacy is that you rarely get feedback about how your message is being received and whether it inspires others to take up the challenge. I learned that our message was effective after TPA invited its members to spend a day together at the capital with legislators, speaking with them about bills we are sponsoring.

Students turned out in record-breaking numbers for this event, ready to take on the challenge of advocating for this much needed legislation.

I headed back to the capital a few weeks later, along with other key TPA members, to testify before the Texas Public Health committee about the importance of passing the Intern Bill. This was an exciting opportunity. I prepared my testimony by doing a little research and getting feedback from students who had not previously matched to an internship program. After all this work, the amount of time I was allowed to testify was reduced from 10 minutes to about 2 minutes! I had to be very concise, but I was able to speak about my most important points during this time (To watch, find the testimony from 04/07/2015 under Public Health, starting at 14:25).

Representative Garnet Coleman and Senator Kevin Eltife have been very supportive of the profession of psychology. Their sponsorship of House and Senate versions of this bill, combined with the persistence of students and TPA members, led to a majority vote with almost no opposition by the House and Senate. The bill became law in June 2015.

The power of student advocacy

My advice to those involved with other organizations interested in promoting similar legislation falls into three categories: awareness, student involvement, and focus.

Awareness: Even in academic settings, people are largely unaware of the severity of the internship crisis. Laying out the numbers gives people a clear view of the problem. Once they have been armed with the facts, people are more likely to become involved in changing the situation. For me, presenting the percentage of students who did not match to accredited internship programs had the greatest impact. These statistics can be found on the APPIC website.

Student involvement: Students are willing to get involved in legislative advocacy. When reaching out to them, it is important that you to provide several avenues to express their support. Those who have the resources to travel to their state’s Capital (or live nearby) should be encouraged to make their position known in person before legislative committees, or set up appointments with their representatives individually. Providing links to online petitions and to the contact information for the state’s representatives can help others get involved. Also, encourage your peers to address these issues with their professors and advisors.

Focus: When giving testimony before legislators keep the focus narrow enough so that you don’t become bogged down in unfamiliar jargon. Present a brief overview of the statistics and then turn your attention to the impact the internship crisis has on individual students and their constituents. Once they understand that billing for interns will lead to increased access to mental health care for their state’s residents, supporting the legislation becomes that much easier.

Don’t be afraid to ask

If you are a student, it is important to be involved in both a national organization, such as APAGS, and your state psychological organization. It was through APAGS that I discovered that the internship crisis existed, which prompted me to get more involved with TPA in trying to do something about it. All I had to do was ask TPA to help with the Intern Bill–they were ecstatic that a student was willing to get involved.

The bottom line is: Don’t be afraid to ask. Ask your state psychology organization to introduce an Intern Bill; ask other students and psychologists to support it; ask your state government to pass it.

It is my hope that the success we have experienced in Texas will make it easier for other state governments to say yes to an Intern Bill.

Editor’s Note: Amanda S. Phillips is a doctoral student in clinical health psychology at the University of North Texas. She is also the 2014-2015 Director of the Student Division of the Texas Psychological Association.

gradPSYCH Blog

APA's Food for Thought for Psychology Students