Return to APA Collection Inventory Page
Text of document:
description should not be a separate section but should be included
after the Preamble. There was some further discussion about how much detail
should be included in this description. The assembly decided that this
should be limited but that the description should end by referring the
reader to the full proceedings of the conference for any additional particulars.
The planning committee was (given leeway, by consent of the assembly, to
spell out particulars regarding the publication of the proceedings in the
document once final arrangements for publication were concluded. Otherwise,
the Preamble, section 1, was approved.
The Introduction, section II, then was approved by the assembly.
The title of the next section was amended from "Definition of a clinical
neuropsychologist" to "Who is a clinical neuropsychologist?" After some
discussion regarding wording, a motion was made to break this section into
two sections. Section III, Who is a clinical neuropsychologist? and, a
new section IV, Who should have education and training in the specialty
of clinical neuropsychology? Section IV was added to specify which individuals
should have specialty training. Then a motion was made to remove the sentence
beginning "Identification of one s self as a clinical neuropsychologist
from section III. The motion carried.
Section V, Professional and scientific activity, was amended
to include language regarding competence to engage in activities involving
diverse populations, with exact wording to be provided when the document
was printed for final reconsideration at the last session of the evening.
After some debate, delegates referred to sections in the Division 40 Petition
(Meier et al., 1995) to the Commission for the Recognition of Specialties
and Proficiencies in Professional Psychology (CRSPPP). Language was also
debated and approved regarding how to define core domains within clinical
neuropsychological practice.
The assembly then moved to Section VI, Knowledge base. Some wording
changes were debated and it was generally agreed that the listing of core
areas of knowledge was not meant to be synonymous with course listings.
Subject headings were reworded to be more specific and the section was
approved.
Concern was expressed that the delegates had done a decent job
of fleshing out the domains in the Knowledge base section (VI) but not
in the Skills section (VII). The skills listed under the assessment section
were thought to have been worked out fairly well but not the skills given
under interventions, consultation, research, and teaching. It was proposed
that the sentence "Domains of skills and examples are to be added at the
end of the introductory sentences in the skills section. Then a proposal
was made concerning the skills for the domains other than assessment. First,
it was suggested that the domain "Interventions" be changed to "Treatment
and Interventions." Then a series of examples of the skills for "Treatment
and Interventions," "Consultation," "Research," and "Teaching" were given.
One delegate suggested that "Psychotherapy" be added to the interventions
list since there are many other approaches to treatment of brain damaged
patients that are not necessarily behavioral as the list seemed to imply.
Other delegates thought that this was not necessary for several reasons.
It was thought that all forms of intervention involved identification of
intervention targets, specification of intervention needs, formulation
and implementation of plans, monitoring and adjustment of the plans, and
assessment of outcome so there was no need to list a specific type of intervention.
The motion to include "Psychotherapy" in the list failed.
It was pointed out that the skills in the assessment domain were
given as nouns while the skills in the treatment and interventions domain
were given as verbs, The delegates were reminded that the planning committee
could make grammatical changes in the policy statement and this issue was
not pursued.
A motion was made to add "Recognition of multi-cultural issues"
to both the "Assessment" and "Treatment and Interventions" domains. The
motion carried.
An amendment to the first sentence of the skill section was proposed
so that it said: "Clinical neuropsychologists possess the following skills
in the areas of generic clinical and specialty clinical neuropsychology."
The motion carried. At this point, section VII of the policy statement
was approved.
Section VIII, Doctoral education in clinical neuropsychology,
was re-discussed. It was suggested that the sentence in the second paragraph
saying that "the foundation of brain-behavior relationships should be developed
to a considerable degree at this level" should be expanded to include all
of the items in sections VI C and VI D. It was pointed out that it is unreasonable
to expect that all doctoral training programs would be able to supply courses
in all of the areas listed under sections VI C and VI D. It was pointed
out also that the delegates had wanted to get away from specifically saying
how much of each domain was to be obtained at each level of training and
to put in specifics here would be to do just that. Section VIII was accepted
with no changes.
Section X, Internship training in clinical neuropsychology, was
accepted with no discussion or changes.
Section XI, Residency education and training in clinical neuropsychology,
was now open to discussion. It was mentioned that accreditation of doctoral
and internship programs has been available for a long time, while accreditation
of residency programs is just beginning. Thus, it was thought that the
policy statement should contain a more detailed description of what should
be involved in a residency program. It was suggested that the guidelines
for residencies include the following: The training director should be
a board certified clinical neuropsychologist. The background of the other
psychology faculty was not specified. The training should be provided at
a fixed site or consortium. There must be some interface with other clinical
services and training programs in other medical specialties. While the
Committee on Accreditation says that there must be more than one resident
in a program, it was noted that it is a difficult criterion for most neuropsychology
residency programs to meet but could be aspired to. Instead, it was proposed
that the resident have interactions with other residents in medical specialties,
if not with other residents in clinical neuropsychology. There should be
clearer criteria for how the resident spends his/her time with some guarantee
of educational activities. A resident should not be just cheap labor. There
should be some statement that residency programs will pursue formal accreditation
when it becomes available. Comments were made about the specific items.
Concern was raised that the items were medically driven and that the interface
should not just be to "medical specialties" and 11 medical residents."
The addition of the wording "related health specialties," "related specialties,"
"related health," or "other professionals" was suggested. Later the wording
in this section was amended to add "and allied professions" to places where
"medical specialties" appeared.
A question was raised as to why the need for a board certified
clinical neuropsychologist was specified at the residency level, but not
at the doctoral and internship levels if the delegates really thought that
our students should be relating, to a board certified professional. No
discussion of this issue ensued.
At this point other aspects of this section were discussed. It
was thought that the residency section was much more regulatory and prescriptive
than the other sections. The wording for this section said that residency
programs "must assure" that certain criteria were met. It was suggested
that the wording be changed to "should" or "should aspire to." It was then
argued that the other sections were regulatory since they said that doctoral
and internship programs must or should be in an APA or CPA approved program,
which implies a lot of regulation. It was reiterated that accreditation
of residency programs is just beginning and it is thus important to include
specific criteria for training at this level. Later the motion was made
to change the sentence "These programs must assure that:" to "These programs
will pursue accreditation supporting the following assurances:"
50
(End of text)
| ||||
