Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
e Psycho Th l f Ireland February 2010 yo ical Societ og Article In Pursuit of Clinical Training Grace O’Shea & Michael Byrne Grace O’Shea is a Research Assistant with Roscommon P.C.C.C., HSE West. Michael Byrne is the Principal Psychology Manager and is also at Roscommon P.C.C.C., HSE West. Correspondence regarding this article may be addressed by email to [email protected]. Introduction As the most popular specialism among psychology graduates, competition for places on clinical psychology doctorate programmes is intense (Hall & Llewelyn, 2006). Adding to applicants’ anxiety is the lack of information about the selection process. This article aims to educate applicants about the selection process and how they may position themselves so as to have the best possible chance of obtaining a place on a training programme. The challenges for programme selection committees include selecting from a relatively homogeneous pool of applicants in terms of their academic achievement, gender and ethnicity. For example, men and individuals from black and minority ethnic groups remain significantly under-represented among psychologists in clinical training (hereafter called “trainees”; Caswell & Baker, 2007; Scior, Gray, Halsey, & Roth, 2007). There is also the challenge of comparing and contrasting varied vocational experiences. In line with competency-based assessment of trainees across various domains, programme selection committees typically select on the basis of developmental “readiness” or competencies (British Psychological Society [BPS], 2007a). However, as to whether to base selection on assessing current or potential competencies remains a matter of debate (Keenan, 1997). One advantage of the latter is that it can partially control for the (geographic) variability in work experience opportunities that can favour those who live in urban areas. Building on some of the issues raised in last month’s Letter to the Editors, this piece may provide a timely insight for members preparing for the selection process. Competencies Applicants need a strong profile across the different but related domains of academics, research, clinical experience and personal skills (Phillips, Hatton, & Gray, 2004). Academics A strong academic background typically reflects a strong work ethic and a potential ability to cope with the challenging academic demands of training. While most programmes require a minimum of an upper second-class honours undergraduate psychology degree, applicants may be able to compensate for a lower grade by demonstrating competence in undertaking additional degrees in clinically related fields (e.g., a Masters in Applied, Counselling or Health psychology or a PhD; Scior et al., 2007). Markers such as scholastic awards may also be of benefit. Alternatively, those with nonpsychology undergraduate degrees can complete a higher (post-graduate) diploma in psychology that confers eligibility for graduate membership with the Psychological Society of Ireland or the British Psychological Society (Roth, 1998). Research At a minimum, completion of a doctoral thesis requires reasonably advanced competence in conducting literature reviews, formulating research methodologies, collecting and analysing data, and interpreting findings. While most candidates will have completed research modules and an undergraduate thesis, many will also have completed one or more post-graduate research theses. Some will also have published their work – preferably in peer-reviewed journals – demonstrating that they are keenly aware of the need to not only undertake clinically relevant research but also to disseminate findings. Applicants also need to demonstrate an awareness of ethical issues when conducting research (e.g., informed consent and protection of participants from harm). Volume 36, No. 4. Page 79 e Psycho Th l f Ireland yo ical Societ og February 2010 Additional ways to strengthen one’s research profile include working as a research assistant on a clinical research project or contributing to the completion of service-based audits. Clinical To facilitate clinical competencies (e.g., assessment, formulation, and intervention), most candidates will have a minimum of at least one year’s clinical experience. However, this is not essential as some may progress quickly onto training given that they may be perceived as being able to offer more years of service to their sponsoring agency (Lee, Vandrevala & John, 2009). Work, either in a paid or an unpaid capacity, may involve experience as an assistant psychologist, a primary care practitioner, a research assistant, a nursing or care assistant, a support worker or working in social services or residential homes. While the latter may not be directly linked with a psychology department, it can provide experience of working with clinically relevant populations (Papworth, 2004). Attendance at accredited training programmes may also be of benefit. More important than duration of clinical experience (in informing whether an applicant may have the aptitude to further develop clinical competencies during training) is the quality of the work experience and related learning. Was supervision provided and by whom? Was there progression towards targeted learning goals? Was one’s work evidence-based or theoretically driven? Did the experience facilitate an understanding of the roles of clinical psychologists, their work environments (e.g., interdisciplinary teams) and the range of individuals they work with? Was there exposure to clinical trainees such that their role and the demands of doctoral programmes are reasonably well understood? Personal Skills Programme applicants may be assessed on their communication skills (e.g., written and verbal) and whether they are amenable to learning on a training programme. The latter can be somewhat subjective but may be informed by the following: perceived level of maturity; emotional stability; openness to reflection and to new learning and experiences; organisational knowledge; and ability to “get along” with others, particularly with supervisors or potential team colleagues. Selection Process Selection of applicants is, at a minimum, typically a two-step process consisting of short-listing (based on a review of application forms) and interviews. Short-Listing Applicants need to profile a balance across the above competency areas in their application forms. Some strong applicants may neglect doing so with the result that they are not called for interview. Similar to writing a journal article, to facilitate readability and ease of navigation of completed forms, word count needs to be kept to a minimum (e.g., use of bullet points rather than including lengthy paragraphs) and they need to be well structured. Despite the unreliability of using references relative to factual information (Armstrong, 2001), programmes typically request two references. A variety of factors need to be considered when choosing same. As they are better able to emphasise the exceptional, it may profit to choose referees with greater experience. Likewise, grading points may be lost if a referee has not known the applicant for a reasonable amount of time, or if the applicant has not contacted the referee to discuss the reference (Papworth, 2007). Referees that are known to the programme in question may also be preferable, as is the inclusion of one academic and an occupational reference (Phillips et al., 2004). Interviews Despite doubts over the reliability of interviews (McDaniel, Whetzel, Schmidt & Maurer, 1994), shortlisted candidates are typically afforded the opportunity of at least one interview to demonstrate their varied competencies. Thorough and strategic preparation is essential. Applicants may initially be requested to Volume 36, No. 4. Page 80 “ground” the interview by giving a short synopsis of their career or by discussing their career highlight to date. Either way, this is an opportunity to draw attention to the manner in which one has developed the various competencies and one’s developmental readiness to begin training. Regardless of the wording of subsequent questions, applicants need to continue demonstrating their academic, research, clinical and personal competencies. As such, while there ought to be no real surprise questions, applicants need to ensure that they answer questions in as few words as possible. The above calls for a mixture of preparing answers to some predictable questions but to be also so well prepared that one can think on one’s feet for potentially more difficult questions. In some programmes, interviews may consist of two parts, the ratings of which are combined to determine applicants’ overall rating. First, a panel interview may involve applicants presenting on some predetermined clinical scenario (that is given 30 minutes before the interview). This may be followed by questions relating to applicants’ psychological knowledge and applications, clinical skills and competencies, personal development and awareness, and research competencies. Second, practical assessments may include a written assessment (specifically relating to one’s research competency) or a group task followed by a group discussion (Phillips, Hatton & Gray, 2001). Conclusion The (unjustified) “Holy Grail” aura of obtaining a place on a clinical psychology doctorate programme has perpetuated misplaced notions of there being a magic formula for doing so. Despite current funding difficulties, that there are now four programmes in the Republic of Ireland and one in Northern Ireland has increased access to such training. Before submitting meticulously well-presented application forms and thoroughly preparing for interviews, what is required is a purposeful and longitudinal development of academic, research, clinical and personal competencies. As such, applicants need to show a commitment towards developing these competencies, including maximising their learning from available opportunities. However, such opportunities are scarce in Ireland. Rather than potentially frittering away in the wilderness for a number of years post-graduation, many graduates choose to work abroad in an effort to develop their competencies. As such, the Psychological Society of Ireland, our Higher Education Institutes and our heads of psychology services need to work together to provide alternative training models and a more fine-grained career structure. One such model, as proposed by the New Ways of Working for Applied Psychologists (BPS, 2007b), would involve creating (stepped or progressive) psychology e Psycho Th l f Ireland February 2010 yo ical Societ og grades with associated pre-doctoral qualifications in preparation for entry to clinical training programmes. We have surveyed entrants to the four doctoral programmes in the Republic of Ireland (during the 10-year period 2000-2009). In the process of being written up, this followup study profiled entrants’ history of applications, their academic qualifications, their research, clinical and training experiences and their perceived competencies (during the year they entered training) along with their experience of the selection process. We hope the findings will provide a further insight into this area. References Armstrong, M. (2001). A handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page. British Psychological Society (2007a). Membership and Professional Training Board Committee on Training in Clinical Psychology: Criteria for the accreditation of postgraduate training programmes in clinical psychology. Leicester: Author. British Psychological Society (2007b). New ways of working for applied psychologists in health and social care: Models of training. Leicester: Author. Caswell, R., & Baker, M. (2007). Choosing to join a minority: Male clinical psychology trainees talking. Clinical Psychology Forum, 180, 17–21. Hall, J., & Llewelyn, S. (2006). Clinical psychology: Is it for you? The Psychologist, 19, 679. Keenan, T. (1997). Selection for potential: The case of graduate recruitment. In N. Anderson & P. Herriot (Eds.), International handbook of selection and assessment. Chichester: Wiley. Lee, K., Vandrevala, T., & John, M. (2009). The challenges and experiences of trainees pursuing clinical psychology training straight from their undergraduate degree. Clinical Psychology Forum, 197, 45–48. McDaniel, M., Whetzel, D., Schmidt, F., & Maurer, S. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599-616. Papworth, M. (2004). Getting on clinical psychology training courses: Responses to frequently asked questions. Clinical Psychology, 42, 32–36. Papworth, M. (2007). Getting on clinical psychology training courses: Responses to frequently asked questions (part 2). Clinical Psychology Forum, 177, 37–41. Phillips, A., Hatton, C., & Gray, I. (2001). Which selection methods do clinical psychology courses use? Clinical Psychology, 8, 19–23. Phillips, A., Hatton, C., & Gray, I. (2004). Factors predicting the short-listing and selection of trainee clinical psychologists: A prospective national cohort study, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 11, 111–125. Roth, T. (1998). Getting on clinical training courses. The Psychologist, 11, 589–592. Scior, K., Gray, J., Halsey, R., & Roth, A. (2007). Selection for clinical psychology training: Is there evidence of any bias against applicants from ethnic minorities. Clinical Psychology Forum, 175, 7–11. Volume 36, No. 4. Page 81