Trainee Impairment

Abstract

This article reviews the professional literature on the topic of evaluating the competence of trainees in professional psychology training programs including program policies, procedures, and actual practice for identifying, remediating, and, in extreme cases, dismissing trainees who are judged unable to provide competent, professional care. This review covers the literature on the following major issues related to trainee performance: (a) problems with definitions of impairment, (b) established professional standards for supervision and evaluation of trainees based on accreditation guidelines and ethical standards, (c) methodological critiques of empirical studies on trainee impairment, (d) issues related to evaluation and identification of trainees who are making inadequate progress toward professional competence, (e) issues related to remediation, (f) dismissal and due process, and (g) relevant legal cases and considerations. The review of these topics provides the platform for an extensive list of recommendations directed toward faculty and supervisors responsible for professional psychology training programs and internships.

Guidelines for clinical supervision in health service psychology.

“…Only a small proportion of supervisees in health service psychology programs demonstrate significant problems in professional competence, but most academic and intern ship programs report at least one supervisee with compe tence problems in the previous five years (Forrest et al, 1999). When this occurs it can be helpful to consider the multiple contexts in which problem behavior is embedded (e.g., cultural beliefs, licensure and accreditation, peers, faculty, supervisors; Forrest et al, 2008).…”

Contextual Influences on Faculty Diversity Conceptualizations When Working With Trainee Competence Problems

“…Such dilemmas may occur internally, among colleagues, or both and include the potential for both under-and overidentifying TPPC Forrest et al, 1999;Forrest, Elman, & Shen-Miller, 2008;Kaslow et al, 2007). For example, faculty afraid of appearing biased may under-identify students from traditionally oppressed backgrounds as having competence problems, and faculty of color may believe that their colleagues will not validate, support, or act on their concerns about a majority student and thus avoid identifying students as having competence problems (Cook, 1994;Norton & Coleman, 2003).…”

Problematic students of NASP‐approved programs: An exploratory study of graduate student views

“…Procedure E-mails were sent to Faculty Sponsors of NASP-approved School Psychology graduate programs and to other faculty through the Trainers of School Psychologists Listserv. The faculty were asked to forward via email the information about the study to the NASP Student Representative(s), and the forwarded message included a survey link that was provided by SurveyMonkey.com (Finley, 2010). The survey included an informed consent page, which indicated that taking the survey was voluntary and participants could back out at any time.…”

“…The research on student impairment that does exist is characterized by confusing terminology and poor methodology (Brear, Dorian, & Luscri, 2008;Forrest, Elman, Gizara, & Vacha-Haase, 1999). In particular, terms such as distressed, impaired, or problematic student have been used interchangeably in the literature (Vacha-Haase et al, 2004), along with the catch-all term unsuitability (e.g., Brear et al, 2008), with no provision of a unified definition.…”