Accreditation Public Comment System





This project is now closed for new comments.
DocumentSectionItemFirst NameLast NameGroup NameComment 
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDeboraBellCUDCP (Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology)The Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP) welcomes the opportunity to comment on these Implementing Regulations regarding Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, I, and P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29). The CUDCP Board of Directors, which serves as the elected representatives of our 175 member programs, drafted these comments. Regarding C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P: Diversity Recruitment and Retention: The detailed description of CoA’s expectations regarding what programs will do and report is very helpful, and in general, the expectations seem appropriate for the purpose of facilitating programs’ development, implementation, evaluation, and improvement of their efforts in this area. Some specific questions/suggestions follow. Because our comments are similar across multiple levels of training, we include all comments relevant to the Diversity Recruitment and Retention here. 1. We are surprised and d... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionCheryllRothery I endorse the NCSPP comments for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJenniferCallahanUniversity of North Texas: Clinical PsychologyOn behalf of the 10 faculty, and 2 student members of the clinical psychology program committee at the University of North Texas, I endorse the CUDCP comments concerning Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29).
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionMeganO'BanionNCSPPNCSPP appreciates and unequivocally endorses the Commission’s commitment to inclusive excellence at the doctoral program, internship, and post-doctoral levels, and its efforts to provide greater guidance around expectations for recruitment and retention. NCSPP respectfully suggests, however, that the proposed IR includes several ambiguities and challenges that will compromise success of programs in this regard, and recommends several minor modifications. Concurrently, NCSPP recommends that the IR be broadened to recognize the more holistic approach that many programs adopt to support inclusive excellence. Specifically, NCSPP recommends the following: 1. The third paragraph of the IR references “generally accepted best practices in the field.” Many NCSPP members (and, via feedback, we understand that non-NCSPP members as well) have received CoA responses indicating that their efforts to recruit and retain diverse faculty and students are perceived by the Commission to be in... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionRadhikaKrishnamurthy I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDavidPantaloneUniversity of Massachusetts, BostonWe endorse the CUDCP comment. Also, we encourage CoA to consider ways of encouraging or requiring sharing with applicants of program-specific, diversity-related successes.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionCrystalCollier I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPatriciaDixon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionTammyBarryWashington State University Clinical Psychology Doctoral ProgramThe faculty in our program supports the CUDCP statement on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionTammyBarryWashington State University Clinical Psychology Doctoral ProgramThe faculty in our program support the CUDCP statement on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLaurenNichols I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPeterBattista I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionKathieBates I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionRebeccaReady I agree with the CUDCP response.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLeahHorvath I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionKathiBorden I endorse the NCSPP Comment on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJoelleTaknintAPAGSThe American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS) appreciates the Commission on Accreditation (CoA) providing an opportunity to comment on the Standards of Accreditation Implementing Regulations C-21 D, C-19 I, C-6 P, and C-29 D. Within the current IRs, CoA’s commitment to enhancing diversity recruitment and retention as a crucial part of doctoral training is clearly evidenced. In particular, we applaud the implementation of a broad definition of diversity, stated as including, but not limited to, “... age, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, language, national origin, race, religion, culture, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status” (SoA, p. 3). Furthermore, we appreciate the guidance provided to training programs to reflect on both areas of strength and weakness in terms of diversity recruitment as part of the program’s self-study. We are in full support of effective regulations that will make a meaningful change towards enhancing diversity recruitm... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDennisDebiakDivision of Psychoanalysis (39) 11 October 2018 Dear Colleagues of the APA Committee on Accreditation [CoA]: Division 39 would like to acknowledge the importance of CoA’s efforts to ensure Programs take effective steps to recruit and retain students and faculty who represent individual and cultural difference through IR C-21. If the spirit behind IR C-21were active in Freud’s time, he would have been allowed to hold a faculty position at the University in Vienna as a Neurologist. Instead, he was ultimately compelled to work as a private practitioner. Ironically, had Freud entered academia and research, he may never have developed his ideas that formed psychoanalysis and the view that somatic and psychological conditions could have psychogenic causes and not solely be the result of weak or diseased neurological constitutions. Freud became interested in patients (mostly women) who had been written off by his medical colleagues because symptoms reported by these patients were not consistent with an organic etio... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDavidSacks I endorse the NCSPP comments on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLuciaGutierrezCommittee on Early Career PsychologistsThe APA Committee on Early Career Psychologists (CECP) appreciates the time and effort of CoA in attending to issues of diversity. We support the manner in which CoA has defined diversity (“cultural and individual differences and diversity as including, but not limited to, age, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, language, national origin, race, religion, culture, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status”) and the inclusion of the importance of inclusivity within the educational environment. A concern that many on our committee have experienced within our own graduate programs and current universities is the discrepancies between intention and action. Programs can be evaluated based on their plans to attract and retain diverse individuals, but their ability to actually provide an environment that is inviting and supporting of these individuals can be lacking and is often overlooked. In essence, programs can engage in lip service as to how important diversity is to t... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJohnsonKelli I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJohnsonKelli I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDavidRaja I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionBrendaNash I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPhillipKeckCRSPPPOverall, CRSPPP commends CoA for thoughtfully addressing issues of diversity in their development of Implementing Regulations. CRSPPP suggests that there are two perspectives on diversity. Diversity can refer to an inclusive environment focusing on recruiting, retaining and advancing faculty and trainees who represent the indicated areas of diversity within the IR. Another perspective is that programs might recruit, retain, and advance faculty and trainees whose area of expertise and interests are within a specified area of diversity. CoA appears to have emphasized the first perspective of diversity (i.e., environmental inclusion) across the doctoral, internship, and postdoctoral settings. CRSPPP recommends operationalizing a framework of best practices for recruiting, retaining, and advancing individuals from diverse backgrounds. In addition to addressing the environmental perspective, CRSPPP suggests that CoA consider expanding their concept of diversity to include recruitment, reten... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionTheresaKayDivision 44, Divsion 41, APAGS, CSOGD, Division 17, CECP, Division 9, NPLA, Division 45PUBLIC COMMENT: COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS RELATED TO DIVERSITY Submitted by Theresa Stueland Kay, PhD, and Joshua Wolff, PhD, on behalf of Division 44 (Society for the Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity); Division 51 (Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities); American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS); APA Committee on Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity (CSOGD); Division 17 (Society of Counseling Psychology) Section on LGBT Issues; APA Committee on Early Career Psychologists (CECP); Division 9 (Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues); Orgullo Latinx/National Latina/o Psychological Association (NLPA); Division 45 (Society for the Psychological Study of Culture, Ethnicity, and Race). I. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We appreciate the Commission on Accreditation (CoA) seeking input on the current Standards of Accreditation (SoA) Implementing Regulations (IR’s). We submit this comment in t... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionSandraKenny I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionHillelSamlanHillel Samlan, MA, MS, and Ruth Varkovitzky, PhDWe appreciate the opportunity to offer comment on the Implementation Regulations related to Diversity Recruitment and Retention. Overall, we feel that the IRs lack specificity, which could lead to unintended outcomes. We are particularly concerned that historically, this vagueness of inclusivity discourse leads to it being debatable, disputable, and left open for interpretation (Dunne, 2009). An overarching issue is the need for a more detailed, moral and ethical framework for approaching the issues of diversity and inclusion. IR C-21 D currently describes an inclusive environment as, “one in which the program creates an atmosphere that is welcoming, respectful and affirming of students’ and faculty members’ multiple identities.” We are concerned that this approach to inclusion is missing an emphasis on social justice and power dynamics. Efforts to improve diversity in training must see equality and justice more broadly as end goals, beyond simply the creation an environment that is “a... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionAnnemarieSlobig I support the NCSPP comments on all sections
July 2018 IR Revisions C-21 D. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionNestingenSigne I endorse the NCSPP comments on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionHillelSamlanHillel Samlan, MA, MS, and Ruth Varkovitzky, PhDWe appreciate the opportunity to offer comment on the Implementation Regulations related to Diversity Recruitment and Retention. Overall, we feel that the IRs lack specificity, which could lead to unintended outcomes. We are particularly concerned that historically, this vagueness of inclusivity discourse leads to it being debatable, disputable, and left open for interpretation (Dunne, 2009). An overarching issue is the need for a more detailed, moral and ethical framework for approaching the issues of diversity and inclusion. IR C-21 D currently describes an inclusive environment as, “one in which the program creates an atmosphere that is welcoming, respectful and affirming of students’ and faculty members’ multiple identities.” We are concerned that this approach to inclusion is missing an emphasis on social justice and power dynamics. Efforts to improve diversity in training must see equality and justice more broadly as end goals, beyond simply the creation an environment that is “a... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionSandraKenny I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionBrendaNash I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDavidRaja I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDennisDebiakDivision of Psychoanalysis (39)C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and Retention "systematic, coherent, and long-term efforts to attract (recruit) and retain)...." Programs would benefit from specifics, exemplars, etc. individual and cultural diversity (as above) add: spirituality, sex, regional affiliation change: delete gender (redundant); country of origin not national origin Recruitment Interns While not pertaining specifically to diversity, as such, it does address the importance of maintaining pluralistic epistemologies and ontologies. For the majority of us, one draw to our internships was that we could take professional leave to finish the dissertation – significant in that for many, this entailed considerable distances to travel on multiple occasions. The internships were psychoanalytically-oriented, which was also primarily why we chose the ones that we did. Generous seminar series and multiple supervisors from various theoretical orientations ensure a supportive learning environment for int... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJoelleTaknintAPAGSAPAGS comment on IR C-19 I is included within the full comment on these IR's, which was submitted under IR C-21 D.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPeggyHicks I have read and reviewed C-19 I and agree with the conclusions of other reviewers that the wording of this IR adequately represents best practices in the recruitment and retention of interns and faculty/staff from diverse backgrounds.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLeahHorvath I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPeterBattista I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLaurenNichols I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionTammyBarryWashington State University Clinical Psychology Doctoral ProgramThe faculty in our program support the CUDCP statement on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPatriciaDixon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJenniferCallahanUniversity of North Texas: Clinical PsychologyOn behalf of the 10 faculty, and 2 student members of the clinical psychology program committee at the University of North Texas, I endorse the CUDCP comments concerning Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29).
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionCheryllRothery I endorse the NCSPP comments for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDeboraBellCUDCP (Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology)The Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP) welcomes the opportunity to comment on these Implementing Regulations regarding Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, I, and P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29). The CUDCP Board of Directors, which serves as the elected representatives of our 175 member programs, drafted these comments. Regarding C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P: Diversity Recruitment and Retention: The detailed description of CoA’s expectations regarding what programs will do and report is very helpful, and in general, the expectations seem appropriate for the purpose of facilitating programs’ development, implementation, evaluation, and improvement of their efforts in this area. Some specific questions/suggestions follow. Because our comments are similar across multiple levels of training, we include all comments relevant to the Diversity Recruitment and Retention here. 1. We are surprised and d... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-19 I. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDeboraBellCUDCP (Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology)The Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP) welcomes the opportunity to comment on these Implementing Regulations regarding Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, I, and P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29). The CUDCP Board of Directors, which serves as the elected representatives of our 175 member programs, drafted these comments. Regarding C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P: Diversity Recruitment and Retention: The detailed description of CoA’s expectations regarding what programs will do and report is very helpful, and in general, the expectations seem appropriate for the purpose of facilitating programs’ development, implementation, evaluation, and improvement of their efforts in this area. Some specific questions/suggestions follow. Because our comments are similar across multiple levels of training, we include all comments relevant to the Diversity Recruitment and Retention here. 1. We are surprised and d... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionCheryllRothery I endorse the NCSPP comments for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJenniferCallahanUniversity of North Texas: Clinical PsychologyOn behalf of the 10 faculty, and 2 student members of the clinical psychology program committee at the University of North Texas, I endorse the CUDCP comments concerning Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29).
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPatriciaDixon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionTammyBarryWashington State University Clinical Psychology Doctoral ProgramThe faculty in our program support the CUDCP statement on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLaurenNichols I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionPeterBattista I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionRebeccaReady I agree with the CUDCP response.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionRebeccaReady I agree with the CUDCP response.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLeahHorvath I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionLeahHorvath I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJoelleTaknintAPAGSAPAGS comment on IR C-6 P is included within the full comment on these IR's, which was submitted under IR C-21 D.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDennisDebiakDivision of Psychoanalysis (39)C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and Retention Same as above (provide detailed description, examples and/or contact with exemplars). Same as above with respect to ICD list. Recruitment Faculty and Staff Similar to what is stated above, post-doctoral fellowships would benefit from faculty and staff who represent diversity as is typically understood, but also theoretical and clinical diversity, particularly psychoanalytic psychology for the historic relevance to the field and the current body of literature that supports the efficacy of this modality. Retention Residents To the extent possible, individual training needs of diverse residents and post-doctoral fellows should be assessed pre- and post-admission each year of placement. Faculty/Staff Diversity of faculty/staff, as has been noted, and applies to not only typical areas of ICD, but also theoretical and clinical orientation. Faculty/staff should be given opportunities to offer supervision and seminar... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionJohnsonKelli I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionDavidRaja I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionBrendaNash I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionSandraKenny I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-6 P. Diversity Recruitment and RetentionHillelSamlanHillel Samlan, MA, MS, and Ruth Varkovitzky, PhDWe appreciate the opportunity to offer comment on the Implementation Regulations related to Diversity Recruitment and Retention. Overall, we feel that the IRs lack specificity, which could lead to unintended outcomes. We are particularly concerned that historically, this vagueness of inclusivity discourse leads to it being debatable, disputable, and left open for interpretation (Dunne, 2009). An overarching issue is the need for a more detailed, moral and ethical framework for approaching the issues of diversity and inclusion. IR C-21 D currently describes an inclusive environment as, “one in which the program creates an atmosphere that is welcoming, respectful and affirming of students’ and faculty members’ multiple identities.” We are concerned that this approach to inclusion is missing an emphasis on social justice and power dynamics. Efforts to improve diversity in training must see equality and justice more broadly as end goals, beyond simply the creation an environment that is “a... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationSandraKenny I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationBrendaNash I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationDavidRaja I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationJohnsonKelli I endorse the NCSPP response for this section
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationDennisDebiakDivision of Psychoanalysis (39)C-29 D. "Accredited, on Contingency" The thought that we entertained relates to the process of programs applying for contingent accreditation. Something feels mildly controlling at the least and punitive at worst when CoA uses phrases such as we identified in the IR above and then does not explain how a program knows when it has reached the mark. We believe in the highest of standards and we also believe in clearly articulating what is required to reach the standard, and how this ‘looks’. If there is some way to share information, learn of exemplars, or provide mentors, the accreditation process, though still daunting, would be minus that particular stress (e.g. the mystery of how you know when you reach certain standards or expectations).
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationJoelleTaknintAPAGSAPAGS comment on IR C-29 D is included within the full comment on these IR's, which was submitted under IR C-21 D.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationKathieBates I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationLaurenNichols I am in support of the comment submitted by Division 44 and the respective co-signers
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationTammyBarryWashington State University Clinical Psychology Doctoral ProgramThe faculty in our program support the CUDCP statement on this IR.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationPatriciaDixon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program Accreditationarthurcantos "It is mandatory that the program be ready to apply for full accreditation within 3 years of obtaining the “accredited, on contingency” status, to ensure that full accreditation may be attained within 5 years of initial accreditation." The program can apply for accreditation on contingency once it has admitted its second cohort and has practicum outcome data. This could happen at the end of the second year and one would assume that accreditation on contingency could be granted some time in the third year. Requiring the program to apply for full accreditation within three years of being accredited on contingency might prove to be difficult for some programs since the program would need at least one graduate and distal data on this graduate. This might prove difficult given that the national mean on years for graduation from Ph.D. programs in clinical psychology is around 6 years. I would recommend that the requirement and language be changed to programs needing to be ready to apply ... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationCrystalCollier I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationDavidPantaloneUniversity of Massachusetts, BostonWe endorse the CUDCP comment.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationJenniferCallahanUniversity of North Texas: Clinical PsychologyOn behalf of the 10 faculty, and 2 student members of the clinical psychology program committee at the University of North Texas, I endorse the CUDCP comments concerning Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, C-19 I, and C-6 P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29).
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationRadhikaKrishnamurthy I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationMeganO'BanionNCSPPNCSPP supports CoA proposed changes to C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationCheryllRothery I endorse the NCSPP comments for this section.
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationDeboraBellCUDCP (Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology)The Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP) welcomes the opportunity to comment on these Implementing Regulations regarding Diversity Recruitment and Retention across the sequence of training (C-19 D, I, and P) and Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation (C-29). The CUDCP Board of Directors, which serves as the elected representatives of our 175 member programs, drafted these comments. Regarding C-29 D: Initial Doctoral Program Accreditation The revisions to the IR that outline the timeline required for programs who apply for “Accredited, on Contingency” status to be able to be evaluated for, and ideally attain, full accreditation within 5 years are of critical importance to new programs. CUDCP strongly supports the role of CoA and the Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation in making the timeline clear and supporting programs embarking on this path to accreditation. In general, we are supportive of the proposed revision to this IR, with the followin... See Full Comment
July 2018 IR Revisions C-29 D. Initial Doctoral Program AccreditationDianaConcannon I endorse the NCSPP response for this section.