Susan Zlotlow, PhD
Director, APA Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation
Marcus Patterson
Chair-Elect, APAGS
Boston University
This article first appeared in the Spring 2000 Edition of the
APAGS Newsletter, Vol. 12(2)
What does accreditation mean?
Accreditation is a voluntary process which assures the
educational community and the general public that an institution or program has
clearly-defined and appropriate objectives and maintains conditions under which
their achievement can reasonably be expected. It encourages improvement through
continuous self-study and review. It fosters excellence in post-secondary
education through the development of principles and guidelines for assessing
educational effectiveness. Accreditation reflects the fact that in achieving
recognition by the accrediting agency, the institution or program is committed
to self-study and external review by one's peers in seeking not only to meet
standards, but to continuously seek ways in which to enhance the quality of
education and training provided. Thus, accreditation sets standards of quality
for programs, not for individuals. Assessment of individual competence is part
of the credentialing/licensure process.
Briefly, how does the process work, how does one gain or lose
accreditation, and who is eligible to receive it?
In psychology, the Committee on Accreditation (CoA ) of the APA,
which is comprised of 21 members who represent various stakeholder groups in the
accreditation process, is the group charged with (among its other duties)
decision making on the accredited status of eligible programs. Currently, the
CoA accredits doctoral programs in clinical, counseling, or school psychology
and combinations of more than one of those areas. The CoA also accredits
predoctoral internship programs in professional psychology as well as
postdoctoral residency programs in (1) advanced professional psychology and (2)
specialty areas of professional psychology.
The process of accreditation starts with a training program's
voluntary submission of an intensive self-study of its objectives, educational
and training practices, resource support base, faculty, students, graduates, and
training outcomes. The program then participates in a review of its operations
by a site visit team of professional colleagues. The CoA reviews the self-study
report, the site visit report, and the program's response to the site visit
report, and makes an accreditation decision based upon the record and its
professional judgment of the program's quality. It can make the following
decisions with regard to accredited status:
- “Accredited” designates a program which, in the
professional judgment of the CoA, is consistent, substantively and
procedurally, with the Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation
(G&P).
- “Accredited, on probation” designates an
accredited program which, in the professional judgment of the CoA, is not
currently consistent with the G&P. Programs on probation will be given a
deadline by which to remedy identified deficiencies. The intent of this
category is to inform the public that the program has issues that need to be
addressed.
- “Revocation of accreditation” designates a program
that has previously been on probation, for which the CoA has evidence that
the program continues to be inconsistent with the G&P. This decision
reflects the CoA's determination that the program will not become consistent
with the G&P within a foreseeable time. An accredited program cannot
have its accreditation revoked without first being placed on “accredited,
on probation” status. The effective date of the revocation is the date of
the CoA meeting in which the decision was made. If the program appeals the
CoA's decision to revoke, and that decision is upheld, the revocation will
take effect 30 days after the appeal hearing is held.
- “Denial of accreditation” designates an applicant
program for which the CoA has evidence that the program is inconsistent with
the G&P.
The award of “accredited” status is effective on the final
day of the site visit preceding the CoA's decision to grant such status.
Students who are in the program on that date and subsequently complete the
program are considered to be graduates of an accredited program, provided, of
course, that the program maintains an accredited status through the date of the
students' graduation. Thus, programs are accredited beginning with the site
visit and accreditation is not retroactive.
What does accreditation mean for students?
Accreditation provides public notification that an institution
or program meets standards of quality set forth by an accrediting agency.
Accreditation also provides assurance that the program in which you are enrolled
or are considering enrolling is engaged in continuous review and improvement of
its quality, that it meets nationally endorsed standards in the profession, and
that it is accountable for achieving what it sets out to do. Thus, it speaks to
professional quality and a sense of public trust. Although graduating from an
accredited program does not guarantee jobs or licensure for individuals, it may
facilitate such achievement.
How are student voices heard in the process and how do
students seek recourse in accreditation issues?
Students are an integral part of the overall accreditation
process. Student participation in accreditation includes: the active involvement
of a student member on the Committee; a specific domain in the Guidelines and
Principles that addresses student-faculty relationships; specific times for
students to meet with site visitors during a visit; and two formal feedback
mechanisms to the Committee on Accreditation. Depending on the program in which
the student is housed, students may also be involved in aspects of writing the
self study documents and preparing for the site visit. In addition, because the
accreditation model used by the CoA is outcome-based, student competency,
achievement and satisfaction with the overall program are carefully reviewed.
The domain of student-faculty relations (intern/staff relations for internships)
includes the accessibility of faculty/staff to students/interns, the timeliness
of feedback, both written and oral, to students/interns, and the right of
students/interns to be treated with respect. This domain was added to the
Guidelines and Principles of accreditation when they were being drafted based
upon the input of the student member of the Committee. During a program's site
visit, the visitors review the overall quality and functioning of the program.
An integral part of that visit is a scheduled meeting with the students/interns.
These meetings allow the site visitors to collect information on students'
perspectives of the program and to discuss the program climate. The role of the
site visitors is to serve as the “eyes and ears” of the Committee on
Accreditation. Those observations are included in a report to the Committee
which is also sent to the program for comment. Although the content of the
meetings with students is not confidential, site visitors are careful to
separate the comments from the individuals making commentary.
The Committee on Accreditation also has two formal mechanisms
whereby students/interns can provide formal feedback to the Committee. These
include the third-party comment and the complaint procedure. The third party
comment can either be positive or negative and is provided to the Committee
prior to the time the program's self-study is reviewed. A complaint against an
accredited program may be filed at any time. In both of these procedures, the
information must be in writing and must include the signature of the party
filing the information. These formal documents are shared with the program for
their response. More information on these procedures is available from the
Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation.
What are some accreditation issues that are of particular
interest to students?
Issues involving accreditation are generally a reflection of
issues in professional psychology in general. The role of the Committee on
Accreditation is to maintain the overall quality of programs in psychology. As
such, the Committee is influenced by larger forces in professional psychology
and is in dialogue with a great many professional, educational and training
groups.
Currently, there is a great deal of interest in reviewing the
overall “sequence of training” in professional psychology - -focusing on the
timing of the internship, this issue is being approached by examining the
sequence of practicum, internship and licensure with the understanding that an
interdependence exists among these training elements. The Council of
Representatives has voted to have a Commission review these issues involved in
the broader picture.
The Office of Accreditation and other training groups is also
considering such national topics as the role of specialty training and the
placement of such training, including issues surrounding post-doctoral residency
positions.
For more information, consult the Office of Program
Consultation and Accreditation webpage: http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/.
This article first appeared in the Spring 2000 Edition of the
APAGS Newsletter, Vol. 12(2)
