Policy on the Retention and Dismissal of Students

 
Objective
The purpose of this policy is to clarify the areas of competence and professional behavior expected of each student, and the procedures for identifying and addressing incompetence and/or ethical violations that might occur during the learner's doctoral program. This policy also describes the procedures used to monitor progress, identify deficiencies, assist the student in remediation where possible, or dismiss the student from the program when remediation is not possible.
 
Introduction 
The mission and goal of the Counseling Psychology doctoral program is to prepare professional psychologists to integrate science and practice as agents of change in a multicultural society, more specifically, to make significant contributions to wellness across the lifespan through scholarly inquiry, direct service, consultation, and education. In addition to becoming competent members of the professional psychology community, students are expected to maintain high standards of professional and ethical behavior in their interactions with clients, students, peers, supervisors, and faculty. These standards include confidentiality, honesty, and academic integrity. 
 
Specific goals include:
      
       1.    Use of scientist-practitioner skills in advancing knowledge of
              psychology and in psychological diagnosis and intervention.
    
       2.    Provision of counseling, consultation, and psychoeducational
              services to clients and consumers resulting from a sound
              theoretical and research knowledge base
      
       3.    Use of scientist-practitioner skills in demonstrating ethical
              and professional behavior consistent with the standards of 
              psychology.
      
       4.    Use of scientist-practitioner skills in providing culturally
              sensitive and compatible services in a multicultural
              environment.
  
Students are expected to be familiar with the Program goals and to ensure that their academic and professional development plans are consistent with the achievement of these goals.
 
Definitions 
          
Incompetence is defined as a lack of ability, which may include deficiencies in professional conduct, interpersonal skill, or academic deficiency.  It is an ethical violation for students to provide psychological services beyond their current level of competence.
  
Ethical Misconduct occurs when the American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct produced are not followed. This code is intended to provide both general principles and the decision rules to cover most situations encountered by psychologists in their professional activities. It has as its primary goal the welfare and protection of the individuals and groups with whom psychologists work. It is the individual responsibility of each psychologist to aspire to the highest possible standards of conduct. Psychologists respect and protect human and civil rights and do not knowingly participate in or condone unfair discriminatory practices.
  
Problematic Behaviors refer to a student's behaviors, attitudes, or characteristics that may require remediation, but are perceived as not excessive or unexpected for professionals in training.  Performance anxiety, discomfort with client's diverse life‑styles and ethnic backgrounds, and lack of appreciation of agency norms are examples of problematic behaviors that are usually remedied and not likely to progress into impairment status (Lamb, Cochran, & Jackson, 1991, p. 292). Problematic behaviors are typically more situational and time limited rather than persisting across time and situations.
 
Identification and Verification of Problems Requiring Remediation or Dismissal 
Impairment, incompetence, ethical violations, or problematic behaviors can be identified in a variety of ways. Formal evaluation of each student's progress takes place annually, as described in the Student Handbook. In addition, a faculty member, supervisor, or fellow student can identify possible problems at any point in the student's academic career.  
 
Annual Student Evaluation 
The following areas are addressed in each student's annual review: academic performance, research experiences, competency with clients, appropriate professional relationship behavior, acceptance of supervision, timely progression through degree requirements, and adherence to ethical, legal, and professional standards. Students will receive ratings of Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory in the categories of Academic, Research, Practice, Writing, and Professional/Ethical performance.
  
If a student disagrees with the evaluation, he or she can prepare and submit to his or her advisor a brief (2-3 page) self‑assessment addressing each of the areas in which there is disagreement. If desired, students may attach relevant documentation (e.g., evaluations by clinical supervisors, research team coordinators). The student may wish to consult faculty while preparing the self‑assessment (e.g., practicum supervisors, instructors, research supervisors, advisor). The counseling psychology program faculty will consider the student's self‑assessment and note areas of agreement/disagreement and particular issues to be raised in meeting with the student.
  
The Evaluation discussion will be summarized in writing, noting particular strengths and needed areas of development as well as the source of the feedback. This documentation will be reviewed with the student in a scheduled meeting with the Program faculty. The written summary of the feedback will be kept in the student's file. In addition, students will receive a copy of the evaluation for their records. If a potential problem is noted, a formal review will take place as described below under "Review Procedures for Possible Problems."
 
Informal Identification of Problems 
In addition to problems identified during the annual evaluation, any faculty member, supervisor, or student may raise an issue at any time. Consistent with the APA ethical code, when a person believes that there is a problem or there may have been an ethical violation, then the person should attempt to resolve the issue informally by bringing it to the attention of that individual (if the an informal resolution appears appropriate and if no confidentiality rights are violated) (see APA, 1992, p. 1611). If an informal resolution is not accomplished or if the situation is not appropriate for an informal resolution, supervisors should initially discuss their concerns with a program faculty member, who will gather additional information and raise the issue at the next scheduled program faculty meeting; students should first discuss the issue with their own advisor, who will then raise the issue with the other program faculty. Advisors and faculty members will protect the confidentiality of the student reporting the potential problem, but they may request that the student meet with them to provide additional information. The Program faculty will briefly discuss the potential problem during the meeting in which it is raised, and if necessary the advisor of the student concerned will gather additional data and will report to the Program faculty within one week. If the concern appears valid, a formal review will take place as described below.
 
Review Procedures for Possible Problems
When a possible impairment or problematic behavior has been identified, the faculty of the Counseling Psychology program will meet with the student to review the evaluation, and to determine whether a problem actually exists. In addition to the original report of the problem, information will be gathered from formal written and/or verbal evaluations of the student and from informal sources, including observations of students outside the training environment or reports from other involved parties. Areas to be reviewed and discussed include the nature, severity, duration, and consequences of the reported impairment or problem behavior. The following questions will be posed at this stage (adapted from Lamb, Cochran, & Jackson, 1991):

         1.    What are the actual behaviors that are of concern, and how
                are those behaviors related to the goals of the Program?

         2.    How and in what settings have these behaviors been
                manifested?

         3.    What were the negative consequences for the training agency
                or others (e.g., clients, other students) of the problematic
                behaviors?

         4.    Who observed the behaviors in question?

         5.    Who or what was affected by the behavior (clients, agency,
                atmosphere, training program)?

         6.    What was the frequency of this behavior?

         7.    Has the student been made aware of this behavior before the
                meeting, and if so, how did he or she respond?

         8.    Has the feedback regarding the behavior been documented
                in any way?

         9.    How serious is this behavior on the continuum of ethical and
                professional  behavior?

       10.    What are the student's ideas about how the problem may be
                remediated?        
    
              
Although each situation is different and requires individual assessment, the following factors may indicate that the problem is more serious and may represent a more serious impairment rather than a problematic behavior that is easier to remediate:

          1.   The student does not acknowledge, understand, or address the
                problematic behavior when it is identified.

          2.   The problematic behavior is not a reflection of a skill deficit
                that can be rectified by training.

          3.   The quality of service delivered by the person suffers and
                cannot be restored or rescued.

          4.   The problematic behavior is not restricted to one area of
                professional functioning.

          5.   The behavior has the potential for ethical or legal
                ramifications if not addressed.

          6.   A disproportionate amount of attention by training personnel
                is required.

          7.   Behavior does not change as a function of feedback.

          8.   Behavior negatively affects the public image of the agency,
                university, or training site.
  
After the initial meeting with the student, the faculty will meet to determine whether impairment or problematic behavior exists.  If the faculty determines that there is a problem, they will develop a written plan for remediation or a recommendation for dismissal and will schedule a meeting to discuss this plan with the student within three weeks of their initial meeting with the student. Students are encouraged to submit their own ideas for remediation to the faculty, through their advisors. The faculty will consider the student's recommendations in developing their own recommendations. The student's advisor will document the plan using the Student Performance Remediation Plan form.
  
After the faculty members have presented their recommendations to the student and answered his or her questions, the student must sign the Performance Review Cover Sheet  indicating that the recommendations have been presented and explained. The student will be given the opportunity to accept the recommendations, to provide a written rebuttal, and/or to appeal. If the student chooses to provide a rebuttal, the Program faculty will meet again to consider any new evidence presented by the student, and will provide written documentation of their decision within three weeks of the date the rebuttal was received.  If the student wishes to appeal the faculty's decision, he or she may follow the appeal procedures outlined in the Purdue University: University Regulations. Regardless of the outcome of the feedback meeting, the student's advisor will schedule a follow‑up meeting to evaluate the student?s adjustment to the review process, and recommend potential sources of guidance and assistance when necessary.
 
Remediation Procedures 
The remediation process will follow the written plan, which must include scheduled review dates and target dates for each issue identified.   Examples of actions that may be included in the remediation plan are an increase in didactic instruction; a decrease in course load; a decrease in or temporary suspension of clinical, didactic, or supervisory responsibilities; increased supervision and/or faculty advisement; leave of absence; and individual psychotherapy. Progress must be reviewed at least once every semester for the Fall and Spring semesters, at least two weeks before registration. Additional reviews may be scheduled as necessary. After each review, a copy of the current Remediation Plan including student comments and faculty signatures must be filed in the student's folder. If progress against targets is viewed by the faculty as insufficient, they may recommend either a change in the remediation plan or dismissal. The student will have an opportunity for rebuttal or appeal, as described above.