Review of the Memorandum of Mutual Recognition (MMR)
Based upon feedback provided by member organizations, the
workgroup re-considered the Memorandum of Mutual Recognition, proposed as a short-term
solution to compliance with AIT. The general principle of having a mechanism for immediate
compliance with AIT, where possible, was re-affirmed. However, it was noted that the MMR
was perhaps too general (i.e. "one-size-fits all"), and that a more effective
approach would retain the general principle of mutual recognition between provinces with
similar entry level requirements (i.e. doctoral-entry provinces to doctoral-entry
provinces; and master's to master's), but allow a more flexible process of recognition,
reconciliation, and accommodation. This process would involve negotiation of agreements
around specific differences, and agreements may differ between different provinces.
Recognition / Reconciliation /
Accommodation Model (RRAM)
As noted above, the RRAM retains the general
principle of mutual recognition between provinces with similar entry-level requirements,
as described in the MMR. It is proposed that the RRAM model would entail having provinces
with similar entry level requirements meet with each other to begin to negotiate an
agreement to recognize qualified practitioners from each other. Specific differences would
be examined, and an agreement to reconcile those differences, or to accommodate them
through a negotiation process would be reached. Depending upon the number of differences,
this could result in a multi-lateral agreement between several provinces. Wherever
possible, recognition and reconciliation would be encouraged. Where this is difficult
(i.e., the differences are irreconcilable), then accommodation strategies would be
developed.
For example, all provinces registering psychologists at the
doctoral level could meet. This could include doctoral-entry provinces as well as
dual-entry provinces, such as Nova Scotia, where there is a doctoral-entry track. If two
of the provinces have slightly different requirements for hours of supervision, they might
agree to ignore those differences and recognize them as essentially equivalent for the
purposes of labour mobility. On the other hand, the difference between two other provinces
may be too great (e.g. one year of supervised experience versus zero years). These two
provinces would attempt to reconcile the difference, and it might be agreed that the
jurisdiction with the one year requirement would accept psychologists from the zero-year
jurisdiction, provided they had been registered and practicing for a number of years
without any disciplinary action against them. If it is not possible to reconcile the
difference, then a reasonable accommodation mechanism would be developed and form part of
the agreement. For example, the applicant might be granted a probationary license for a
year, with a peer review at some point; or an extended oral exam or review of work
samples; or a period of continuing education or supervision, etc.
The above are provided as examples only. An important
principle of the proposed RRAM model is that it focus on solutions that are immediately
achievable or available to jurisdictions. In other words, legislative change would not be
required. While this does not resolve the master's - doctoral level issue, it is seen as
an important step towards compliance with AIT. Based upon the feedback received from
jurisdictions to date, the workgroup identified a high degree of commonality between
provinces. The application of a recognition, reconciliation and accommodation model has
the potential to significantly improve mobility for psychologists in Canada.
Recommendation of PSWAIT
The RRAM is recommended as an immediate action, as a first
step to full compliance with AIT. Subsequent steps will be addressed in an iterative
process in achieving mobility for the profession of psychology. The iterative process will
be anchored in a competency-based framework.
The workgroup suggests that jurisdictions consider applying
the RRAM as an exercise to:
a) isolate specific barriers between their respective
jurisdictions and other jurisdictions;
b)develop accommodations and reconciliation to allow free flow across provincial borders;
and
c) to determine the irreconcilable issues and how they can be reduced or resolved.
COMPETENCY-BASED FRAMEWORK
I. Current Competency-based training
The workgroup discussed various models of training of
psychologists in Canada. It was noted that competency-based training of psychologists
already exists to a great extent in Canada. The following dimensions of education and
training of professional psychologists were identified, and examined in terms of
competency assessment and knowledge/content-based training.
A) Character
- assessed at point of program entry (references, interviews,
etc.)
- continuous evaluation by supervisors (observation,
performance, etc.)
B) Jurisprudence
- knowledge/content based training
- examined by regulatory bodies at point of registration
- training of necessary knowledge in training programs
- continuous or regular evaluation by supervisors in training
programs
- measures are currently available (typically oral or written
examinations)
C) Ethics
- both knowledge and competency training
- continuous evaluation by examination and observation during
training programs
- measures are available
D) Internship
- both knowledge and skills-based training
- most organized internships have well developed methods of
evaluating knowledge and skills throughout training as these are required for
accreditation.
- assessment of competency is central component of the
internship
E) Degree
- degree in professional psychology requires acquisition of
core knowledge as well as demonstrated competence in area of training
- knowledge assessed primarily be
examinations/papers/candidacy exams, etc.
- competency assessed in practica by supervisors (observation
of application of skills by supervisors is regular in accredited programs, and in most
organized training programs)
- competency in specific skills areas (e.g. assessment)is
usually assessed by supervised application of skill area and evaluation of performance
F) Post-degree supervised experience
- many jurisdictions require post-degree supervised experience
- primarily competency-based training
- competence to apply skills is evaluated by supervisors
during this period.
These dimensions of training professional psychologists
involve both knowledge and competency based training. Further, it is clear from the above
that assessment of competency skills occurs continuously throughout the training of
professional psychologists in recognized programs. Following professional training,
further assessment of competency occurs at the level of registration or licensure.
II. Assessment of Competence at the level of
registration
A set of knowledge and skills is brought to the level of
registration. Regulatory bodies assess competence in specific skill areas. The College of
Psychologists of Ontario also requires a detailed declaration of competence by applicants,
which is also reviewed by supervisors familiar with the applicant's training and
experience, and which forms the basis for evaluation of the competence of the applicant in
specific areas by the College.
Using the Ontario College's declaration of competence as a
model, the workgroup considered developing a comprehensive form for declaring competence,
based upon the Ontario application, for use by other jurisdictions to assist them in
assessing competence.
It was suggested that the following "AREAS" of
competence be included:
Proposed areas of Competence:
Health Service Providers
Clinical
Counselling
School
Health
Rehabilitation
Developmental
Forensic
Geropsychology
|
Other
Applied Research
Teaching
Program Evaluation
Human Resource Management
Industrial/Organizational
Health System Evaluation
|
Applicants for registration would be required to
declare their proposed competence in the above areas, and to further indicate which
activities or services they are competent to provide within each area. The following list
of activities or services were suggested:
Assessment
Psychotherapy
Counselling
Other Intervention (specify)
Consulting
|
Research
Program Evaluation
Teaching
|
Finally, the principal client groups that
the applicant is competent to work with would be specified:
Children
Adolescents
Adults
Couples
|
Families
Elderly
Organizations
|
Thus, for example, an applicant may indicate
that they are competent in Clinical Psychology and Rehabilitation Psychology. Within
Clinical psychology they are competent to provide assessment and treatment, but within
Rehabilitation only assessment. Principle client groups might include children and
adolescents only.
An example of a table to declare proposed areas of
competence is found in Table 1.
Many though not all of the above areas of competence have
definitions which currently exist and are accepted by the profession. For example:
| Clinical |
- defined by CPA,
ABEP (American Board of Examiners in Psychology)
- CPA accreditation criteria for Clinical Programs/Internship |
| Counselling |
- as above |
| School |
- as above, plus the
Canadian/National Association of School Psychologists |
| I/O |
- CPA (I/O section)
- ABEP |
| Forensic |
- ABEP |
| Clinical
Neuropsychology |
- CPA
-ABEP Accreditation |
In order further comply with the requirements of AIT,
the ongoing iterative process will focus on additional development of competency-based
strategies.
Workplan
In order to keep all stakeholders aware of the work
completed thus far and the proposed activities of the PSWAIT, a workplan has been
developed. It was determined that breaking the activities down into phases would simplify
communication regarding these activities.
Phase I began with a meeting held in Montreal from April
3-4, 1998. A set of general consensus items was developed by the workgroup as well as a
proposed modification of the Memoranda of Mutual Agreement (MMR). These were written into
minutes and presented at the June, 1998 CPAP meeting held in Edmonton. CPAP delegates were
asked to present the information to their respective organizations and provide feedback by
September 15, 1998. At the June CPAP meeting, the registrars from the Colleges of Ontario
and Alberta were added to the PSWAIT. Also during this period, a funding proposal, which
has undergone three revisions, was submitted to the federal government. A decision from
Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) regarding funding has not yet been received.
Phase II began with a meeting in Ottawa on October 2-3,
1998. An analysis of the feedback from the CPAP members is compiled into the present
report. Three documents from this meeting are being prepared for consideration by the CPAP
members, the federal and provincial representatives, and CRHSPP. In addition to this
report, the minutes of the October meeting will be circulated by the end of October and
the latest version of the funding proposal will be sent out for approval by mid-October.
Feedback on the funding proposal is required as soon as possible in order that it might be
re-submitted to HRDC. The funding proposal has already been approved by CPAP delegates in
the past, but the revisions require approval.
Direct communication with all stakeholders by the PSWAIT
will occur by November 15, 1998 to answer any questions and it is hoped that formal
feedback on the report and minutes of the October meeting will be received by
mid-December. Feedback will be compiled and reproduced for discussion and amendment at the
January, 1999 CPAP meeting.
Simultaneously, federal and provincial representatives will
be kept informed of the progress made by the profession by making all documents available
to them as well as maintaining telephone contact.
Phase III will begin with the CPAP meeting in January where
CPAP members will be asked to provide direction to the PSWAIT. It has now become apparent
that solving the mobility issues within the profession of psychology can only been
achieved through an ongoing iterative model. Discussions and deliberations at CPAP will
determine the direction and the actions of the workgroup. An elaboration of the subsequent
steps will be developed at that time.
Table 1 | Table 2 |
