Assessment Details
Academic Year: 2020-2021 Level: Graduate
Campus Department: Lynch School of Education & Human Development [UG and Grad]
Program Type: Major [UG] / Program [Grad]
Program Name: Counseling Psychology PhD (Link)
Description of Data Collection:
a. Students demonstrate foundational knowledge, and identification with, the field of psychology, generally and counseling psychology, specifically
i. Faculty evaluation of performance on comprehensive examination
ii. Annual surveys of all current students
iii. Annual alumni surveys for alumni 2 and 5 years from graduation
iv. Faculty review of students’ performance across multiple domains in the context of annual student evaluations
v. Annual employer surveys of supervisors of recent (within last 10 years) program graduates
b. Students demonstrate competency as theorists, researchers, and scholars, who are knowledgeable of the ways in which practice influences science.
i. Faculty evaluation of performance on comprehensive examination
ii. Faculty evaluation of student 2nd year research qualifying paper
vi. Annual surveys of all current students
vii. Annual alumni surveys for alumni 2 and 5 years from graduation
iii. Faculty review of students’ performance across multiple domains in context of the annual student evaluations
c. Students demonstrate competency as practitioners and are knowledgeable of the ways in which science influences practice
i. Faculty evaluation of performance on comprehensive examination
ii. Supervisor evaluation of student practicum performance
iii. Faculty evaluation of student performance as MA lab leader
iv. Student completion of APA-approved internships
v. Faculty review of students’ performance across multiple domains in context of the annual student evaluations
d. Students demonstrate social justice practices in their professional work.
i. Faculty evaluation of performance on comprehensive examination
ii. Supervisor evaluation of student practicum performance
iii. Faculty evaluation of student performance as MA lab leader
iv. Faculty review of students’ performance across multiple domains in context of the annual student evaluations
Review Process:
The full faculty meets each week to discuss program-related issues, including student performance and feedback in several ways including survey of current students and graduates. In addition, each year at the end of the second semester, we hold a program-level Faculty Retreat, where the faculty review the above student data in the context of an in-depth student evaluation process. We make curricular changes at any point that we see the need, but especially in the context of the end-of-year student evaluation process.
Resulting Program Changes:
The findings demonstrated that our students are meeting our aims. We also recognize the need to continue a close assessment process of both program specific aims and profession specific aims. Below we note the changes to our program that have been based on findings in recent years:
• In 2019, upon the request of students, two faculty and student representatives from each cohort came together in a series of meetings to discuss student self-care. Many students felt overwhelmed by all of the required work, which compromised their capacity to take care of themselves. They wanted structural changes in the program rather than simply advice about how to take care of themselves. In response, we came together in faculty meetings to discuss how to ensure our courses were robust and effective but also streamlined to focus on the most essential material. The result was that we each reviewed our own doctoral-level syllabi with the aim of limiting the number of readings and assignments to those that were the most central to student growth. This was a critical process that reduced student burden without compromising their learning.
• In 2015, we responded to students who, for several years, had described the process of studying for the research component of the comprehensive exams as taking up so much time that they became woefully behind in actually using their research skills to do research. In response, we discussed alternatives in faculty meetings and decided on a new process: We have removed research questions from our comprehensive exams and located evaluation of students’ research knowledge and skills in a separate qualifying paper, due in January of their second year. The qualifying paper process (described in detail in the Doctoral Student Handbook, I.C.4) requires students to develop a research proposal that they can, if they want, use as the beginning of a dissertation process. In this way, the evaluation of their research skills serves as a catalyst for their own research rather than a hindrance.
• We have continued a process of reducing redundancy in courses, especially for Direct-Admit students. For example, rather than requiring the MA level courses in Counseling theories for direct admit students, we now offer the doctoral level course each year and have revamped the course to address the needs of MA and direct admits.
• With the retirement of AJ Franklin in the Spring of 2020, students have become concerned about how we demonstrate to interested applicants our commitment to Black students. We created a task force to address this concern in the Fall of 2020, composed of two faculty members and one student representative. As a result of our work together, we have added the following to our website: a.) a statement on our commitment to Black lives, b.) a video describing our commitment to social justice throughout the admissions process, and c.) several videos of our doctoral students describing how they see social justice enacted in our program.(Please see our program website for details: https://www.bc.edu/content/bc-web/schools/lynch-school/academics/departments/cdep/phd-counseling-psychology.html). We will also be using this year’s Covid-related waiving of the GRE as a springboard for further consideration of whether the GRE can be eliminated from our program admissions process entirely given the inequities it produces.
Date of Most Recent Program Review:
The findings demonstrated that our students are meeting our aims. We also recognize the need to continue a close assessment process of both program specific aims and profession specific aims. Below we note the changes to our program that have been based on findings in recent years:
• In 2019, upon the request of students, two faculty and student representatives from each cohort came together in a series of meetings to discuss student self-care. Many students felt overwhelmed by all of the required work, which compromised their capacity to take care of themselves. They wanted structural changes in the program rather than simply advice about how to take care of themselves. In response, we came together in faculty meetings to discuss how to ensure our courses were robust and effective but also streamlined to focus on the most essential material. The result was that we each reviewed our own doctoral-level syllabi with the aim of limiting the number of readings and assignments to those that were the most central to student growth. This was a critical process that reduced student burden without compromising their learning.
• In 2015, we responded to students who, for several years, had described the process of studying for the research component of the comprehensive exams as taking up so much time that they became woefully behind in actually using their research skills to do research. In response, we discussed alternatives in faculty meetings and decided on a new process: We have removed research questions from our comprehensive exams and located evaluation of students’ research knowledge and skills in a separate qualifying paper, due in January of their second year. The qualifying paper process (described in detail in the Doctoral Student Handbook, I.C.4) requires students to develop a research proposal that they can, if they want, use as the beginning of a dissertation process. In this way, the evaluation of their research skills serves as a catalyst for their own research rather than a hindrance.
• We have continued a process of reducing redundancy in courses, especially for Direct-Admit students. For example, rather than requiring the MA level courses in Counseling theories for direct admit students, we now offer the doctoral level course each year and have revamped the course to address the needs of MA and direct admits.
• With the retirement of AJ Franklin in the Spring of 2020, students have become concerned about how we demonstrate to interested applicants our commitment to Black students. We created a task force to address this concern in the Fall of 2020, composed of two faculty members and one student representative. As a result of our work together, we have added the following to our website: a.) a statement on our commitment to Black lives, b.) a video describing our commitment to social justice throughout the admissions process, and c.) several videos of our doctoral students describing how they see social justice enacted in our program.(Please see our program website for details: https://www.bc.edu/content/bc-web/schools/lynch-school/academics/departments/cdep/phd-counseling-psychology.html). We will also be using this year’s Covid-related waiving of the GRE as a springboard for further consideration of whether the GRE can be eliminated from our program admissions process entirely given the inequities it produces.
Attachments (if available)