Department of Psychology // University of Notre Dame

Counseling Program Evaluation

Deadlines

In 2006, program deadlines that were formerly established at the department level were transitioned to the program level. Therefore, students entering the Counseling Program prior to 2006 are subject to Department deadlines published in the General Requirements document. Students entering the Program in or after 2006 are subject to the deadlines given below.

The purpose of this set of deadlines is to give students a two-tiered timeline that advises them of both when they have fallen behind, and are thereby no longer making "Satisfactory" progress, and when they have gotten so far behind that they forfeit their eligibility to continue in the program. The Program has worked closely with its students to assure that these are reasonable dates and welcomes any further input students would care to offer.

To remain in "Satisfactory" status, starting with incoming 2006 students, the following deadlines will apply:

First-Year Project

Year 1, May 1: Program presentation.
Year 2, Sep 1: Department presentation.

Master’s Project

Year 2, Feb 1: Proposal defended.
Year 3, Dec 1: Thesis defended.

Preliminary Exam

Year 4, Sep 1: Paper or exam completed.

Doctoral Project

Year 4, Oct 31: Proposal defended.
Year 5: (Internship Year)
Year 6, Aug 1: Dissertation defended.

Students not meeting a "Satisfactory" deadline will lapse into "Unsatisfactory" status and will discontinue their practica training (at the end of any practica contracts in place at that time) until they make up the missed requirement. Students in "Unsatisfactory" status for 6 months will forfeit their degree eligibility. For students with compelling justification, deadline extensions can be approved by the department's Graduate Studies Committee.

Comments

The Program will offer its Research Methods course every year. The course will focus even more than it has in the past on helping students prepare their master's proposals. Students will take this course in the fall of their second year so they can reasonably be expected to defend their master's proposals early in spring semester of their second years (Feb 1).
Rather than alternating years with Research Methods, as is currently being done, Ethics/History and Systems will alternate years with Multicultural.
Although the last deadline is in Year 6, departmental funding is for only 5 years.
Students meeting this schedule will finish at Notre Dame after 4 years, defending their dissertations while on their internship, with their 5th year of support going unused.
Once the master's thesis is defended at the beginning of Year 3, students will need to spend the next year focused on both their preliminary exam and their doctoral proposal in order to complete them between Sep 1 and October 31 of Year 4.
The dissertation proposal deadline has been moved up, based on feedback from students, to clear November through February of Year 4 for internship season.
Request for extension of these deadlines should be submitted to the Graduate Committee in a letter that provides a compelling reason for the extension and proposes a new deadline. This letter also must be signed by the student's advisor.

Annual Report

One week before the last class day of spring semester, our graduate students complete an annual report (PDF) and the faculty meet to review student progress and provide written feedback to the students. Evaluation of students' progress is based on their emotional stability/maturity, application of ethical guidelines, responsiveness to supervision, and the following:

Year 1

Progress on the first-year project
Involvement in research
Performance of teaching assistantship duties
Successful completion of Clinical Skills and Interventions course
Successful completion of other first-year courses

Year 2

Presentation of research at the First-Year Project Symposium
Successful proposal of master's thesis project
Involvement in research
Performance of teaching assistantship duties
Successful completion of practicum at UCC
Successful completion of other courses

Year 3

Successful defense of master's thesis
Successful completion of 3 statistics courses (with a B- or better in each)
Successful completion of other courses
Progress in research projects, manuscripts for publication, and conference presentations
Adequate performance of teaching assistantship duties
Sucessful completion of community practicum placement
Successful completion of other courses
Progress toward completing preliminary examination

Year 4

Progress in research projects, manuscripts for publication, and conference presentations
Performance of teaching assistantship duties
Successful completion of courses
Successful completion of preliminary examination

Year 5*

Progress on development of dissertation proposal
Progress in research projects, manuscripts for publication, and conference presentations
Performance of teaching assistantship duties
Successful completion of courses

*Students must have a draft of their proposal approved by their advisor before applying for internship. They also must have successfully proposed their dissertation prior to submitting their rank-ordered internship sites to the APPIC-match program.

Comprehensive Exams

Currently, there are two options for graduate students in the Counseling Program: a) the written comprehensive examination or b) a comprehensive research literature review manuscript. Successful completion of one of these examination options and successful defense of the dissertation proposal constitutes the necessary conditions for admission to doctoral candidacy. It is strongly recommended that students satisfy these candidacy requirements prior to applying for internship. As noted elsewhere, students may not apply to internship unless they deliver a proposal to their advisor prior to the internship application deadline and the advisor determines that the student can defend the proposal successfully prior to beginning the internship.

Examination Option

The comprehensive written exam is written over the course of two days and covers a variety of topics. Day 1 covers core areas and Day 2 covers specialty areas. The examination consists of answering three questions per day. Two faculty members read and grade each question.

Day 1: Core Areas

Research Methods
Process and Outcome Research
Ethics/Professional Issues
Multicultural Psychology
Assessment
Psychopathology

Day 2: Specialty Areas (student chooses a competency/speciality area)

Note. Students who choose the Quantitative Minor are excused from Day 2 because they have a paper and publication requirement as part of their requirement for the minor.

Review Paper Option

The review paper represents a second option for satisfying candidacy requirements. Students are required to consult with their advisor on the selection of the topic of the paper. After students consult with their advisor and a topic has been chosen and discussed, students submit a two-page prospectus to a committee of three faculty members, which includes their advisor and two other faculty members, prior to writing the paper. The resulting manuscript is a Psychological Bulletin, Psychological Review, or The Counseling Psychologist - type review paper. Acceptance of the proposal is established when the last committee member signs and dates the Prospectus Approval Form. The review paper is due 3 months from the date of the acceptance of the proposal by the committee. Students must inform committee members what the deadlines are for each step of the evaluation process.

This paper is considered a competency-based project; thus, revisions based on feedback from the committee must be incorporated into a final draft, which is subject to re-review by the committee. That is, within 3 weeks after the paper is submitted to the committee, the three readers (i.e., the committee) will provide written feedback consistent with a journal manuscript review. The student distributes each reader's comments to all the other readers, so each reader has a complete set of reviews. The student then revises and resubmits the paper to the committee with a cover letter indicating how the reviewers' comments were addressed. Students can obtain consultation from the committee concerning the reviewers' comments during the revision stage. The final paper is due 30 days after receiving feedback from the committee. At that point, each reader will give a rating and the average of the readers will determine whether a passing of failing grade is given. The rating is given on a 6-point scale; 3.5 or higher is passing. Students will distribute to their committee members the 6-point grading scale in Appendix 7 of the Department's "General Requirements for Doctoral Students: document. If a passing grade is not achieved, the student can start over with the same topic, choose a new topic, or opt for the written exam. University regulations indicate that students have two chances to pass preliminary exams. Not passing the paper option the first time (as not passing the written exam option the first time) exhausts one of those chances.

The paper must conform to APA publication style (5th edition) throughout (including title page, abstract, formatting, etc.). There will be no exceptions to precise conformity to APA-style.

Summary of Tasks and Timelines

Student consults with advisor on topic, scope, focus, etc., as well as committee composition.
Student prepares 2-page prospectus in APA style for the committee.
Committee members review the prospectus and either sign the Prospectus Approval Form or ask for revisions.
Paper is due 3 months after the last committee member signs the Prospectus Approval Form.
Committee reviews the paper within 3 weeks of receiving it and provides written feedback.
Student has 30 days to revise and resubmit the paper with a cover letter.
Committee members provide a final grade within 3 weeks.

Post-Master's / Third Year “Gate”

The Program will conduct a specific advancement to PhD work evaluation of every student in the program after successful defense of the Master's thesis or at the end of Year 3. The evaluation will be based on all available information, including the Master's project, prior annual reports, vitae, professionalism, research, teaching, and transcripts. The program will decide if the student should proceed with additional preparation for the PhD or should terminate at the point of the evaluation. All program faculty will contribute to this decision. When the vote is not unanimous, the faculty will prepare written justifications for their votes, and the complete set of written justifications will be forwarded to the Graduate Studies Committee for review before the student is permitted to proceed with PhD work.