Visit SEQ Clinical Psychology (Doctorate)

Visit SEQ – Clinical Psychology (Doctorate)

PRE-VISIT SUBMISSION
Self-evaluation questionnaire for Doctoralprogrammes /

You should complete this questionnaire if you are submitting your accredited provision ahead of a partnership visit.

The questionnaire is split into two sections:

Section A asks for key information about the award you are submitting for accreditation, including details of who we should contact if we have queries about your application.
Section B invites you to self-evaluate your programme against each of our eight programme standards.

You should read this questionnaire alongside our handbook Preparing for a partnership visit, and alongside our accreditation standards.

You should provide your completed submission in three hard copies and on three USB sticks. Please post them to:

Partnership & Accreditation Team

The British Psychological Society

St Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East

Leicester LE1 7DR

If you have any queries in relation to your submission, please

Section A: about your provision

1. The programme(s)

If your submission covers more than one programme, please add further rows to this table as required.

Full name of programme as it appears on award certificate / Mode of study (tick all that apply) / Is the award validated? / Trainee numbers (FTE) / Date of first intake / Intake from which accreditation sought
Full-time / Part-time / Blended learning / Distance learning / Yes / No* / Current
(if the programme is already running) / Projected
(if the programme is brand new)

* Note:If your programme has not yet been validated, please indicate the date on which the validation event (or equivalent) is planned to take place.

2. The education provider

Name of awarding institution:
Academic unit(s) in which the provision is based:
Full address (to assist us in relation to future visit planning, where required):
Name of Programme Director(s): / You should tell us the name of the staff member(s) with overall academic responsibility for the provision and its delivery and development.
Franchising arrangements: / Is the provision franchised for delivery by a partner institution? Yes / No
If yes, please state the name of the partner institution.

3. The application

Who should we approach with any queries about this application? / You should tell us the name and role of who we should approach with any queries about your application, and provide us with an email address and telephone number for them.
Senior management sign off: / We require the Head of the academic unit in which the provision is based to confirm the accuracy of the information contained within this application, and the provision of the additional evidence outlined below.
Signature (electronic):
Name and role:
Date of submission:

4. The checklist

The sources of evidence to be supplied alongside this self-evaluation questionnaire are outlined below. This list should be considered alongside our handbook, Accreditation through Partnership: Preparing for a partnership visit.

Programme standard / Required evidence source (or equivalent alternative source if appropriate) / Enclosed?
Y/N
Programme standard 1: Programme Design / Programme specification.
Programme standard 2: Programme Content (learning, research and practice) / Module outlines.
Programme handbook.
Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks if applicable.
Information on staff/trainee/graduate publications
Programme standard 3: Working ethically and legally / There are no additional evidence requirements for this standard. / N/A
Programme standard 4: Selection and admissions / Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy. / Please provide a link
Recognition of Prior Learning Policy (if applicable). / Please provide a link
Programme standard 5: Student development and professional membership / There are no additional evidence requirements for this standard. / N/A
Programme standard 6: Academic leadership and programme delivery / CV’s / brief biographies for all staff listed in item 6.3.
Programme standard 7:Discipline specific resources / There are no additional evidence requirements for this standard. / N/A
Programme standard 8: Quality management and governance / An overview of any feedback collected by the programme in relation to quality matters (e.g. internal programme review document).
Copies of minutes of key programme committees for the last year e.g. Board of Studies, Programme Board and its subgroups.Individual trainee information should be redacted.
Copies of the most recent report by your external examiner(s).
Responses to the report by your external examiner(s) detailing any actions taken, if applicable.
(international/franchised provision only) Outline of the arrangements in place to support the collaborative delivery of the programme by external partner(s)

Please note that our reviewers may request clarification or ask for further information in addition to the event that the evidence sources outlined above do not adequately demonstrate fulfillment of the accreditation standards.

Section B: self-evaluation against our standards

In this part of our questionnaire, we ask you to tell us about the context in which your provision is delivered and the rationale for its development. We invite you to self-evaluate your provision against our eight programme standards.

When you complete this part of the questionnaire you must refer to the relevant accreditation standards and the associated process handbook(

Context and rationale

Information required / Commentary
How does your provision contribute to the strategic aims of your institution?
Please provide a brief outline.
What are the distinctive features of this provision?
Please briefly outline what you feel to be the distinctive features or strengths of this provision, using bullet points. These may relate to staff expertise, the provision, the academic unit in which it is based, or the education provider more generally.
How has the provision changed since the last review undertaken by the Society?
Please briefly outline any significant changes to your programme(s) (e.g. content, assessment, structure) or the resources underpinning delivery (e.g. staffing, discipline-specific resources, quality management).

Programme Standard 1: Programme Design

1.1Please list below each of the modules of which the accredited award is comprised (note: please add rows as required):

Module code / Module title / Level / Credits / Assessment task(s) / Mandatory/optional / Name of module leader

Assessment

Information required / Commentary
1.2Please confirm that the pass mark for each of the above modules is 50% (where quantified marking is used) / Yes / No(delete as appropriate)
1.3Is any compensation permissible across the above modules? / Yes / No(delete as appropriate)
1.4Please describe your approach to incorporating in vivo assessment on the programme
1.5Is there any specific good practice you wish to highlight in relation to this standard?
For any good practice highlighted, please describe the impact of that good practice on the quality of the overall trainee experience, or on other aspects of delivery.
Evidence Requirements
For this programme standard we expect you to submit the following evidence sources:

Programme Specification

Please indicate in the evidence checklist at the front of this document which evidence sources you have provided.

Reviewers’Comments

Standard met in full / Yes / No
Good Practice
Further information or areas for clarification / Please indicate the specific standard(s) to which your comments relate
Areas of concern (standard not met) / Please indicate the specific standard(s) you are concerned may not be met

Preparation for visit

Reviewers: please use this section to highlight any general themes that you have observed from your reading of the programme’s documentation that you feel you may wish to explore with other members of the visiting team, and subsequently with the education provider and their stakeholders.

Matters for discussion with students
Matters for discussion with programme team
Matters for discussion with senior management

Programme Standard 2: Programme Content (learning, research and practice)

Competenciesand content

2.1Accredited programmes are expected to address the full range of core competencies, as outlined below, and in full in our accreditation standards. Programmes are encouraged to develop specific emphasis and focus on some areas in more depth than others, to reflect the areas of strength of the staff team delivering the programme, or to promote a distinctive identity for the programme as a whole. You should provide a narrative, below, outlining how you prepare trainees in developing the required competencies.
You should also complete the more detailed mapping document that is included at the end of this section.
Competency / Narrative
1. Generalisable meta-competencies
2.Psychological assessment
3.Psychological formulation
4.Psychological intervention
5.Evaluation
6.Research
7.Personal and professional skills and values
8.Communication and teaching
9.Organisational and systemic influence and leadership
Information required / Commentary
2.2If the programme offers a particular emphasis or distinctive identity (e.g. in line with staff expertise), please outline that here.
2.3Please provide a brief commentary on your approach to curriculum design and delivery
2.4Have you reviewed your research and research methods provision against the Society’s Supplementary Guidance for research and research methods on Society accredited postgraduate programmes? / Yes / No (delete as appropriate)
Supervised practice
2.5Please describe the range of supervisory resources to which the programme has access, and the different supervisors (i.e. roles) with whom a trainee will typically work over the course of their placement(s).
2.6Please describe the training provided to supervisors to support them in their role.
2.7What are the programme’s minimum expectations in relation to the amount, frequency and nature of supervision that should be in place?
2.8What arrangements are in place for monitoring the amount and quality of supervision provided, and the quality of the placement/supervised practice experience overall?
2.9Please outline how you benchmark your curriculum and placement provision, e.g. by adapting recognised competence frameworks for psychological interventions.
2.10Please outline your approach to developing and benchmarking trainees’ competencies in psychological testing.
2.11Is there any specific good practice you wish to highlight in relation to this standard?
For any good practice highlighted, please describe the impact of that good practice on the quality of the overall trainee experience, or on other aspects of delivery.
Evidence Requirements
For this programme standard we expect you to submit the following evidence sources:

Module outlines: we expect to see evidence that provides an overview of what is taught in each module. If that level of detail is not included in the module descriptor please provide the module handbook.
Programme handbook.
Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks, if applicable.
Information on staff/trainee/graduate publications

Please indicate in the evidence checklist at the front of this document which evidence sources you have provided.

Reviewers’Comments

Preparation for visit

Matters for discussion with students
Matters for discussion with programme team
Matters for discussion with senior management
Matters for discussion with supervisors
Matters for discussion with other stakeholders (e.g. service users)

Visit SEQ – Clinical Psychology (Doctorate)

COMPETENCIES MAPPING DOCUMENT
Doctoral programmes in Clinical Psychology /

Programmes will need to evidence that they meet the competency standards we outline in our Standards for the accreditation of Doctoral programmes in Clinical Psychology handbook in full. Differing levels of emphasis on particular aspects by different providers will allow flexibility and enable the unique identity of particular programmes to be preserved. You should use the table below to tell us where particular competencies are addressed.

Competencies / Module code(s) / Module title(s)
Generalisable meta-competencies

Drawing on psychological knowledge of developmental, social and neuropsychological processes across the lifespan to facilitate adaptability and change in individuals, groups, families, organisations and communities.

Deciding, using a broad evidence and knowledge base, how to assess, formulate and intervene psychologically, from a range of possible models and modes of intervention with clients, carers and service systems. Ability to work effectively whilst holding in mind alternative, competing explanations.

Generalising and synthesising prior knowledge and experience in order to apply them critically and creatively in different settings and novel situations.

Being familiar with theoretical frameworks, the evidence base and practice guidance frameworks such as NICE and SIGN, and having the capacity to critically utilise these in complex clinical decision making without being formulaic in application.

Complementing evidence based practice with an ethos of practice based evidence where processes, outcomes, progress and needs are critically and reflectively evaluated

Ability to collaborate with service users and carers, and other relevant stakeholders, in advancing psychological initiatives such as interventions and research.

Making informed judgments on complex issues in specialist fields, often in the absence of complete information.

Ability to communicate psychologically-informed ideas and conclusions to, and to work effectively with, other stakeholders, (specialist and non-specialist), in order to influence practice, facilitate problem solving and decision making.

Exercising personal responsibility and largely autonomous initiative in complex and unpredictable situations in professional practice. Demonstrating self-awareness and sensitivity, and working as a reflective practitioner within ethical and professional practice frameworks.

Psychological assessment

Developing and maintaining effective working alliances with service users, carers, colleagues and other relevant stakeholders.

Ability to choose, use and interpret a broad range of assessment methods appropriate:

•to the client and service delivery system in which the assessment takes place; and
•to the type of intervention which is likely to be required.

Assessment procedures in which competence is demonstrated will include:

•performance based psychometric measures (e.g. of cognition and development);
•self and other informant reported psychometrics (e.g. of symptoms, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, behaviours);
•systematic interviewing procedures;
•other structured methods of assessment (e.g. observation, or gathering information from others); and
•assessment of social context and organisations.

Understanding of key elements of psychometric theory which have relevance to psychological assessment (e.g. effect sizes, reliable change scores, sources of error and bias, base rates, limitations etc.) and utilising this knowledge to aid assessment practices and interpretations thereof.

Conducting appropriate risk assessment and using this to guide practice.

Psychological formulation

Using assessment to develop formulations which are informed by theory and evidence about relevant individual, systemic, cultural and biological factors.

Constructing formulations of presentations which may be informed by, but which are not premised on, formal diagnostic classification systems; developing formulation in an emergent transdiagnostic context.

Constructing formulations utilising theoretical frameworks with an integrative, multi-model, perspective as appropriate and adapted to circumstance and context.

Developing a formulation through a shared understanding of its personal meaning with the client(s) and / or team in a way which helps the client better understand their experience.

Capacity to develop a formulation collaboratively with service users, carers, teams and services and being respectful of the client or team’s feedback about what is accurate and helpful.

Making justifiable choices about the format and complexity of the formulation that is presented or utilised as appropriate to a given situation.

Ensuring that formulations are expressed in accessible language, culturally sensitive, and non-discriminatory in terms of, for example, age, gender, disability and sexuality.

Using formulations to guide appropriate interventions if appropriate.

Reflecting on and revising formulations in the light of on-going feedback and intervention.

Leading on the implementation of formulation in services and utilizing formulation to enhance teamwork, multi-professional communication and psychological mindedness in services.

Psychological intervention

On the basis of a formulation, implementing psychological therapy or other interventions appropriate to the presenting problem and to the psychological and social circumstances of the client(s), and to do this in a collaborative manner with:

• individuals
• couples, families or groups
• services / organisations

Understanding therapeutic techniques and processes as applied when working with a range of different individuals in distress, such as those who experience difficulties related to: anxiety, mood, adjustment to adverse circumstances or life events, eating difficulties, psychosis, misuse of substances, physical health presentations and those with somatoform, psychosexual, developmental, personality, cognitive and neurological presentations.

Ability to implement therapeutic interventions based on knowledge and practice in at least two evidence-based models of formal psychological interventions, of which one must be cognitive-behaviour therapy. Model specific therapeutic skills must be evidenced against a competence framework as described below, though these may be adapted to account for specific ages and presentations etc.

In addition, however, the ability to utilise multi-model interventions, as appropriate to the complexity and / or co-morbidity of the presentation, the clinical and social context and service user opinions, values and goals.

Knowledge of, and capacity to conduct interventions related to, secondary prevention and the promotion of health and well-being.