The enhanced examination for professional practice in psychology: A viable approach?
| dc.contributor.author | Callahan, Jennifer L | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bell, Debora J | |
| dc.contributor.author | Davila, Joanne | |
| dc.contributor.author | Johnson, Sheri L | |
| dc.contributor.author | Strauman, Timothy J | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yee, Cindy M | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-04-01T14:39:37Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-04-01T14:39:37Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-01 | |
| dc.date.updated | 2022-04-01T14:39:37Z | |
| dc.description.abstract | Health disciplines have increasingly required competency-based evaluations as a licensure prerequisite. In keeping with this trend, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) has begun to develop a second part to the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). The resulting 2-part examination is collectively referred to as the Enhanced EPPP. Part 1 of the Enhanced EPPP, which consists of the current exam, is designed to be an assessment of knowledge. Part 2 of the Enhanced EPPP is newly developed and intended to address the need for a competency-based evaluation. To date, ASPPB has addressed some standard facets of validity for the EPPP Part 2, but not others. In addition, the EPPP Part 2 has yet to be subjected to a broader validation process, in which the suitability of the test for its intended purpose is evaluated. Implementation of the EPPP Part 2 before validation could have negative consequences for those seeking to enter the profession and for the general public (e.g., potential restriction of diversity in the psychology workforce). For jurisdictions implementing the EPPP Part 2, failure to gather and report the evidence required for use of a test in a forensic context may also open the door for legal challenges. We end with suggestions for feasible research that could significantly enhance the validation process for the EPPP Part 2 and offer jurisdictions concrete suggestions of features to look for in determining whether and when to implement the Enhanced EPPP. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved). | |
| dc.identifier | 2019-81943-001 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0003-066X | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1935-990X | |
| dc.identifier.uri | ||
| dc.language | eng | |
| dc.publisher | American Psychological Association (APA) | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | The American psychologist | |
| dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1037/amp0000586 | |
| dc.subject | Humans | |
| dc.subject | Psychology | |
| dc.subject | Educational Measurement | |
| dc.subject | Professional Practice | |
| dc.title | The enhanced examination for professional practice in psychology: A viable approach? | |
| dc.type | Journal article | |
| duke.contributor.orcid | Strauman, Timothy J|0000-0002-0310-4505 | |
| pubs.begin-page | 52 | |
| pubs.end-page | 65 | |
| pubs.issue | 1 | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Sanford School of Public Policy | |
| pubs.organisational-group | School of Medicine | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Trinity College of Arts & Sciences | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Institutes and Centers | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Psychology and Neuroscience | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Institutes and Provost's Academic Units | |
| pubs.organisational-group | University Institutes and Centers | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke Institute for Brain Sciences | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke-UNC Center for Brain Imaging and Analysis | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Initiatives | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Duke Science & Society | |
| pubs.organisational-group | Center for Child and Family Policy | |
| pubs.publication-status | Published | |
| pubs.volume | 75 |
Files
Original bundle
- Name:
- 2020 Callahan et al American Psychologist article.pdf
- Size:
- 619.37 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format