Psychology in the Schools, Vol.

48(9), 2011 
C 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pits DOI: 10.1002/pits.20601

EVOLVING PRACTICUM ISSUES IN SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY PREPARATION

CHIEH LI
Northeastern University
CATHERINE A. FIORELLO
Temple University

Practicum experiences have been a critical aspect of the education and training of school psychol-
ogists at both the specialist and doctoral level. At the specialist level, the National Association
of School Psychologists recently updated their standards for practicum, but the content, quality,
and length of practicum vary tremendously across training programs. At the doctoral level, recent
guidelines from the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards allow for the emerging
option to include practicum experience together with internship toward licensure requirements.
However, this raises a number of questions unique to the context of school psychology training,
including what hours and activities count, appropriate credentials for supervisors, appropriate sites
for practicum experiences, what competencies are to be gained, and how to assess those compe-
tencies. The Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs has organized a task force to
address issues of competencies and supervision in practicum experiences to inform recommen-
dations and regulations regarding practicum experiences. This article summarizes the nature and
context of these issues, and makes recommendations for school psychology training programs,
national professional organizations, and credentialing organizations.  C 2011 Wiley Periodicals,

Inc.

Although the primary professional organizations representing school psychology have always
considered practicum experiences to be a critical part of training, recent revisions in guidelines and
expectations (American Psychological Association [APA], 2010; National Association of School
Psychologists [NASP], 2010b) have raised questions nationally about how to implement them to
best effect. Practicum is relatively poorly defined for school psychology, with the APA Practicum
Competencies Outline focused mainly on clinical approaches (Li & Council of Directors of School
Psychology Programs [CDSPP] Practicum Task Force, 2011) and NASP leaving most of the defin-
ing frame to the individual program. As a result, the content, quality, and length of practicum vary
tremendously across training programs. Such variations often cause confusion among field supervi-
sors, who have practicum students from different universities, as well as affect students who apply
for Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) internships. At the
doctoral level, the emerging option to include practicum experience toward licensure requirements
(APA, 2010; Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards [ASPPB], 2009) is resulting in
a variety of expectations for practicum, which needs to be examined in the context of school psy-
chology training. The CDSPP organized a task force to address issues related to competencies and
supervision in practicum experiences in order to inform recommendations and regulations regarding
practicum experiences (Li, Strein, & CDSPP Practicum Taskforce, 2010). This article begins with a
brief overview of our current professional guidelines for practica and their implications for practice.

The authors express their heartfelt thanks to Drs. Hatcher and Lassiter, and colleagues in the Practicum Compe-
tencies Workgroup of the Association of Directors of Psychology Training Clinics and Council of Chairs of Training
Councils for developing the Practicum Competencies Outline; to members of the Council of Directors of School Psy-
chology Programs Practicum Task Force for reviewing and adapting the Practicum Competencies Outline for school
psychology; to participants in the practicum and internship focus group discussion at the meeting of the Trainers of
School Psychologists during the 2010 National Association of School Psychologists Annual Convention; and to all
the trainers and field supervisors for their valuable input.
Correspondence to: Chieh Li, Dept. of Counseling and Applied Educational Psychology, Northeastern University,
404 International Village, Boston, MA 02115-5000. E-mail: c.li@neu.edu.

901
902 Li and Fiorello

C URRENT P ROFESSIONAL G UIDELINES FOR P RACTICUM AT THE S PECIALIST L EVEL

Current professional guidelines for school psychology practicum are still very general. See the
following statement from the NASP Standards (2010b):
School psychology practica are closely supervised on-campus and/or field-based activities
designed to develop and evaluate a school psychology candidate’s development and mastery of
specific professional skills consistent with program goals. Practica activities may be completed as
part of separate courses focusing on distinct skills or as part of a more extensive course experience
that covers a range of skills. Candidate skill and competency development, rather than delivery of
professional services, should be regarded as the primary purpose of practica.
3.1 The school psychology program requires supervised practica experiences that include the
following:

• Completed for academic credit or are otherwise documented by the institution

• Specific, required activities consistent with goals of the program and in settings relevant to
program objectives for development of candidate skills
• Systematic development and evaluation of specific skills in multiple, relevant domains of
school psychology graduate education and practice (See Standards 2.1 to 2.10)
• Direct oversight by the program to ensure appropriateness of the placement, activities, and
supervision
• Collaboration between the program, placement site, and practicum supervisors
• Close supervision by program faculty and qualified practicum supervisors
• Inclusion of appropriate performance-based evaluation by program faculty and supervisors
to ensure that candidates are developing designated competencies
• Are distinct from, precede, and prepare candidates for the school psychology internship.
(p. 7)

These updated guidelines on practica in school psychology from the NASP Standards (2010b)
specify more of the expectations of practicum than the 2000 standards. For example, the NASP
Standards 2000 (NASP, 2000) only had one short paragraph on practicum, as follows:
3.1 Supervised practica and internship experiences are completed for academic credit or are
otherwise documented by the institution. Closely supervised practica experiences that include the
development and evaluation of specific skills are distinct from and precede culminating internship
experiences that require the integration and application of the full range of school psychology
competencies and domains. (p. 18)
Although the recent NASP Standards (2010b) specify more of their expectations of practica,
including the primary purpose and eight requirements of practica, they still leave it up to the training
programs to decide prerequisites for practica, the competencies that should be taught in practica
before entering internship, assessment criteria and measures, and minimum practicum hours.

I SSUES IN S CHOOL P SYCHOLOGY T RAINING UNDER C URRENT NASP P RACTICUM G UIDELINES

Although NASP approval of school psychology programs put some quality control on practicum
training, under the current broad NASP guidelines, trainers are running practicum programs based
on their own interpretations, resulting in differences in conceptualization, contents, format, required
hours, outcome evaluation criteria and procedures, qualification of field supervisors and field sites,
and quality control. Such phenomena were noticed during the practicum and internship focus group
discussion at the meeting of the Trainers of School Psychologists (TSP) associated with the 2010

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Practicum Training 903

NASP Annual Meeting. For example, one of the authors did a preliminary survey by asking the
members of the focus group to answer a few questions about practicum and internship on an index
card at the end of the meeting. She found that among the 24 training programs from different states
represented at the focus-group discussion, the number of practicum hours required for the specialist
level ranged from 200 to 800, with a median of 500 hours and mean of 439 hours. Such variations
(based on the feedback from some practicum site supervisors) often cause confusion among field
supervisors who have practicum students from different universities. For instance, when trainers
from one state sought feedback at a meeting last year, the field supervisors attending a local School
Psychology Field Supervision Summer Institute requested a consistent practicum guideline across
local training programs or at least a document helping field supervisors to see the similarities and
differences among requirements across training programs.
However, because there is no accreditation requirement for school psychology practicum sites
or requirement of formal training of supervision for field supervisors (Harvey & Struzziero, 2008),
students from different practicum sites experience different paradigms of school psychology service
delivery, quality of mentoring, and expectations of practicum students.
As an example, NASP allows programs to self-nominate as addressing multicultural issues
in their training, without a critical review of those nominations (NASP, 2010a). Among those
programs, there is a wide variation in practicum training for working with culturally and linguistically
diverse children (CLD), ranging from mere placement in sites with CLD children to placement at
a multicultural site with a bilingual school psychologist supervisor. It is not known what variation
might exist in programs that do not self-identify as addressing multicultural issues.
From this review of the NASP guidelines and current issues in school psychology practicum
at the specialist level, it appears that the guidelines allow ample freedom for different theoretical
orientations (which may be a positive aspect), but also allow a different quality of mentoring and
field experience (which may be a negative aspect). The review reveals a compelling need for further
development of professional guidelines for practicum. This does not mean a prescription, but a
clearer definition of practicum, adoption of minimum requirements for qualifying practicum sites
and site supervisors, and recommended benchmarks and assessment tools to evaluate practicum
student competencies.

C URRENT P ROFESSIONAL G UIDELINES FOR P RACTICUM AT D OCTORAL L EVEL

The need for clear guidelines appears to be even greater at the doctoral level. First, the ac-
creditation guidelines for practica in doctoral programs are also very general. On the one hand,
the practicum guidelines allow for substantial freedom on the part of the program. On the other
hand, they result in the same issues of confusion and quality control as those at the specialist level.
Following is the relevant section of APA Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation of Programs
in Professional Psychology (APA, 2009):
4. Additionally, the program requires that its students receive adequate and appropriate
practicum experiences. To this end the program should:

(a) Place students in settings that: are clearly committed to training; supervise students using
an adequate number of appropriate professionals; and provide a wide range of training
and educational experiences through applications of empirically supported intervention
procedures;
(b) Integrate the practicum component of the students’ education and training with the other
elements of the program and provide adequate forums for the discussion of the practicum
experience;

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

904 Li and Fiorello

(c) Ensure that the sequencing, duration, nature, and content of these experiences are both
appropriate for and consistent with the program’s immediate and long-term training goals
and objectives; and
(d) Describe and justify the sufficiency of practicum experiences required of students in prepa-
ration for an internship.
It is the program’s responsibility to describe and document the manner by which
students achieve knowledge and competence in these areas. Furthermore, given its stated
goals and expected competencies, the program is expected to provide information regarding
the minimal level of achievement it requires for students to satisfactorily progress through
and graduate from the program, as well as evidence that it adheres to the minimum levels it
has set. (pp. 7-8)

The APA accreditation guidelines quoted above describe their broad expectations of practica in
four aspects, leaving graduate training programs to decide prerequisites for practica, the competen-
cies that should be trained in practica before entering internship, assessment criteria and measures,
and minimum practicum hours. In addition, the requirements of the practicum setting and qualifi-
cation of supervisors are very general. Therefore, the guidelines allow graduate programs sufficient
freedom, which is consistent with the overall intent of APA accreditation guidelines. However, al-
though individual programs enjoy the freedom in practicum training, our profession is challenged
in the new era. The following section discusses these challenges.

Current Issues for School Psychology Practicum at the Doctoral Level

Because practicum training in professional psychology is being considered as applicable to-
ward the supervised experience hours for licensure as a psychologist (APA, 2010), the practicum
experience is no longer introductory, but a critical part of the sequence of training that leads to
licensure (ASPPB, 2009). Seven states currently accept preinternship hours toward licensure rather
than requiring postdoctoral hours (ASPPB, n.d.). Thus, increasing scrutiny is being applied to the
experiences, competencies, and supervision available in practicum settings. If practicum hours are
to count as supervised clinical experience toward licensure eligibility, more attention needs to be
paid to issues such as hours, competencies, assessment, supervision and supervisor credentials, and
the like.
First, how many practicum hours should be required, and what counts for practicum hours? Al-
though practicum hours are required by both APA and NASP prior to eligibility for internship, there
is little professional agreement on how many hours are needed and on what constitutes appropriate
experience. The ASPPB (2009) recommends 1,500 hours of supervised experience, as least half
of which is in service-related activities, including treatment/intervention, assessment, interviews,
report writing, case presentations, and consultations. States that currently accept preinternship hours
toward licensure requirements require a total of between 3,000 and 4,000 hours, including internship
(ASPPB, 2011). However, in a survey of APA-accredited clinical psychology programs and intern-
ship sites (Hecker, Fink, Levasseur, & Parker, 1995), respondents agreed that direct client contact
and supervision hours should count as practicum hours, but showed little agreement on whether
other activities, including peer supervision, library research, and attending workshops, should count.
The APPIC Application for Psychology Internships asks students to report practicum hours that are
in direct presence of the client, including parent and teacher consultation about a client. All other
activities are listed under support hours. The Hecker et al. (1995) survey results also highlight a
major difference between clinical and school psychology—the definition of direct client contact. In
school psychology, client contact may be direct, as when a student is assessed or seen in counsel-
ing. However, school psychology trainees also provide indirect services, such as consulting at the
classroom or systems level.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Practicum Training 905

School psychologists often act as consultants to teachers and parents to address the needs of
children. This method of service delivery is fundamentally different from the direct service roles
often envisaged for clinical and counseling practicum students. Consultation may be directed at
an individual child, which allows for case conceptualization at the child level, but may also be
directed at a systems level. Standard methods of logging client contact hours make little sense
when developing school-wide intervention plans to improve academic and behavioral functioning
throughout the building. Accountability for client outcomes must be broadly defined and measured
in a school psychology practicum (e.g., Barnett et al., 1999). These indirect services should be
counted as direct client contact, because working with parents, teachers, and administrators is a
major clinical role of practicing school psychologists.
In addition to questions about how hours should be counted comes the question of whether
hours should be counted at all. Although measuring quantity is relatively easy, our actual goal
is quality; that is, the competencies that should be attained through practicum experiences. Until
recently, there were no guidelines for these competencies, so hours of practicum have become a
proxy for preparedness. In addition, students may be increasing their number of hours in the absence
of better measures of their competency prior to internship (Ko & Rodolfa, 2005).
Second, what competencies are to be gained in practicum? The move toward competency-
based professional education demands clear expectations for what competencies are to be mastered
in practicum. However, there were almost no specific guidelines regarding what competencies are
to be gained in practicum in professional psychology until recently. The Practicum Competencies
Workgroup, made up of representatives from the Association of Directors of Psychology Training
Clinics and the Council of Chairs of Training Councils (Hatcher & Lassiter, 2007), developed The
Practicum Competencies Outline. The Outline assembled and organized descriptions of currently
identified core competencies for the professional psychologist and characterized the levels of com-
petence in these core domains in three levels of practicum: prior, beginning, and end. It provides a
very useful tool for (a) developing practicum training programs by defining competency goals; (b)
communication between practicum sites and graduate programs regarding training goals; (c) devel-
oping competency assessments for practicum trainees; (d) providing a basis for evaluating outcomes
for practicum training programs; and (e) stimulating thinking concerning competency goals for more
advanced training.
However, there are several challenges to applying the Outline to school psychology practicum
because it was developed from a clinical psychology perspective, which has some overlap with
but does not reflect all aspects of school psychology. Some parts of the document do not apply
to school psychology, whereas some competencies crucial to school psychology are not included
(Li & CDSPP Practicum Task Force Members, 2011). For instance, the skills listed in the Rela-
tionship/Interpersonal Skills section are oriented toward adults and clinical experience, missing a
crucial skill for school psychologists, that is, forming relationships with children at various de-
velopmental stages, parents, teachers, school administrators, and other school personnel. Another
example is that the skills listed in the Application of Research section are based on the need for
clinical practice, missing a crucial skill for current and future school psychologists, that is, accessing
and applying research knowledge to promoting mental health and academic performance for all
children in a school setting. These issues become more salient as school psychology moves from its
traditional medical model of service delivery with a clinical focus toward a public health model that
is prevention oriented and population based. Such issues were found with the skills listed in almost
every competency, including psychological assessment, intervention, consultation, diversity, ethics,
development of leadership skills, and supervision.
Third, what tools are used to assess practicum competencies? Almost no comprehensive as-
sessment tools of practicum competencies existed until the recent APA task force developed the

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

906 Li and Fiorello

Assessment of Competencies Benchmark (APA Board of Educational Affairs, 2007). A product of

the task force, The Competency Assessment Toolkit for Professional Psychology (Kaslo et al., 2009),
provides a comprehensive toolkit for professional psychology. Each tool is a specific method to
assess competence, appropriate to professional psychology. The methods are defined and described;
information is presented about their best use, psychometrics, strengths and challenges; and future
directions are outlined. Finally, the implications of professional psychology’s current shift to a “cul-
ture of competency,” including the challenges to implementing ongoing competency assessment, are
discussed. However, because the Toolkit was developed for clinical psychologists, it also needs to
be reviewed and modified for application to school psychology.
Fourth, how can the scientist-practitioner training model be implemented? Reviewing the sci-
entific evidence for assessment, consultation, and intervention is the basis of science-based practice
(Galassi & Brooks, 1992). Practicum is seen as a key portion of training where science and prac-
tice can be integrated under supervision. For example, there have been calls for including data
collection on each client served using single-subject methodology to evaluate outcomes (Barnett
et al., 1999; Bonner, 2002; Galassi & Brooks, 1992). Training and supervision on data collection
and interpretation methodologies, as well as implementation of empirically supported treatments,
require more than simple placement in a school or clinical site. In addition to finding placements
in sites with appropriately credentialed supervisors, training programs must ensure that models
of evaluation and accountability are implemented, either through the training of field supervi-
sors or through university supervision of practicum students. This may be a particular problem in
school psychology, where practice in schools may lag behind the paradigm shift that training has
undergone.
Fifth, how should trainees be supervised? Standards for credentials for supervisors in school
psychology differ, with NASP requiring certification as a school psychologist and APA requiring
licensure as a professional psychologist. Supervision for doctoral-level practicum for school psy-
chology trainees needs to cover both requirements. That is, in addition to the training needed for
licensure as a professional psychologist, practicum experiences are also expected to cover the 10
domains of school psychology practice: (1) Data-Based Decision Making and Accountability; (2)
Consultation and Collaboration; (3) Interventions and Instructional Support to Develop Cognitive
and Academic Skills; (4) Mental Health Services to Develop Socialization, Learning, and Life Skills;
(5) Diversity in Development and Learning; (6) School-Wide Practices to Promote Safe and Effective
Learning Environments; (7) Prevention and Early Intervention; Crisis Response; (8) Family–School
Collaboration Services; (9) Research and Program Evaluation; and (10) Legal, Ethical, and Profes-
sional Practice (NASP, 2010b). Thus, supervision of school psychology doctoral-level practicum
demands broader skill areas than that for clinical psychologists. Ideally, a supervisor is both a li-
censed psychologist and certified school psychologist, and is trained in supervision. However, not
many school psychology field supervisors are licensed in both, and few have explicit training in
supervision (Crespi & Lopez, 1998).
Sixth, how can appropriate practicum sites be identified? As the changes discussed become
more broadly accepted, it will become increasingly difficult to identify appropriate practicum sites,
given the unique needs of school psychology trainees. When the practicum experiences are designed
to meet training requirements for licensure, it is necessary that these experiences be organized
and sequenced as is required of current supervised experiences necessary for licensure (ASPPB,
2009). Schools may be willing to provide placements for students, but supervisors may not be
implementing the full range of roles in which universities wish their students to be trained (Kramer,
Conoley, Bischoff, & Benes, 1991). In a recent survey of school psychology students, Tarquin
(2006) found that most practicum placements were focused on assessment and that supervisors did
not model expanded role activities. Currently, many practicum students are placed in practicum sites

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Practicum Training 907

based on availability of sites or willingness of sites to provide training, but not necessarily on the
educational or training needs of the student (ASPPB, 2009).
Seventh, how can communication between practicum site and graduate training programs be
improved? A national survey of practicum sites in professional psychology indicated that there was
little communication between practicum site coordinators and graduate training programs and a lack
of understanding of the goals and expectations for practicum training by the sites (Lewis, Hatcher,
& Pate, 2005). Interestingly, it was not until after the surveys were returned that the authors realized
that they had not even included “school” as a possible practicum site, despite surveying clinical,
counseling, and school psychology training programs. School practicum sites also responded with
a much higher percentage of “other” activities, beyond the typical assessment and intervention cat-
egories, presumably reflecting the types of indirect service activities more common among school
psychologists. Lewis and colleagues (2005) recommended a written practicum agreement to im-
prove communication between practicum sites and training programs. Guidelines from professional
organizations and credential agencies should be helpful in designing written practicum agreements.

Efforts to Address Current Practicum Issues

Recently, school psychology trainers from both graduate programs and field sites are beginning
to address several of the current practicum issues described previously by exploring solutions at
national, state, and school-district levels. The next section presents a few examples of these efforts,
including the collaboration between Massachusetts Trainers and field sites, as well as the work of
the CDSPP Practicum Taskforce.

Example of State-Level Efforts to Improve Practicum Training

In Massachusetts, school psychology training programs have been challenged with common
concerns about practicum from students, supervisors, and trainers. To address these concerns, several
training programs and school districts have begun to provide annual institutes jointly for field
supervisors since 2008 over a period of 2 days in the summer. The purpose is to foster cooperation,
collaboration, and communication among stakeholders and to address the common issues that were
identified as impediments to training (Harvey et al., 2010). To foster communication, the trainers
also meet regularly every 6 to 8 weeks to continue dialog among the group via e-mails and maintain
close connections with the state school psychology organization. These regular communications
serve to provide clarifications, resolve academic calendar issues, and facilitate active dialogue about
practicum/internship placement policies.
One of the participating school districts, the Boston Public Schools (BPS), highlights the
benefit of such local collaboration. Three years ago, BPS committed to the development of a
formal practicum/internship training program. At the beginning, the BPS school psychology service
coordinator was invited to be a member of the Massachusetts School Psychology Trainers (MSPT)
group as a district representative. Through the MSPT group, BPS is now able to directly and
regularly communicate with all of its university partners. Together, they address issues concerning
field experiences and supervision. When problems arise, MSPT are able to provide training via
a Summer Institute for Supervisors. BPS encourages a large number of its school psychology
supervisors to attend the MSPT Summer Institute. Such training of supervisors results in greater
satisfaction for both field supervisors and practicum students.
In addition to participating in the MSPT group, the BPS school psychology department has
accomplished several tasks to improve their practicum sites for students. They formed a supervision
committee that meets monthly to discuss issues and ideas regarding supervision. Each year, they
set goals for their committee, and throughout the year, they work toward these goals, as well as

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

908 Li and Fiorello

increase their supervisory skills. For example, in 2008, they developed practicum/intern policies and
procedures. Until that time, supervisors implemented their own practice. By agreeing to standards,
they ensure that all university students get consistent practicum training and supervision in their
school district. In 2009, BPS developed a student handbook to include professional information,
as well as district and school information important to each student’s experience. As part of the
experience, BPS also created an intern/practicum professional development program. In addition,
all practicum students are invited to participate in more than 100 hours of professional development
that the BPS school psychology department completes each year. Another school district, Newton
Public Schools (NPS), holds monthly seminars for practicum students and interns to address students’
needs and district-wide training. NPS representatives also report the positive effects of participating
in the MSPT group.

National Efforts to Improve Practicum Training

In 2009, CDSPP formed three task forces to tackle critical issues that school psychology training
programs were facing. Task Force 2, the Practicum Task Force, was charged with reviewing the APA
practicum competency documents and other practicum definitions that have emerged recently (e.g.,
the revised document by ASPPB, 2009) from a school psychology perspective. This task force would
provide guidance in the field through CDSPP about how programs should respond to various reporting
requirements in these documents and how they can be revised for use in school psychology; the task
force would also advise the CDSPP Executive Committee on how it can advocate for revisions that
reflect legitimate areas of practice that are unique to the specialty of school psychology and/or that
are not well represented in the document.
The chair of the task force was from the CDSPP executive committee, who recruited volunteers
from the membership of the CDSPP. The members represented 11 training programs from 10
states. The task force prioritized the development of practicum competencies for school psychology.
Because the Practicum Competencies Outline (Hatcher & Lassiter, 2007) provides an excellent
model and reflects the hard work of a task force of two organizations in the APA, the CDSPP
Practicum Task Force explored how it could be used in school psychology. Over the course of
the 2009–2010 year, members of the task force thoroughly reviewed the Outline, adapted it, and
added skills that are unique to school psychology. In addition, wording that was not typical in school
psychology was also modified, such as changing “patient” to “client” and adding “school” to “clinic”
as a potential practicum site. Although there are different views on what competencies should be
expected at what level (novice, intermediate, advanced), the task force did not address this issue,
as this is not an issue unique to school psychology. The revised Outline (Practicum Competencies
Outline: A Reference for School Psychology Doctoral Programs; Caterino et al., 2010) was put on
the CDSPP website as a working document for comments from the entire CDSPP in the fall of
2010. With the endorsement of CDSPP, the adapted Outline will be recommended as a reference for
trainers of doctoral school psychology programs. Members of the task force clarify that they are not
advocating a “one-size-fits-all” model, but rather, they are continuing in the development/refinement
of a tool for programs to consider.
Another product of the practicum task force is a comprehensive review article of the Outline
from a school psychology perspective (to be submitted for publication), to accompany the adapted
Practicum Competencies Outline for school psychology. The goal of this article is twofold: (a) to
provide school psychology trainers with an explanation of the adaptation of the benchmarks of
practicum competencies of the Outline; and (b) to provide other professional psychologists, includ-
ing colleagues on accreditation and licensing boards, with information on competencies pertaining to
school psychology to bridge understanding among different specialties of professional psychology.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Practicum Training 909

The review and the adapted Practicum Competencies Outline together may serve as a reference for
accreditation bodies of APA and state licensing boards. It provides information on which compe-
tencies and skills listed in the original Practicum Competencies Outline (Hatcher & Lassiter, 2007)
are applicable to school psychology, which are not, and which are unique to school psychology.
School psychology has always held a unique position in psychology. As one of the three original
specialty areas of professional psychology, and as a field in its own right within the education
profession, it reflects the tensions of this dual role (Tharinger, Pryzwansky, & Miller, 2008). Helping
our students develop the competencies they need to be effective professional psychologists through
appropriate practicum placements, training, and supervision is one critical challenge for trainers.
The aforementioned examples are only a few among many efforts to address the challenges we face
in practicum. We hope that the work from these examples will stimulate more colleagues to share
their suggestions and to explore solutions together.

R ECOMMENDATIONS
This article discusses current issues in school psychology practicum at both the specialist and
doctoral levels and attempts to address these issues. Based on the presented needs of the field and
the work of the CDSPP Practicum Taskforce, the authors make the following recommendations:
At the National Level

• Review and adapt the Competency Assessment Toolkit for Professional Psychology (Kaslow
et al., 2009) or its updated version for school psychology and align it with the adapted
competency outline.
• Review and adapt the current Guidelines on Practicum Experience for Licensure to ensure
their appropriateness for school psychology by working with ASPPB, APA, and the other
national professional organizations representing school psychology, such as CDSPP, TSP,
and NASP.

At the State and Local Levels

• Encourage communication between graduate training programs and practicum sites to ad-
dress the confusion about expectations from practicum. One good example is the collabora-
tion between MSPT and field sites.
• Ensure that professional organizations at the state level are aware of the adaptations necessary
for school psychology so that any changes in licensure legislation take those issues into
account.

At the Program Level

• Request that training program faculty visit the ASPPB website (www.asppb.net) and read
the ASPPB Guidelines on Practicum Experience for Licensure and the adapted Practicum
Competencies Outline for their own reference.
• Ask training directors to review the current practice of practicum in their own programs
in reference of the above documents and develop written practicum agreements for their
students.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

910 Li and Fiorello

R EFERENCES
American Psychological Association. (2009). Guidelines and principles for accreditation of programs in professional psy-
chology. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/about/policies/guiding-principles.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2010). Model act for state licensure of psychologists. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/model-act-2010.pdf
American Psychological Association Board of Educational Affairs. (2007). Assessment of competencies benchmark work-
group report. Washington, DC: Author.
Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards. (2009). ASPPB guidelines on practicum experience for licensure.
Retrieved from http://www.asppb.net/files/public/Final Prac Guidelines 1 31 09.pdf
Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards. (n.d.). Handbook on licensing and certification requirements.
Retrieved from http://www.asppb.org/HandbookPublic/before.aspx
Barnett, D. W., Daly, E. J., Hampshire, E. M., Rovak Hines, N., Maples, K. A., Ostrom, J. K., et al. (1999). Meeting
performance-based training demands: Accountability in an intervention-based practicum. School Psychology Quarterly,
14, 357 – 379.
Bonner, M. L. (2002). Accountability of school psychology practicum: A procedural replication. Dissertation Abstracts
International, Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 63(1-A), 142.
Caterino, L., Li, C., Hansen, A., Forman, S., Harris, A., Miller, G., et al. (2010). Practicum competencies outline: A reference
for school psychology doctoral programs. Retrieved from http://sites.google.com/site/cdspphome/file-cabinet
Crespi, T. D., & Lopez, P. G. (1998). Practicum and internship supervision in the schools: Standards and considerations for
school psychology supervisors. The Clinical Supervisor, 17, 113 – 126.
Galassi, J. P., & Brooks, L. (1992). Integrating scientist and practitioner training in counseling psychology: Practicum is the
key. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 5(1), 57 – 65.
Harvey, V. S., Amador, A., Finer, D., Gotthelf, D., Hintze, J., Kruger, L., et al. (2010). Improving field supervision through
collaborative supervision institutes. Communiqué, 38(7), 22 – 24.
Harvey, V. S., & Struzziero, J. (2008). Professional development and supervision of school psychologists: From intern to
expert. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin/Sage and NASP.
Hatcher, R. L., & Lassiter, K. D. (2007). Initial training in professional psychology: The practicum competencies outline.
Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 1, 49 – 63.
Hecker, J. E., Fink, C. M., Levasseur, J. B., & Parker, J. D. (1995). Perspectives on practicum: A survey of directors of
accredited PhD programs and internships (or, what is a practicum hour, and how many do I need?). Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 205 – 210.
Kaslow, N. J., Grus, C. L., Campbell, L. F., Fouad, N. A., Hatcher, R. L., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2009). Competency assessment
toolkit for professional psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(4, Suppl. 1), 7 – 45.
Ko, S. F., & Rodolfa, E. (2005). Psychology training directors’ views of number of practicum hours necessary prior to
internship application. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36, 318 – 322.
Kramer, J. J., Conoley, J. C., Bischoff, L. G., & Benes, K. M. (1991). Providing a continuum of professional training: The
Nebraska Psychology of Schooling Project and the Nebraska Internship Consortium in Professional Psychology. School
Psychology Review, 20, 551 – 564.
Lewis, B. L., Hatcher, R. L., & Pate, W. E. (2005). The practicum experience: A survey of practicum site coordinators.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36, 291 – 298.
Li, C., & Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs Practicum Task Force Members (2011). Practicum task force
update. Retrieved from http://sites.google.com/site/cdspphome/file-cabinet
Li, C., Strein, W., & Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs Practicum Task Force Members. (2010, February).
CDSPP Task 2 report on practicum. Presented at Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs Annual Confer-
ence, Orlando, FL, 2, 2010.
National Association of School Psychologists. (2000), Standards for training and field placement in school psychology.
Bethesda, MD: Author.
National Association of School Psychologists. (2010a). Multicultural and bilingual school psychology training programs.
Retrieved from http://www.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcompetence/multprograms.aspx
National Association of School Psychologists. (2010b). Standards for graduate preparation of school psychologists. Retrieved
from http://www.nasponline.org/standards/2010standards.aspx
Tarquin, K. M. (2006). School psychology students’ perceptions of their practicum experiences. Psychology in the Schools,
43, 727 – 736.
Tharinger, D., Pryzwansky, W., & Miller, J. A. (2008). School psychology: A specialty of professional psychology with
unique competencies and complexities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(5), 529 – 536.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits