School Psychology Review

ISSN: (Print) 2372-966x (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uspr20

School Psychology Training for the 21st Century:

Challenges and Opportunities

Mark E. Swerdlik & Joseph L. French

To cite this article: Mark E. Swerdlik & Joseph L. French (2000) School Psychology Training for
the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, School Psychology Review, 29:4, 577-588

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2000.12086046

Published online: 22 Dec 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uspr20
School Psychology Review
2000, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 577-588

School Psychology Training for the 21st Century:

Challenges and Opportunities

Mark E. Swerdlik Joseph L. French

Illinois State University Pennsylvania State University

Abstract: Training programs will continue to change to meet the needs of consumersof
schoolpsychological servicesin the 21st Century. This article provides information about
the factors influencing the preparation of school psychologistswhose roles and functions
must change to meet these needs.Emphasisis on the overall context of training, the most
influential factorson training, andthe anticipatedchangesand challengesin the 21st Century.

School psychology in the 21st Century will
expand to meet the needs of consumers, including
students, parents, teachers, administrators as well
as the needs of employment settings, including
schools, clinics, hospitals, and independent
private practice. Education and training provided
through formal preservice programs, continuing
professional development, collaboration, and
supervision, represent the mechanisms by which
these needs will be met and expanded roles and
functions will be realized. To meet these
expanded needs, school psychology training
programs, with the assistance of feedback from
alumni, employers, and external reviews, will
assume increasing responsibility for affecting
change for children and youth in schools. In this
article the context of school psychology training
is described, followed by a discussion of factors
influencing current and future training with a
focus upon trends, probable directions, and
challenges.
The Context of Training
A number of factors influence training in
school psychology and will continue to do so in
the 21 st Century. These factors include
credentialing issues, program approval and
accreditation principles and guidelines of
professional associations, approval standards of
state departments of education (SDE), state and
federal laws influencing education broadly and
special education in particular, standards-based
school reform initiatives, and the changing
demographics of society and other societal needs.
In meeting future demands for current and
expanded roles in a variety of settings, school
psychologists will continue to be educated at both
the specialist and doctoral levels. Credentialing
requirements promulgated by SDEs and state
boards of psychology and training program
requirements are, and will continue to be,
interlocked. Credentialing requirements and job
demands often dictate program curricula, most
noticeably at the specialist degree level. In turn,
training program curricula and faculty influence
credentialing requirements. School psychology
graduate programs also are influenced by
accreditation standards for doctoral programs
employed by the American Psychological
Association’s (APA) Committee on Accreditation
(CoA), and by the program approval standards

The authors wish to thank Tom Fagan and Susan Sheridan for their very helpful comments regarding the
manuscript.

Addressall correspondenceconcerning this article to Mark E. Swerdlik, Department of Psychology,Campus

Box 4620, Illinois StateUniversity, Normal, IL 61790-4620. E-mail: meswerd@ilstu.edu.

Copyright 2000 by the National Association of School Psychologists,ISSN 0279-6015

577
578 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

employed by the National Association of School ongoing efforts in state-to-state reciprocity, it is

Psychologists (NASP) for the specialist and
doctoral levels, and by the unit accreditation
standards of the National Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE).
In most statesthere are strong links between APA
accreditation status and the approval processes
for nonschool-based credentialing and among
NASP’s program approval and/or accreditation
by NCATE, the requirements of the Nationally
Certified School Psychologist (NCSP) process,
and the credentialing process for school-based
practice. These links have a strong influence on
the characteristics of training programs, and it is
likely that training programs in the future will
continue to seek the approval of these agencies.
Other aspects of the context for training
include legislative andjudicial decisions that have predict an increase in the standardization of
influenced school psychology since its early
history (Jacob-Timm & Hartshome, 1998) and
the changing political, economic, and social
conditions in which school psychologists function
(see e.g., Sheridan & Gutkin, 2000; Ysseldyke et
al., 1997). These changes include shifting
population trends; increasing racial, ethnic, and
language diversity; increasing levels of poverty;
increasing percentagesof nontraditional families
and parenting models; increasing numbers of
children being home schooled; and increasing
numbersof children being educatedwith multiple
physical/medical, social, emotional, and
academic problems. As we continue to better
understand the impact of culture on behavior,
including parenting, help-seeking behavior,
relationships with peersand family members, and
the manifestation of mental illness, all of these
changes will continue to influence the training
of school psychologists. We now turn our
attention to a discussion of the most influential
factors and the ways in which they will continue
to influence the education and training of school
psychologists. In making predictions and
judgments about the future, we are well aware of
the limitations inherent in that process.
Factors Influencing Training
Now and in the Future
Credentialing Issues
In the 21st Century, it is unlikely that states Curtis, & Hunley, 1995). We predict that the
will yield to the federal government their number of NCSPs will continue to grow and
responsibility and authority to regulate the future applicants to school psychology programs
practice of professions. However, due to already will prefer to attend programs that are NASP-
probable that jurisdictions in North America will
have nearly common educational requirements
for admission to, and “passing scores” for, the
Examination for Professional Practice of
Psychology (EPPP) to become licensed for
nonschool practice. We believe this will occur
before most jurisdictions agree upon a common
curriculum and a test with a uniform passingscore
for school-based practice. Even so, there is a
strong movement to standardize the education,
training, and admission to practice in school
psychology through credentials such as the
Nationally Certified School Psychologist (NCSP)
and program approval/accreditation
requirements. Although the authority for
credentialing will remain with the states, we
practice credential requirements that will, in turn,
foster the standardization of education and
training.
To independently practice psychology as a
health-service provider in North American
jurisdictions requires, among other things,
successful completion of a degree from a
regionally accredited institution, but not
necessarily an accredited program, and the EPPP
(Association of State and Provincial Psychology
Boards, 1999). Eligibility to practice as a school
psychologist in the public schools is less
standardized and regulated by SDEs (Prus &
Mittelmeier, 1995). Standardization of programs
preparing specialist-level school psychologists is
increasing but has not yet been achieved. Of the
192 NCATE-accredited educational units with
specialist-level school psychology programs,
NASP has approved 107. Of the 77 NCATE-
accredited units with doctoral programs in school
psychology, 51 have been approved by NASP,
and 40 of those also are accredited by APA (J.
Prus, personal communication, September 26,
1999). To achieve the NCSP credential an
applicant need not be trained in aNASP-approved
program but must have met the requirements of
the NASP Standards for Training and Field
Placementand have passedthe school psychology
examination of the Educational Testing Services
Praxis series. To date, most statesneither require
the examination nor the NCSP but rely instead
on their own requirements (see PIUS, Draper,
 School Psychology Training 579

approved to better ensure they will meet the foundations, academic interventions, or special
NCSP requirements. We also expect that the education. Thus, these programs raise concerns
examination used in the NCSP process will be about the quality of the educational component
gradually adopted by state regulatory boards that of a school psychologist’s training, for a
credential school psychologists for independent program’s ability to educate its students to fulfill
practice, but much more rapidly by boards that an expanding role and function in the schools,
provide credentials for school-based practice. and ultimately, for the program’s prospects of
A related credentialing concern is the recent obtaining NASP and/or APA approval. We
trend of school districts to hire professionals predict a modest increase in the number of
without SDE credentials to provide services not proprietary, professional schools of psychology
specifically required in SDE regulations. For offering state-approved school psychology
example, some school districts have as many training. This predicted increase in professional
licensed professional counselors (LPC) as school schools of psychology with a school psychology
psychologists and use the LPCs to provide track is based upon the productivity of these
counseling services as specified in students’ schools in clinical psychology and their interest
individual educational programs (IEP). Licensed in providing training for a perceived lucrative job
psychologists are being employed to provide market in school psychology (seeReschly, 2000).
crisis counseling and prevention programs. We
believe this trend will continue and that schools The Roles of NASP and APA
will have increasing numbers of professionals
from related fields of psychology (e.g., clinical, NASP and APA are the major organizations
counseling) to provide services that in the past influencing the training of school psychologists.
could have been or were provided by school Their influence is observed in their connections
psychologists. That is, school systems may to accreditors (e.g., NCATE, CoA); their training
choose to hire doctoral, licensed psychologists standards; and futures documents, position
to provide some of these services in an effort to papers, and conferences. A recent trend in the
recover costs through third-party reimbursement authority for accreditation is to have such
for which most specialist-level school activities guided by groups or panels of repre-
psychologists are ineligible. sentativesfrom many relevant constituencies, not
one organization such as APA or NASP.
Growth of Professional Schools Although involving a complicated network of
of Psychology constituencies, the trend is toward making
accreditation less connected to a parent
Another potentially strong factor is the organization’s specific positions. For decades,
growth of freestanding schools of professional APA accreditation was but one activity of the
psychology, offering the Doctor of Psychology parent APA; in contrast, NCATE was an
degree (PsyD). Employing a training model akin accrediting body whose sole purpose was
to that of medicine, most of the 63 programs in accreditation and it has historically had
the National Council of Schools and Programs representation from numerousconstituent groups.
of Professional Psychology (NCSPP) operate in The APA CoA and the NCATE are both now
relative isolation from curricula and students in making accrediting decisions independent of the
other fields of psychology or education. Members external influence of a parent organization. We
of the NCSPP include 38 schools that are both believe that this trend will continue and that
regionally and APA-accredited, 18 that are NASP’s Training, Program Approval, and
regionally accredited, and 7 that arein the process Accreditation Committee will become less
of developing doctoral programs in clinical formally connected to NASP. It also is unlikely
psychology (National Council of Schools and that NASP could function as an independent
Programs of Professional Psychology, 2000). accrediting body and more likely that NASP will
These programs often enroll part-time students continue its affiliation with NCATE. The NASP
who are working in another field while obtaining will continue to have a major impact on specialist-
their school psychology training, and their level programs. APA’s CoA will continue to
studentshave lessopportunity to enroll in courses focus upon doctoral training and be a stronger
with other educators and to benefit from more force in that arena than NASPLNCATE.
educationally focused coursessuch aseducational The recent position documents, School
580 School Psvcholoav Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
J Y,

Psychology: A Blueprint for Training and
Practice II (Ysseldyke et al., 1997), and the
Petition for Reafirmation of the Specialty of
School Psychology (“Specialty of school
psychology recognized,” 1998), will have a
significant impact upon school psychology future
training. The Petition primarily reflects school
psychology at the doctoral level and will,
therefore, influence primarily doctoral training;
Blueprint ZZdoes not specify levels of preparation
but it is assumed that it focuses upon both the
specialist and doctoral levels. The Blueprint ZZ
positions are reflected in the revised NASP
training standardsfor both specialist and doctoral
programs. The extent to which the Blueprint and/
or the Petition influence APA standards or
accreditation remains to be seen.
way that students in special education programs
are assessed,educated,and reevaluated. The 1997
IDEA also includes changes related to the need
for accommodations and modifications of
curriculum, instruction, grading, discipline, and
mandatesfor functional assessmentsand assistive
technology. We predict that these topics and
others mandated by future legislation and
litigation will be increasingly incorporated into
school psychology graduate programs without
extending their length. Training programs will
be challenged to find ways to incorporate
necessary content and experiences without
allowing the program to become overly
prescriptive.
Standards-Based School Reform Initiatives

State Department of Education Program Legislation, including a number of standards-

Approval Standards based school reform initiatives (e.g., Goals 2000:
Educate America Act and The Improving
In almost every state the SDE credentials America 3 SchoolsAct of 1994; seeLewis, 1995),
school psychologists for school-based practice. have and will continue to influence training in
Through the university/college training program school psychology. These efforts have resulted
approval process, the SDE is a potent force on in the adoption of state-level learning standards
the structure and content of training programs and emphasized the need to assessfrequently
within its jurisdiction, and we predict this will student progress toward meeting these standards
continue in the future. In the past decade,NCATE through state-developed and mandated
has entered into partnerships with several states standardized achievement tests. Assessment of
whereby accreditation activities are facilitated, basic skills is a key component of most standards-
especially with regard to specific professional based reform movements. These reform
programs; some states have adopted NASP initiatives have made it important that training
training standards as their criteria for program programs educate future school psychologists to
approval and can enforce them through the become familiar with state-level learning
partnership agreement. We predict the number standards and develop academic intervention
of state partnerships will increase in the future. skills to assist in developing, implementing, and
With or without partnership agreements we evaluating interventions for students at risk. In
encourage trainers and state association leaders the future, school psychologists will need skills
to seek and maintain involvement with the SDE to consult on appropriate assessmentstrategies
committees that develop program approval for all children, especially accommodations
requirements. necessaryfor children with disabilities in school
and community settings.
State/Federal Laws and Court Cases
Changing Political, Economic,
States have the primary responsibility for and Social Context
regulating education within their areas of
jurisdiction. State educational practices are Preparation of school psychologists through
increasingly influenced by actions at the federal degree programs and continuing education will
level to retain federal funding and to meet federal increasingly place greateremphasison sensitivity,
civil rights mandates and these practices will knowledge, and skill to work effectively with
continue to influence training. For example, the diverse populations of children and families. We
passage in 1997 of the Individuals with predict an increasing need for didactic and
Disabilities Education Act amendments (IDEA, experiential training in cultural competence.This
P.L. 105-17) specified dramatic changes in the will be accomplished not only through
 School Psychology Training
restructured course content but also through
collaboration and partnerships between the
program and local schools and community
agencies in creating practicum and internship
placements.
Training in social responsibility to embrace
diversity, display respect for others, and enhance
the welfare of others will be emphasized in future
training in an effort to better educate school
psychologists to meet this ethical principle
(Berman, 1997; Campbell et al., 1999). Such
content will be increasingly infused into course
offerings. In addition, we predict that as part of
training programs there will be a greater emphasis
on field experiences that are intended to have
students integrate and apply their skills to meet
these needs.
The changing demographics of our society
will continue to present a strong need to recruit
individuals from under-represented groups into
graduate programs. As the 20th Century ended,
school psychologists remained predominantly
(approximately 92%) Caucasian with
significantly more females (71%) than males
(NASP, 1999a). The recruitment of members of
diverse groups is an important topic at all national
conventions and futures conferences and is
represented in both APA and NASP/NCATE
training standards. Flexible admission standards
and training options, financial incentives through
dedicated minority scholarships, and active
outreach efforts targeting culturally and
linguistically diverse populations have proved
successful in recruiting culturally and
linguistically diverse students into school
psychology training programs, and we predict
that all those efforts will be increasingly used in
the future (NASP, 1998). In addition, if the trend
continues with entering school psychology
students being overwhelmingly female (Thomas,
1998), we predict that the recruitment of males
into the profession also will become a priority.
The concern for diversity in training extends
beyond the student body to include the diversity
of the faculty and the field experience settings to
which students are exposed. These expectations
also will continue to be reflected in training and
accreditation standards.
Future Trends in
School Psychology Programs
Based upon the aforementioned factors that
will continue to influence the preparation of
581
school psychologists, we anticipate several trends
to occur in school psychology training. The trends
will be related to domains/areas of training and
practice, levels of training, characteristics of’
preparation programs, movement toward out-
come and competency/performance-based
systems, predoctoral and specialist-level intem-
ships, postdoctoral specialties, the need for a
commitment to lifelong learning, and anincreased
interface with field settings in both preservice
training and continued professional development
(CPD).
Domains/Areas of Training and Practice
The program accreditation/ approval process
will help assure that training is current in
Blueprint II domains becausethese domains are
reflected in the revised NASP training standards.
In the domain of research and program
evaluation, there will be an increasing need for
preparing school psychologists to be informed
consumersand skilled distributors and producers
of research (see Kratochwill & Stoiber, 2000).
The expanded roles for school psychologists,
together with handling more complex referrals,
will create the need for more collaborative
researchwith other members of multidisciplinary
teams. In addition, the demand for greater
accountability will create the need for more
training related to evaluating the effectiveness of
one’s practice (see Harvey, 1996). To meet these
needs, we predict that there will be a movement
toward more applied research methodologies,
including single-subject and qualitative designs.
In the future, students will be encouraged to use
these methodologies in their research, including
theses and dissertations. In practicum and
internship settings, trainees will implement these
methodologies to assessthe effectiveness of their
interventions. Incorporation of these
methodologies into practicum and internship
activities also will serve to meet the emphasis in
current training standardson analysis of training
outcomes in delivering effective school
psychological services.
Interpersonal, communication, and
leadership skills are important for effective
practice. We predict that these skills will become
increasingly important as professionals from
related fields seek practice in schools and as
school psychologists function as facilitators on
multidisciplinary problem-solving teams. These
skills will be developed by traditional meanssuch
582 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
as reading or attending lectures and by practica
and internships that provide appropriate
supervised experiences in group facilitation.
Training in technology will become
increasingly important. As the number of
computer-assistedtest administration, scoring and
interpretation programs increases, there will be a
need for increased training to supervise
paraprofessionals, to function as informed
“consumers,” and for using these products
consistent with ethical principles and positions
such as the Guidelines for Computer-Based Tests
and Interpretations (APA, 1986). In addition,
school psychologists will need to keep abreastof
developments in assistive technology.
The importance of continuing to provide
effective training in psychological/educational
foundation areas cannot be overemphasized.
Evolving topics include psychometrically sound
ways of expanding assessment techniques to
provide a comprehensive evaluation that extends
beyond classification to providing meaningful
direct and indirect intervention plans. Although
all school psychology training programs will
increasingly addressprevention issues,we predict
that some future school psychologists will have
special proficiencies that enable them to provide
primary, secondary, and tertiary preventive
mental health services and programs.
Levels of Training
During the past two decades training
expectations for school psychologists have
moved from the master’s level (30- to 36.
semesterhours) to the specialist level (at least 60
semester hours), including a year of supervised
internship. There is a noticeable lack of
standardization in the titles of degrees from
nondoctoral programs for school psychologists.
For the three-year program required for NASP
approval, some students earn only a master’s
degree (MA, MS, MEd) while others earn an
educational specialist degree (EdS) or a
nondegree certificate of advanced study (CAS).
Because credentialing in school psychology in
the 21st Century will demand of recipients at least
the current NASP standard of three years of
education and training, the title of the degree
should convey more meaning than the master’s
degree, which many think of as a one-year
program. In the Midwest there is a trend among
training programs to offer an approved Specialist
in School Psychology (SSP) degree. Perhaps as
more programs grant the EdS or the SSPdegrees
or obtain some other common and descriptive
title, education and psychology credentialing
boards will better understand the nature of
specialist-level training in school psychology. We
predict that more training programs in the 21st
Century will offer degrees with the title of
specialist (e.g., SSP or EdS) to differentiate it
from a master’s degree.
It is unlikely that there will be a significant
increase in future state support for the
development of traditional doctoral programs
granting the PhD or EdD. However, some
specialist-level programs will likely be enhanced
to the PsyD degreelevel asoccurred several years
ago in some New York City institutions and more
recently at JamesMadison University in Virginia.
Considerable political negotiating is often
involved in acquiring the authority to grant the
PsyD degree. Such negotiations may be easier in
the future as governing boards see other
institutions with no history of granting doctoral
degrees begin offering the PsyD degree. In
Pennsylvania, PsyD degrees are becoming
available in at least five institutions without any,
or much, prior experience in granting doctorates.
In spite of thesepossible changes,we believe that
specialist-level requirements will not be extended
beyond two years plus the year of internship, and
doctoral programs will not be extended beyond
an average 100 semester hours of course work
plus internship and dissertation.
Characteristics of Training Programs
All school psychology programs will
continue to include content related to assessment,
consultation, interventions (and their evaluation),
and administration/supervision. However, the
proportional emphases of these areas will
continue to vary acrosstraining programs. In most
specialist-level programs, these areas will
continue to represent the major foci of training.
In many doctoral programs there will continue
to be a generalist emphasis,but in other programs
students will pursue one or more subspecialties
or special proficiencies. Many subspecialties and
proficiencies have been developed (seeFagan &
Wise, 2000, ch. 6 for a list of programs and their
subspecialties).Thesesubspecialtieswill continue
to include course work in the foundations and
techniques for practice and supervised training.
As suggested by Nastasi (2000) and Shapiro
(2000), those related to health/mental health and
 School Psychology Training
instruction are dominant. We believe that in the
21st Century, many of the following will be
available in addition to health/mental health and
instruction: assessmentof cognitive processes,
assessmentof affective processes,early childhood
and/or pediatric psychology, home/school/
community collaboration, organizational and
instructional consultation, prevention, program
evaluation, and services in rural or urban areas
and/or with particular minority groups (see Fagan
& Wise, 2000; “Specialty of school psychology
recognized,” 1998; Ysseldyke et al., 1997).
Reeder et al. (1997) identified additional
necessary competencies, including those related
to health issues, for school psychologists to
function effectively in full-service schools. Due
to the relative brevity of specialist-level programs,
we anticipate that providing subspecialtiesin such
programs will remain nearly impossible.
We believe that assessmentwill continue to
advance as developing techniques are validated,
computer technology improves, and state-of-the-
art computers are more widely available in
schools. There will be an increasing emphasis in
training programs on linking assessment and
intervention. Stronger training components will
include how assessmentresults can be translated
into effective (i.e., empirically supported)
interventions for social-emotional and academic
concerns (see Kratochwill & Stoiber, 2000).
Supervision will become a key component of all
doctoral programs and, increasingly, we predict
that specialist programs will introduce their
studentsto the literature related to becoming more
effective supervisees (see Berger & Buchholtz,
1993). Preparation for supervision at the specialist
level will likely come from continuing profes-
sional development through workshops, college
classes in supervision, and/or increased inter-
action with university training programs (see
Knoff, 1986; Ward, 1999). Some doctoral
programs may include supervision as a sub-
specialty or proficiency to prepare graduates to
become both administrative directors of psycho-
logical service units and supervisors of other
psychologists, related professionals, and parapro-
fessionals. At both the specialist and doctoral
levels of training, course work and field
experiences emphasizing communication, team
participation, and leadership will become
increasingly important.
Training for school-based practice has been
found to be similar within doctoral and specialist
programs. However, doctoral programs may have
583
provided a better background for understanding
learning and behavior problems within school
settings, provided significantly more preparation
for their graduates for practice in nonschool
settings, and for researchand evaluation (Reschly
& McMaster-Beyer, 1991). We predict that
education and training guidelines will continue
to evolve to distinguish general professional
psychology from school psychology programs,
specialist from doctoral school psychology
programs, and pre- from postdoctoral training.
The revised NASP (1999b) training standardswill
help clarify the differences between specialist and
doctoral education. Specialist-level programs will
be more uniform than doctoral programs.
Movement Toward Outcome- and
Competency/Performance-Based Systems
In the 20th Century, the emphasisin program
evaluation was on characteristics of applicants
and current students, quality of faculty, and
content of instruction. Reflected in the current
draft of the NASP Standards for Training and
Field Placement Programs in School Psychology
(NASP, 1999b) and in the CoA handbooks for
self studies (APA, 1996) the next decade will see
increased emphasis on various outcome/per-
formance-based variables. Although no set of
specific outcome criteria has been established,
the shift to outcomes will undoubtedly explore
many questions. For example, what percent of
entering students remain in the program and
graduate from the program in a reasonable period
of time? What measuresattest to their achieving
program goals while in training? What percent
enter and remain in school psychology
employment? What evidence attests to their
competencein practice? Do programs purporting
to prepare leadership personnel report the
leadership positions and professional offices of
their graduates? In programs emphasizing
subspecialty training, how does the work of their
graduates reflect that training? Programs will
need to develop innovative methods to assessthe
competencies of their graduates (see Wandle,
Thompson-Drew, & Luz-Alterman, 1999), and
this may include increased communications with
alumni and their employers. Outcome- and
performance-basedaccreditation may be the most
dramatic shift in accreditation procedures in the
past 50 years and follows similar shifts in the
evaluation of school districts in the recent era of
school reform.
584 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4
Predoctoral Internships
In 1999, there were 455 APA-accredited
settings enrolling about 1,500 predoctoral
psychology interns. Of these settings, 90% were
in clinics, medical centers,and statehospitals with
6% in multiple agency consortia (some including
schools) and 4% in an “other” category, including
correctional institutions, Employee Assistance
Programs, and schools (APA, 1999a). The vast
majority of all clinical and counseling interns
have their culminating predoctoral training
experience in an APA-accredited site. We believe
that the growing linkage of accredited internships
to the credentialing process for nonschool
practice will increasingly necessitate that future
school psychology students complete internships
in accredited sites also.
A related concern is the linkage of internship
sites to employment. In 1998, “interns tended to
find initial employment in the sametype of setting
as their completed (predoctoral) internship . . .
(and) a match between initial employment
settings was observed 82 percent of the time”
(APA, 1999a,p. 5). If school psychology students
elect to intern in accredited but nonschool
settings, then they are less likely be socialized to
school systemsand less likely to have a career in
schools. Such selection also limits the number of
doctoral psychologists in schools when there is
need for more. Thus, there will be a need for more
accredited doctoral internships in school settings
to make it more likely that students will be
socialized to the schools and later seek employ-
ment there. Increased accredited internships also
will strengthen school psychology’s connection
to mainstream professional psychology.
The consortium internship model developed
in several states is one encouraging solution to
the lack of accredited sites. Examples of
internship consortium models that accept school
psychology students include The University of
Nebraska-Lincoln, The University of Tennessee-
Knoxville, and the Memphis City Schools. Many
school psychology doctoral programs have, in
effect if not by a letter of agreement, “captive”
nonaccredited internships (i.e., for their own
students) within commuting distance of the
campus. A consortium with those participants
could be formalized and accreditation obtained.
We predict that more doctoral internships in
schools, consortia of schools, or consortia
including schools will be accredited, but not at a
rapid rate.
We also predict that the match of the goals
of the setting with those of the training program
will increasingly determine the appropriateness
of the setting for the doctoral school psychology
internship and the interns selected for it.
Nonschool-based sites, congruent with the
application of psychology to learning and
learning problems (e.g., hospitals, postsecondary
settings, home or clinic preschool services) will
be considered more appropriate than in the past.
In the near future, many doctoral students will
elect one internship year in the schools and
another in a more health-intensive setting.
Schools are excellent settings for both pre- and
postdoctoral supervised training. With SDE
credentials, trainees might be paid more than
trainees in other settings.
Specialist-Level Internships
For the foreseeable future, specialist-level
internships will remain almost exclusively in
schools.The goal of the specialist-level internship
will continue to be an extension of a student’s
on-campus preparation for school-basedpractice.
Interest in quality internships is highly connected
to NASP training standards and the acquisition
of the NCSP. While several stateshave approval
mechanisms for nondoctoral school psychology
internships (Fagan & Wells, 2000), there are no
national accreditation or approval mechanisms
available.
Increasingly, graduates of specialist-level
school psychology programs, spurred by NASP
program approval requirements, are moving
toward meeting NASP standards for internships
relating to length (at least 1,200 hours during one
or two school years) intensity of supervision (an
average of two hours per week); qualifications
of the supervisor; collaborative development of
an internship plan by site personnel, intern, and
university personnel; and other work setting
requirements. To meet NASP training standards
at the specialist and doctoral levels, internship
sites and supervisors must meet specified criteria.
We predict that collaboration between university
programs, including those at the specialist level,
and internship sites will increase in the future .
This will be consistent with NASP requirements
for collaboration in providing supervision,
support, and both formative and summative
performance-based evaluation of intern
performance.
There are several issues to address in the
 School Psychology Training
future to improve specialist-level internships.
Most states(with the notable exception of Illinois
and Ohio) do not have internships that are
coordinated on a statewide basis by SDEs, the
local school districts, and training programs or
do many have paid school psychology internship
programs at the specialist level. Although NASP
has had internship standards for more than 20
years, they are part of training program approval
standards and do not represent formal
accreditation standardsfor internships. One future
direction may be the development of specialist-
level internship accreditation/approval standards
as a means of improving the quality of specialist-
level internships. Perhaps related to this, NASP
is currently developing advanced certification for
intern supervisors. Given the high costs of
graduate education generally and the needsof the
profession to attract and retain persons from
diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, and socioeconomic
backgrounds, increasing the number of paid
internships will be essential. An alternative
approach may be for NASP and its state affiliate
to encouragethe SDE to develop a statewide, paid
internship program with requirements akin to
NASP standards.
Postdoctoral Specialization
Postdoctoral specialty preparation is
emerging in professional psychology. Currently,
there are five accreditedpostdoctoral training sites
and several others are in the advanced stages of
preparation (APA, 1999b). Accreditation proce-
dures for both generic and specialty postdoctoral
residencies are in place, and in the next 10 years
a number of additional programs will achieve that
status.
Applicants to postdoctoral training must be
extending their previous education and training,
not simply changing specialties. Most post-
doctoral training will be an extension of the
predoctoral specialty area. However, specialties
such as neuropsychology, forensic psychology
(e.g., addressing child custody referral issues),
and, perhaps, psychopharmacology are logical
extensions for students from any accredited
school psychology program and would not
represent a change in specialty.
One area that has been discussed as a
postdoctoral specialty is psychopharmacology.
There has been an ongoing battle over
prescription privileges for psychologists that is
far from over, and its outcome is difficult to
585
predict (Hayes & Heiby, 1996). A vocal and
persistent core of psychologists advocate
changing the education of psychologists to
include the ability to provide a limited number
of prescriptions (seeKubiszyn, 1994). In the near
future it is likely that continuing education
programs, some leading to the equivalent of a
master’s degree, will be offered for licensed
doctoral psychologists. Regardless of whether
school psychologists eventually obtain
prescription privileges, we predict that school
psychology programs will increasingly include
curriculum content related to psycho-
pharmacology (e.g., the possible side effects of
the various medications used with children).
Many school psychologists will be called upon
to chart, or preferably to teach, paraprofessionals
and others how to chart behaviors to help monitor
children taking prescription medication. In the
future, we predict that psychopharmacology will
be a post-degree training specialty as an optional
“add on” program for doctoral-level school
psychologists from accredited programs, but not
likely to be achieved by specialist-level school
psychologists.
Commitment to Lifelong Learning
It is widely known that continuing profes-
sional development (CPD) is essential to develop
new skills to practice effectively and meet the
needs of consumers of school psychological
services. Many states are now mandating a
minimum number of CPD hours to maintain
school psychology credentials (Prus et al., 1995).
CPD will assumeincreasing importance for the
school psychologist; this will influence training
programs as well. We predict that training
programs will increasingly be expected to
collaborate with practitioners in assessing and
providing for the CPD needsof inservice school
psychologists. Training programs will
increasingly usedistance education and electronic
learning for delivering CPD (see Cummings,
1999).
Increased Interface with Field Settings:
Preservice Training and CPD
In the future, we predict that more
elementary and secondary school/university
partnerships will develop for both preservice
training and CPD to assistin the development of
new and expanded skills for the practicing school
586 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

psychologist and to increase the effectiveness of at the specialist level and accreditation by the
preservice school psychology training. APA at the doctoral level will result in curricula
Professional development schools, which for school psychologists that will become similar
represent formal partnerships between university enough to provide reciprocity across North
school psychology programs and elementary/ America. Although different examinations will
secondary schools, and in which training of be used at those levels, acceptable scores from
graduate students is provided within the walls of each examination will become uniform across
public schools are increasing (see Robinson- jurisdictions to further facilitate state-to-state
Zanartu, 1999). Such models are very popular in reciprocity. SDEs will continue to establish
the preservice preparation of teachers. In standards for practice in schools as will state
professional development schools, students can regulatory boards for independent practice in
more easily observe their professors modeling other settings. Schools will employ more mental
isolated skills and the integration/application of health professionals licensed for private practice
knowledge and skills necessary for effective for activities not limited to personnel with SDE
school psychology practice. Using public credentials. More school psychologists will
elementary and secondary schools as acquire licenses for private practice to expand
“classrooms” also will provide preservice their roles in schools, engage in limited private
students with an opportunity to begin to practice in addition to school employment, or
demonstrate, with corrective feedback, particular leave the schools.
critical skill(s) previously limited only to The ETS PRAXIS examination for school
classroom discussions, simulations, or practica. psychologists and NCSP statuswill becomemore
In this respect, future school psychology training widely used for both school and private practice
may more closely resemble medical education for credentials. As use of the examination increases,
which the norm is for first- and second-year more graduate programs will seek NASP
medical students to observe and work with their approval. Increasingly, freestanding schools of
professors, “learning by doing.” professional psychology will prepare students for
Accomplishing this interface between this examination and practice in schools. Existing
training programs and field settings means that NASP and APA documents will evolve and will
more school psychology educators of the future continue to guide faculty in finetuning programs
will need to return to elementary and secondary to meet the needs of an increasing array of
schools to engage in limited delivery of school consumers of school psychological services.
psychological services serving as “models” for School psychology faculty and leaders of school
their students. For this increased time to occur, practice must be involved in SDE committees
their efforts must be acknowledged aspart of their shaping curricula and credentials to protect
faculty “teaching assignment” and accorded children and facilitate their education.
appropriate recognition by department personnel As the U.S. and the composition of its
committees in annual evaluation, promotion and schools become more diverse, degree programs
tenure decisions. These practices may evolve and post-degree education must enable school
more rapidly in the emerging professional schools psychologists to meet their various needs. The
than in traditional academic settings. school psychology workforce will reflect the
composition of clientele in the dimensions of
Summary and Conclusions diversity. School psychological services will
continue to expand beyond those necessary to
As we enter the 21st Century, training for serve exceptional children and will be delivered
school psychologists holds many exciting in school and in other settings.
challenges and opportunities. The doctoral- The NCATE and APA will continue to be
specialist training controversy, reflected in the the major accrediting agencies. NCATE/NASP
basic policy differences of APA and NASP (see approvals will have their major influence on the
Fagan, Gorin, & Tharinger, 2000) is not likely to specialist level, and APA will continue to
change in the foreseeable future. This has dominate at the doctoral level. Outcome variables,
implications for the content and structure of many based upon training program goals, will be used
training programs that will continue to be linked for internal and external reviews of programs. As
to credentialing requirements for school and a result, program faculty will communicate with
nonschool practice. Program approval by NASP and be guided by alumni input on training and
 School Psychology Training
the quality of their professional services.
The academic locale and basic structure of
programs will remain much the same. Programs
will continue to operate in Colleges of Arts and
Sciences or Colleges of Education with gradual
entrance into the training market by freestanding
schools of professional psychology; the latter will
primarily train at the doctoral level. The master’s
degree will fade from use and be replaced by a
specialist degreefor greater “truth in advertising.”
Faculty in many programs now unable to offer a
PhD will argue persuasively to obtain a PsyD.
Support for the growth of doctoral and specialist
programs will likely be limited and the number
of university-based training programs will not
increase significantly in the future; the number
of freestanding professional school programs is
difficult to predict.
Enrollment in school psychology training
programs will increase at a modest rate as
undergraduates become aware that school
psychology has greater and more varied
employment opportunities than the more popular
specialties of clinical and counseling psychology.
Unless enrollment increases considerably in
number and student diversity, training programs
will not be able to meet the demand for
practitioners.
The content areas of programs will not
change dramatically; assessment,consultation,
and intervention will continue as the primary
areas of school psychology training. Doctoral
programs will continue to offer an array of
specializations and proficiencies including
supervision and administration. At all levels of
training, demonstration of effective communica-
tion, team participation, and leadership will be
required of students. Practicum and internship
training and CPD will have increased focus upon
validating techniques of assessment and
treatment. Specialist-level internships will be
more formalized and recognized as an induction
processby school systems.Doctoral students will
chooseinternships that add to their previous field
experiencesand allow later practice in school and
nonschool settings. Slowly but surely, pre- and
postdoctoral internships in schools will be
accredited. Accredited postdoctoral education and
training in specializations such as neuro-
psychology, psychopharmacology, and forensic
psychology will be available to doctoral recipients
from APA-accredited programs in school
psychology.
Increased CPD requirements in credentialing
587
will underscore the importance of training
programs providing continuing education to
inservice practitioners. To meet this need and
provide effective skill-based training, programs
will be challenged to offer CPD consistent with
well-known principles of adult learning and
interface more with field settings.
Since the 197Os, the field of school
psychology haswitnessed increasing stabilization
of its identity and progress in achieving the
symbols of profes Isionalization. Most of the
predicted trends andpneedsare already observable
in the changing nature of society and in the
proposals for standards in credentialing and
accreditation. The increased regulation of
professional education and psychology generally
and school psychology specifically will continue
well into the 21st Century. This regulation will
continue to be expressedin the training of school
psychologists.
References
American Psychological Association. (1986). Guidelinesfor
computer-based tests and interpretations. (Committee
on Professional Standards and Committee on
Psychological Tests and Assessment). Washington, DC:
Author.
American Psychological Association. (1996). Guidelines and
principles for accreditation of programs in professional
psychology and accreditation operating procedures.
Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (1999a). Committee
on Accreditation 1998 annual report. Washington, DC:
Author.
American Psychological Association. (1999b). Accredited
doctoral programs in professional psychology: 1999.
American Psychologist, 54, 1099- 1 111.
Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards.
(1999). Handbook of licensing and certification
requirements for psychologists in North America.
Montgomery, AL: Author.
Berger, S. S., & Buchholtz, E. S. (1993). On becoming a
supervisee: Preparation for learning in a supervisory
relationship. Psychotherapy, 30, 86-92.
Berman, S. (1997). Children’s social consciousness and the
development of social responsibility. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Campbell, C. D., Estelle, L., Miller, J., Pi&l, R., Ganey, K.
& Hopkins, S. (1999, August). Teaching social
responsibility in clinical and counseling psychology
doctoral programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Psychological Association, Boston.
Cummings, J. A, (1999, April). The use offield-based case
studies to situate learning on the Web. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the National Association of
School Psychologists. Las Vegas.
Fagan, T. K., Gorin, S., &Tharinger, D. (2000). TheNational
Association of School Psychologists and the Division of
School Psychology-APA: Now and beyond. School
Psychology Review, 29, 525-535.
588 School Psychology Review, 2000, Vol. 29, No. 4

Fagan, T. K., & Wells, P. D. (2000). History and status of
school psychology accreditation in the United States.
School Psychology Review, 29, 28-5 1.
Fagan, T. K., & Wise, P. S. (2000). Schoolpsychology: Past,
present, andfuture. (2nd ed.). Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Harvey, V. S. (1996). Guidelines for evaluating school
psychological services (rev.). Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Hayes, S. C., & Heiby, E. M. (1996). Psychology’s drug
problem: Do we need a fix or should we just say no?
American Psychologist, 51, 198-206.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (P.L. No. lOl-
476). 20 U.S.C. Ch. 33; Amended by P.L. 10517, June
1997. (34 C. F. R. Part 300).
Jacob-Timm, S., & Hartshome, T. S. (1998). Ethics and law
for school psychologists (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Knoff, H. M. (1986). Supervision in school psychology: The
forgotten or future path to effective services? School
Psychology Review, 15, 529-545.
Kratochwill, T. R., & Stoiber, K. C. (2000). Uncovering
critical research agendas for school psychology:
Conceptual dimensions and future directions. School
Psychology Review, 29, 59 l-603.
Kubiszyn, T. (1994). Pediatric psychopharmacology and
prescription privileges: Implications and opportunities
for school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 9,
26-40.
Lewis, A. C. (1995). An overview of the standards
movement, Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 744-750.
Nastasi, B. K. (2000). School psychologists as health-care
providers in the 21st Century: Conceptual framework,
professional identity, and professional practice. School
Psychology Review, 29, 540-554.
National Association of School Psychologists. (1998).
Position statement on minority recruitment. Bethesda,
MD: Author.
National Association of School Psychologists. (1999a).
Membership renewal form data. Bethesda, MD: Author.
National Association of School Psychologists. (1999b).
Draft: Standards for training and field placements in
school psychology. Bethesda, MD: Author.
National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional
Psychology. (2000). The schools and programs of the
National Council of Schools and Programs of
Professional Psychology. [On-line]. Available:
www.am.org/ncspp/
Prus J., Draper, A., Curtis, M. J., & Hunley, S. (1995). A
summary of credentialing requirements for school
psychologists in public school settings. In A. Thomas &
J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology-III
(pp. 1237-1248). Washington, DC: National Association
of School Psychologists.
Prus J., & Mittelmeier, K. (1995). A summary of licensure
requirements for independent practice in psychology and
school psychology. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.),
Best practices in school psychology-III (pp. 1249- 1256).
Washington, DC: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Reeder, G. D., Maccow, G. C., Shaw, S. R., Swerdlik, M.
E., Horton, C. B., & Foster, P. (1997). School
psychologists and full-service schools: Partnerships with
medical, mental health, and social services. School
Psychology Review, 26, 603-62 1.
Reschly, D. J., & McMaster-Beyer, M. (1991). Influences
of degree level, institutional orientation, college
affiliation, and accreditation status on school psychology
graduate education. Professional Psychology: Research
and Practice, 22, 368-374.
Robinson-Zanartu, C. (1999, April). Systemic approaches
to professional readiness: The role of site-based
instruction. Paper presented in the Field-based
instruction in school psychology preparation symposium
conducted at the annual meeting of the National
Association of School Psychologists, Las Vegas.
Shapiro, E. S. (2000). School psychology from an
instructional perspective: Solving big, not little problems.
School Psychology Review, 29, 560-572.
Sheridan, S. M., & Gutkin, T. B. (2000). The ecology of
school psychology: Examining and changing our
paradigm for the 21st Century. School Psychology
Review, 29, 485-502.
Specialty of school psychology recognized. (1998). The
School Psychologist, 52, 108- 109.
Thomas, A. (1998). Directory of school psychology graduate
programs. Bethesda, MD: National Association of
School Psychologists.
Wandle, C. H., Thompson-Drew, C., & Luz-Alterman, S.
(1999, April). A blueprint for the future: Assessing the
competencies of future school psychologists. Paper
presented at the annual conference of the National
Association of School Psychologists, Las Vegas.
Ward, S. (1999, November). Field-based intern supervision:
A study of practices. Communique, 28, 32-33.
Ysseldyke, J., Dawson, P., Lehr, C., Reschly, D., Reynolds,
M., & Telzrow, C. (1997). School psychology: A
blueprint for training and practice II. Bethesda, MD:
National Association of School Psychologists.

Mark E. Swerdlik, PhD, is a Professor of Psychology and Coordinator of the specialist and doctoral
degree programs in school psychology at Illinois State University. He is a NASP folio reviewer, a Past-
Chair of the Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs, and current Chair of the Directors of
University School Psychology Programs, an inter-university Council of Directors of State of Illinois-
approved school psychology programs.

Joseph L. French, EdD, ABPP, is a Professor Emeritus from Penn State University where he was the
director of school psychology training for 33 years. He was a member of the APA Accreditation Committee
and of the Designation Committee representing the Association of State and Provincial Psychology
Boards. He is serving his third term on the Pennsylvania Board for Psychology of which he is the chair.