Mailing Address
Psychology Department
N218 Elliott Hall
75 East River Road
Minneapolis, MN
55455-0344

Map/Directions

Main Office
Phone: 612-625-2818
Fax: 612-626-2079

 


Department Intranet

Evaluation of Students

Counseling Psychology Program students are reviewed annually (at the end of spring semester) by the faculty to determine each student's performance and progress to date and her or his chances of completing the Program. These evaluations ensure that students are making satisfactory progress toward their degree, provide feedback to students, and identify students who are having difficulty meeting program requirements. In addition to the annual evaluation, the Counseling Psychology Program faculty may also review the status of any student at any time during the year should there be reason to believe that the student is experiencing difficulty in the program.

First-year student evaluations typically consider grade point averages, course loads, number of incompletes, performance in the required counseling core curriculum, and the advisor's comprehensive evaluation of the student.

After the first year, evaluations have an added emphasis on the satisfactory acquisition of counseling, research, and teaching skills. In addition to evaluating students’ adequate progress through the requirements of the program, students’ interpersonal skills, professional fitness and development, self-awareness and self-reflection, resolution of problems, and ethical conduct are also evaluated.

Students should know that faculty in the Counseling Psychology Program have a professional, ethical, and potentially legal obligation to:

  1. establish methods through which aspects of competence in addition to students’ knowledge or skills may be assessed (including, but not limited to, emotional stability and well being, interpersonal skills, professional development, and personal fitness for practice)
  2. ensure—insofar as possible—that students who complete the program are competent to manage future relationships (e.g., client, collegial, professional, public, scholarly, supervisory, teaching) in an effective and appropriate manner.

Because of this commitment, Counseling Psychology Program faculty strive not to advance, recommend, or graduate students with demonstrable problems (e.g., cognitive, emotional, psychological, interpersonal, technical, ethical) that may interfere with professional competence to other programs, the profession, employers, or the public at large.

As such, within a developmental framework, and with due regard for the inherent power difference between students and faculty, students should know that faculty will evaluate their competence in areas in addition to coursework, research, teaching, practicum performance, and comprehensive examinations. These areas include, but are not limited to, demonstration of sufficient:

  1. interpersonal and professional competence (e.g., how students relate to clients, peers, faculty, allied professionals, the public, and individuals from diverse backgrounds or histories)
  2. self-awareness, self-reflection, and self-evaluation (e.g., knowledge of the content and potential impact of one's own beliefs and values on clients, peers, faculty, allied professionals, the public, and individuals from diverse backgrounds or histories)
  3. openness to processes of supervision (e.g., the ability and willingness to explore issues that either interfere with the appropriate provision of care or impede professional development or functioning)
  4. resolution of issues or problems that interfere with professional development or functioning in a satisfactory manner (e.g., by responding constructively to feedback from supervisors or program faculty; by the successful completion of remediation plans; by participating in personal therapy in order to resolve issues or problems).

This policy is applicable to settings and contexts in which evaluation would appropriately occur (e.g., coursework, practica, supervision), rather than settings and contexts that are unrelated to the formal process of education and training (e.g., non-academic, social contexts). However, irrespective of setting or context, when a student’s conduct clearly and demonstrably

  1. has an impact on the performance, development, or functioning of the student,
  2. raises questions of an ethical nature,
  3. represents a risk to public safety, or
  4. damages the representation of psychology to the profession or public,

faculty may review such conduct within the context of student evaluation.

Students are responsible for providing the Area Director with the information they need to evaluate them in the form of an Annual Progress Report, which students must complete annually to describe their progress and professional activities. In addition, students are asked to contribute examples of their work in various domains throughout the year to develop a portfolio that documents their developing skills.

At the annual evaluation meeting, students are evaluated by faculty who are familiar with their work as instructors, advisors, and teaching, research, or practice supervisors. Faculty evaluate students' strengths and weaknesses using an annual evaluation form.

Following the Annual Student Review, a letter from the student’s advisor summarizing the feedback from review will be sent to the student. The letter outlines the student’s progress to date and goals for the coming academic year. The student is asked to sign this letter, indicating his/her awareness of its contents, and a signed copy is placed in her or his file.

When they receive the letter, students should make an appointment with their advisors to discuss their progress and goals in more detail. At this meeting, faculty are also encouraged to ask their advisees about any problems they may be having in the program, whether personal, interpersonal, academic, or otherwise. Students are encouraged to share their concerns proactively with the faculty at this annual meeting, so that problems can be collaboratively addressed by students and faculty.

In addition to the annual evaluation, other major indications of a graduate student's progress toward the degree are timely and successful completion of coursework for the General Area Distribution Requirements, successful completion of the Special Written Examination, the Preliminary Oral Examination, and the Final Ph.D. Oral Examination.

Failure to Meet Program Requirements

All students should expect to receive constructive or corrective feedback about their performance -- from their advisors, other faculty, other supervisors, and from their peers -- at various points during their graduate student career, and students are expected to demonstrate both openness to self-examination and diligence in addressing and improving upon their weaknesses when such constructive feedback is received.

However, serious concerns about student performance within the Counseling Psychology Program are rare. When serious concerns do arise and/or students fail to comply with program requirements, policies, and procedures, this is handled on a case-by-case basis, generally following the template described below. Student evaluation reflects an individualized process that considers each person’s strengths and weaknesses and offers prescriptions to remedy serious concerns, and in some cases students may receive written notice of an identified concern that must be addressed and the manner in which it is to be addressed, without being formally placed on probation.

Probation and Remediation Steps

Being placed on probation indicates a very serious faculty concern about a student’s performance. Students are placed on probation (as opposed to being terminated from the program), when, in the opinion of the faculty, it is likely that the student will be able to address the difficulty that led to the probation if appropriate remediation is provided. Once the faculty have determined that a serious concern about a student’s performance exists, the following steps are generally taken:

  1. The area director and the student’s advisor will notify the student, in writing, that the student is on probation within the program. Additionally, the student will be requested to make an appointment with the advisor to discuss the issues involved.
  2. The advisor will meet with the student and inform the student of the identified problem areas noted by the faculty.
  3. The student and advisor will develop a written plan for remediation of the student’s behavior. This plan will:
    1. behaviorally define the student’s problem areas
    2. identify the expected behavior patterns or goals
    3. specify methods that will be used to reach these goals, which may include personal counseling, self-structured behavioral change, additional academic course work or practica, additional supervision, or other remedies as appropriate
    4. specify how goal attainment and competence in the problem area will be demonstrated
    5. set a date for reevaluation of the student’s progress and competence.
  4. This plan will be submitted to the program faculty for review, possible modification, and approval.
  5. If the plan has been modified by the program faculty, the advisor and the student will meet to review the modified plan.
  6. A copy of the approved plan will be provided to the student and a copy will be retained in the student’s file. Both copies of the plan will be signed and dated by the student and the advisor.
  7. Near the date for reevaluation, the student will present to the advisor any available documentation of progress in the identified problem areas and completion of the remediation plan.
  8. At or near the date for reevaluation, the student’s progress will be reviewed by the program faculty at a regularly scheduled faculty meeting, and the faculty will make one of the following recommendations:
    1. Continuation in the program: The identified concerns no longer present a significant problem and the student is no longer on probation within the program.
    2. Continued probation and remediation: The student has made significant progress in addressing the identified concerns, but has not yet attained the expected degree of competence in the problem areas. An updated behavioral plan is prepared, and a date is set for another reevaluation at the program faculty’s discretion.
    3. Dismissal from the program: The student has failed to attain the behavioral goals and there is no expectation that he or she can reasonably attain them in the near future.
  9. The advisor will notify the student in writing of the reevaluation decision and will request that the student make an appointment with the advisor for feedback concerning the decision.
  10. The student will be requested to sign and date two copies of the reevaluation decision. One copy will retained by the student and one copy will be placed in the student’s file.
  11. If dismissal from the program is recommended by the faculty, a written notification will be sent to the student. One copy will be provided to the student, one copy will be placed in the student’s file, and one copy will be sent to the Graduate School.
  12. Depending upon the reevaluation decision, the student and the advisor will meet to review the options available to the student and assist the student in educational, career, and remediation planning.
  13. If dismissal from the program is recommended, the student will be given 30 days in which to
    1. prepare and present to the faculty a written response to the notification
    2. request, in writing, a faculty review of the termination recommendation, if the student chooses.
  14. If the student requests such a review, the student will be invited to the next scheduled faculty meeting to present her or his case to the faculty.
  15. Following the student’s presentation, the program faculty will meet to render a decision as to whether the dismissal recommendation is to be upheld. Written notification of the decision will be provided to the student by the area director.