临床神经心理学博士后奖学金项目的评估政策和程序调查。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2024.2315731
Julie K Janecek, Brittany Lang, Sakina Butt, Laura Kenealy, Amy Heffelfinger
{"title":"临床神经心理学博士后奖学金项目的评估政策和程序调查。","authors":"Julie K Janecek, Brittany Lang, Sakina Butt, Laura Kenealy, Amy Heffelfinger","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2315731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objectives of this study were to examine current procedures that are used to evaluate competency development in clinical neuropsychology at the postdoctoral level and to investigate policies and procedures for the management of performance that is below expectations during the postdoctoral fellowship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Clinical neuropsychology fellowship program directors were invited via email with multiple reminders to participate in an online survey between 1/26/2023 and 3/31/2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most programs administer a competency-based written evaluation of fellow performance (92%) and have a written policy for managing performance that is below expectations (86%). However, greater variability was reported regarding the use of other evaluation tools, including fellow self-assessments (46% of programs), program evaluations (57% of programs), supervisor evaluations (73% of programs), and exit interviews (82% of programs). Moreover, there was variability between programs with regard to the specific competencies that were measured and how performance that is below expectations is managed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Competency-based evaluations and clear, written policies and procedures for management of performance that is below expectations are recommended. Such tools and policies provide clear expectations for fellowship outcomes, promote regular communication between fellows and supervisors, foster early identification of gaps in training, facilitate program quality improvement, and increase opportunities to support and intervene during the course of fellowship training.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1501-1523"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survey of evaluation policies and procedures in clinical neuropsychology postdoctoral fellowship programs.\",\"authors\":\"Julie K Janecek, Brittany Lang, Sakina Butt, Laura Kenealy, Amy Heffelfinger\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2024.2315731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objectives of this study were to examine current procedures that are used to evaluate competency development in clinical neuropsychology at the postdoctoral level and to investigate policies and procedures for the management of performance that is below expectations during the postdoctoral fellowship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Clinical neuropsychology fellowship program directors were invited via email with multiple reminders to participate in an online survey between 1/26/2023 and 3/31/2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most programs administer a competency-based written evaluation of fellow performance (92%) and have a written policy for managing performance that is below expectations (86%). However, greater variability was reported regarding the use of other evaluation tools, including fellow self-assessments (46% of programs), program evaluations (57% of programs), supervisor evaluations (73% of programs), and exit interviews (82% of programs). Moreover, there was variability between programs with regard to the specific competencies that were measured and how performance that is below expectations is managed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Competency-based evaluations and clear, written policies and procedures for management of performance that is below expectations are recommended. Such tools and policies provide clear expectations for fellowship outcomes, promote regular communication between fellows and supervisors, foster early identification of gaps in training, facilitate program quality improvement, and increase opportunities to support and intervene during the course of fellowship training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1501-1523\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2315731\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2315731","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究的目的是检查目前用于评估博士后临床神经心理学能力发展的程序,并调查在博士后研究期间对低于预期表现的管理政策和程序:方法:通过电子邮件多次提醒临床神经心理学研究项目主任在 2023 年 1 月 26 日至 2023 年 3 月 31 日期间参与在线调查:大多数项目都对研究员的表现进行了基于能力的书面评估(92%),并制定了管理低于预期表现的书面政策(86%)。然而,其他评估工具的使用情况差异较大,包括研究员自我评估(46%的项目)、项目评估(57%的项目)、主管评估(73%的项目)和离职面谈(82%的项目)。此外,在衡量的具体能力以及如何管理低于预期的绩效方面,不同项目之间存在差异:结论:建议采用基于能力的评估以及明确的书面政策和程序来管理低于预期的绩效。这些工具和政策明确了对研究金成果的期望,促进了研究员与导师之间的定期沟通,有助于及早发现培训中的不足,促进项目质量的提高,并增加了在研究金培训过程中提供支持和干预的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survey of evaluation policies and procedures in clinical neuropsychology postdoctoral fellowship programs.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to examine current procedures that are used to evaluate competency development in clinical neuropsychology at the postdoctoral level and to investigate policies and procedures for the management of performance that is below expectations during the postdoctoral fellowship.

Method: Clinical neuropsychology fellowship program directors were invited via email with multiple reminders to participate in an online survey between 1/26/2023 and 3/31/2023.

Results: Most programs administer a competency-based written evaluation of fellow performance (92%) and have a written policy for managing performance that is below expectations (86%). However, greater variability was reported regarding the use of other evaluation tools, including fellow self-assessments (46% of programs), program evaluations (57% of programs), supervisor evaluations (73% of programs), and exit interviews (82% of programs). Moreover, there was variability between programs with regard to the specific competencies that were measured and how performance that is below expectations is managed.

Conclusions: Competency-based evaluations and clear, written policies and procedures for management of performance that is below expectations are recommended. Such tools and policies provide clear expectations for fellowship outcomes, promote regular communication between fellows and supervisors, foster early identification of gaps in training, facilitate program quality improvement, and increase opportunities to support and intervene during the course of fellowship training.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信