Professional mobility for psychologists is rapidly becoming a reality.

Abstract

Professional mobility for psychologists has been a problem since states first passed psychology licensing laws because of relatively small but crucial variations in licensing requirements. Although the profession of psychology and the association of psychology regulatory bodies in the United States and Canada (i.e., the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards [ASPPB]) have recognized this problem for decades, little progress was made in resolving it. Recently, the ASPPB launched two different approaches to facilitating professional mobility: one to forge agreements between regulatory bodies to accept each other's licensees, and another to certify or endorse individual psychologists who meet ASPPB standards for licensure and therefore can be recommended to licensing boards for relicensure. The specific requirements of each of these programs and their success in addressing the professional mobility problem are described. KIM R. JONASON received his PhD from Ohio State University in physiological psychology. Following postdoctoral study in neuroanatomy at Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse, NY, he trained in clinical psychology at the University of Louisville. He has been actively involved with Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) mobility efforts since 1993. He is the chair of the ASPPB Mobility Committee and serves on the ASPPB board of directors. He is interested in administrative law as it relates to the practice of psychology and in the issues of licensing mobility and interjurisdictional consistency in licensure requirements. STEPHEN T. DEMERS received his EdD from the school psychology program accredited by the American Psychological Association (APA) at Rutgers University. He is a professor and director of the APA-accredited school psychology program at the University of Kentucky and director of the certification program for the ASPPB. He is a paid consultant to the Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ) Program. His areas of interest include legal and ethical issues in psychological practice, credentialing and regulation in psychology, and the development and use of test user qualifications in psychological assessment. THOMAS J. VAUGHN completed his PhD in counseling psychology at the University of Oklahoma. He is a former president of ASPPB and former chair of the ASPPB Mobility Committee. He is in independent practice with Behavioral Medicine Associates at the Unity Health Center Hospital in Shawnee, OK, and serves as the director of professional affairs for the Oklahoma State Board of Examiners of Psychology. He is board certified (American Board of Professional Psychology) in clinical psychology with primary research interests in internship training and professional mobility. RANDOLPH P. REAVES received his JD degree from the University of Alabama School of Law and is a member of the Alabama State Bar. He is chief executive officer of ASPPB. His interests have centered on the legal literature related to psychological-legal issues and in researching the ASP...

A Cube Model for Competency Development: Implications for Psychology Educators and Regulators.

“…The question among psychology educators is how and in what way is this to be accomplished (Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers, 2004). Those responsible for regulation of the profession through credentialing pose comparable questions related to the assessment of competency for independent practice (Jonason, DeMers, Vaughn, & Reaves, 2003).…”

The ASPPB Credentials Bank and the Certificate of Professional Qualification in Psychology: Comprehensive Solutions to Mobility Obstacles.

“…Early in the 1990s, ASPPB launched a series of specific actions and programs aimed at addressing the long-recognized mobility problem (Jonason et al, 2003). First, ASPPB recommended to its member boards the adoption of a uniform passing point for the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP), the licensing exam used in all jurisdictions.…”

“…Such inconsistency in licensure eligibility across jurisdictions gets magnified the longer the time interval between one's completion of training and his or her attempt to obtain licensure in another jurisdiction. For many years, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) has recognized and attempted to address these obstacles to professional mobility (Jonason, DeMers, Vaughn, & Reaves, 2003).…”

Professional doctoral training in psychology: International comparison and commentary

“…Health-care professions are generally regarded as services and when the jurisdictions involved have different training standards, how different training levels can be accommodated is difficult. One approach is that based upon agreements to recognise credentials across state or provincial boundaries either through negotiated agreements or independent bodies, as in North America (Goodman, 2000;Jonason, DeMers, Vaughn, & Reaves, 2003), or through mutual recognition legislation, as is the case in Australia and Canada (Hall & Boucher, 2003). Another is based upon the use of competencies, as was recently agreed by the provincial regulatory bodies in Canada (Breault, 2001).…”