ABSTRACT

Recent changes to clinical psychology training and supervision in Australia have been driven by a deliberate endeavour by regulatory authorities and professional bodies to align education and training with competency-based models of training, a development that is apparent internationally across health disciplines. A critical question is: how do reforms in Clinical Psychology training standards match international benchmarks for competency-based pedagogies?

Objective: To outline key principles of competency-based pedagogies and to critically examine whether Australia’s new standards and guidelines for accreditation of coursework, practicum requirements, and supervision are consistent with competency principles, and match similar guidelines proposed in the U.K. and the U.S.A.

Method: Following a critical analysis of the extant literature, the authors highlight progress achieved, discuss major gaps and challenges, and examine the extent to which current accreditation changes constitute a reliable blueprint for the development of a competent psychology workforce for the country.

Results and Conclusions: The current review indicates that in an overall sense, practitioner training in Australia is tracking well in comparison to international developments. Specifically, the decreased emphasis on the regulation of inputs (e.g., nature and type of coursework and practicum) is pedagogically sound and has the potential to promote training innovation and efficiencies. However, a revision of the current competency framework is required to underpin future progress. Also, the lack of reliable and valid competence instruments in combination with less than rigorous adherence to systematic, timely, and ecologically valid assessments constitute a major challenge and a serious threat to ensuring safe and competent psychology practice.

KEY POINTS

What is already known about this topic:

(1) Competency-based education and clinical training play important coordinated roles in ensuring the competence of clinical psychologists, consistent with the accreditation standards and registration requirements of the Psychology Board of Australia.

(2) The Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC, 2019) have recently published new accreditation standards for psychology programs that are based on competency principles.

(3) The shift to the new paradigm is both exciting and challenging. It is exciting because it provides opportunities for innovation; it is challenging because it demands systemic change.

What this topic adds:

(1) The current paper compares and contrasts current standards and guidelines for accreditation in Australia with their counterparts in the U.K. and the U.S.A.

(2) Although significant progress has been made in Australia, additional implementation efforts should be taken to establish a comprehensive and authoritative competency framework, incorporating empirically-supported means of assessment. Such a framework should be fit-for-purpose providing a grid that maps shared and unique aspects of competencies across registration levels and specialised endorsements.

(3) The progressive relaxing of input criteria has the potential to seriously compromise the commitment to safe and competent psychological practice if training institutions do not adopt a re-designed system of ecologically valid assessments both during training and at the point of entry to the profession.

(4) The need to ensure competence is maintained throughout a psychologist’s career will remain a major challenge, given the ongoing and rapid advance of science. A commitment to the competency-based approach provides the necessary scaffolding for ongoing professional development.

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚心理学实践基于能力的标准和指南：机遇和风险

摘要

澳大利亚临床心理学培训和监督的最新变化是由监管机构和专业机构刻意努力推动的，以使教育和培训与基于能力的培训模式相结合，这一发展在国际卫生学科​​中都很明显。一个关键问题是：临床心理学培训标准的改革如何与基于能力的教学法的国际基准相匹配？

目标：概述基于能力的教学法的关键原则，并批判性地检查澳大利亚关于课程作业、实习要求和监督的新标准和指南是否与能力原则一致，并与英国和美国提出的类似指南相匹配

方法：在对现有文献进行批判性分析后，作者强调了所取得的进展，讨论了主要差距和挑战，并检查了当前认证变化在多大程度上构成了为该国发展合格的心理学劳动力的可靠蓝图。

结果和结论：目前的审查表明，总体而言，与国际发展相比，澳大利亚的从业人员培训跟踪良好。具体而言，减少对投入监管（例如，课程作业和实习的性质和类型）的重视在教学上是合理的，并有可能促进培训创新和效率。但是，需要对当前的能力框架进行修订，以支持未来的进展。此外，缺乏可靠和有效的能力工具，加上对系统、及时和生态有效的评估的坚持不够严格，对确保安全和称职的心理学实践构成了重大挑战和严重威胁。

关键点

关于这个主题的已知信息：

(1) 基于能力的教育和临床培训在确保临床心理学家的能力方面发挥着重要的协调作用，符合澳大利亚心理学委员会的认证标准和注册要求。

(2) 澳大利亚心理学认证委员会 (APAC, 2019) 最近发布了基于胜任力原则的心理学课程的新认证标准。

(3) 向新范式的转变既令人兴奋又具有挑战性。这令人兴奋，因为它为创新提供了机会；它具有挑战性，因为它需要进行系统性变革。

本主题添加的内容：

(1) 本论文将澳大利亚的现行认证标准和指南与英国和美国的同行进行了比较和对比

(2) 尽管澳大利亚取得了重大进展，但应采取额外的实施工作来建立一个全面和权威的能力框架，并结合经验支持的评估手段。这样的框架应该适合目的，提供一个网格，映射跨注册级别和专业认可的能力的共享和独特方面。

(3) 如果培训机构在培训期间和进入专业时不采用重新设计的生态有效评估系统，则输入标准的逐步放宽可能会严重损害对安全和合格心理实践的承诺.

(4) 鉴于科学的持续快速发展，确保心理学家在整个职业生涯中保持能力的需求仍将是一项重大挑战。对基于能力的方法的承诺为持续的专业发展提供了必要的支架。