ABPP Certification in Rehabilitation Psychology. www.abrp.org. In addition to these slides candidates are strongly encouraged to visit the ABRP website and review
In addition to these slides candidates are strongly encouraged to visit the ABRP website and review
American Board of Professional Psychology, American Board of Rehabilitation Psychology Certification Guidelines and Procedures: Candidate’s Manual (2012)
And “Examples of Successful Practice Samples”
To access them go to:
Under RELATED DOCUMENTS (right side of the page) click on: ABRP Candidates Manual
Under REHABILITATION PSYCHOLOGY (bottom left side of the page) click on: Examples of Successful Practice Samples
Advanced TrackPart I:Communicating with ABPP/ABRPSelecting/Writing Practice SamplesEllen Snoxell, Ph.D., ABPP (RP)Gillette Children’s Specialty Health CareSt. Paul, MinnesotaMary R Hibbard Ph D ABPP (RP)New York University Langone Medical CenterNew York, New York
Diane Butcher (email@example.com)
Nancy McDonald (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Ellen Snoxell, Ph.D., ABPP (RP)
Secretary, American Board of Rehabilitation Psychology
Please utilize your mentor when (before) selecting and preparing your practice sample!
Posting of successful Practice Samples are posted on the ABRP Website
The first practice sample portion is recommended to include a brief description of the candidate’s work setting.
Introduction (1-2 pages)
Regardless of the work type (clinical, research, etc.), the narrative should describe your work and communicate how your work embodies the principles of Rehabilitation Psychology
Much more about the narrative portion to come…
More information about supporting materials to come…
Consumer protection issues
Justification for limitations in the case
“Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How?”
Outcome of case, emphasizing how candidate impacted the outcome
Supporting materials may include (but are not limited to):
Materials may include, but are not limited to
Course or program outlines alone do not constitute an acceptable Practice Sample portion
Materials may include, but are not limited to
A “pass” decision allows the candidate to be admitted to the oral exam.
This is not a final “pass” rating for the practice sample portion of the oral exam
Situations That Necessitate Revision and Resubmission of a Practice Sample
Inadequate description or consideration of patient’s emotional/personality functioning
Absence of internal integration of case
Case does not follow a rehabilitation model: e.g., the candidate’s involvement is not in collaboration or consultation with other rehabilitation professionalsSituations That Necessitate Revision and Resubmission of a Practice Sample
Advanced TrackPart II:Oral Exam: Clinical VignettesOral Exam: EthicsOral Exam: Practice SampleLester Butt, Ph.D., ABPP (RP)Craig Hospital Englewood, ColoradoBarry Nierenberg, Ph.D., ABPP (RP)Nova Southeastern UniversityFt. Lauderdale, Florida
An observer may be present in one of two possible scenarios:
In neither situation will the observer have any vote or input about the candidate’s performance
Oral Exam committee members meet as a group and determine whether the candidate was able to demonstrate presence of the required competencies over the course of the examination (not just during the practice sample exam).
If the candidate does not pass (i.e., 2 examiners do not pass the examinee), on the first vote, a discussion is required.
OVERVIEW: Adult Woman with Multiple Sclerosis and Leukemia referred for outpatient evaluation and psychotherapy
PRESENTING MEDICAL PROBLEM AND HISTORY: Ms. Diane Grant was referred medical specialties hematology and neurology for evaluation and psychotherapy as appropriate. Review of her medical chart reveals diagnoses of long-standing multiple sclerosis (MS) which was first diagnosed in 1976 and granulocytic leukemia (CGL), diagnosed this year. She was placed on Zoloft and Doxepin by her neurologist. Ms. Grant is currently on a regimen of chronic chemotherapy that is managed by her hematologist.
DEVELOPMENTAL, EDUCATIONAL, VOCATIONAL HISTORY: Ms. Grant reports that her parents are in their 70's and reside in a small town in Virginia where she still owns a home. She has a brother in the state of Washington. She graduated from high school in 1965, completing a college degree in English literature in 1969. She married her high school sweetheart subsequent to college with a separation in 1991, divorcing in September, 1993. Previously she had worked as an administrative assistant for regulatory affairs within a chemical equipment company. She stopped working in 1985. She met her current significant other (Henry) in late 1994 through a Christian single's group in Virginia. He moved back to Iowa in 1995 to begin a chiropractic practice. She currently is living with Henry. She is uncertain about her leukemia course. She states that statistics give her 3-10 years to live but it is ultimately up to God.
MENTAL/ CHEMICAL HEALTH HISTORY: On initial interview, Ms. Grant was a scattered informant who admitted that she might fail to remember some specifics of her history. She reports previously seeing a counselor who she described as a Christian social worker in Virginia. She believes that her current anti-depressant medication has been modestly helpful. Ms. Grant also noted that she takes an occasional Valium (once every two weeks) when foot spasticity interferes with sleep.
COGNITIVE AND PHYSICAL STATUS: On initial interview, Ms. Grant was meticulously attired and groomed. She wore glasses with a black lens over the left eye because of difficulties with diplopia and nystagmus. She is able to ambulate short distances using a cane with a marked ataxic gait. She used a wheelchair for long distances but could not independently utilize. She was an alert and responsive informant with hesitant, mildly dysarthric speech. Mood is anxious and dysphoric with noted lability. Speech rate was slowed and mildly tangential. She appeared overwhelmed with the enormity of her cognitive, emotional, and health stressors. No evidence of formal thought disorder was manifest. When questioned, she openly acknowledged difficulties with concentration, speed of information processing, memory, and complex problem-solving. Insight is reduced but adequate.