School Psychology Title and Practice at Risk
 

NASP Communiqué, Vol. 36, #6
March 2008

By Kathy Pluymert, NCSP

As NASP awaits further action by the American Psychological Association on its template language for state psychology licensing boards (the Model Act for State Licensure of Psychologists), it is important that members continue to understand the possible implications should APA’s proposed legislation be offered as a model to state policy makers who are responsible for the regulation of the practice of psychology.

Last fall, NASP members and many other members of the educational community responded during APA’s comment period with well over 10,000 letters expressing concern about removing the school psychology exemption from its model licensure act. While APA is reviewing comments on this issue and has slowed adoption of the model act, it is important for school psychologists to stay informed and vigilant regarding this issue.

APA's Model Licensure Act Is Both a Practice and a Titles Act

One issue that is of particular concern to NASP is the common misconception that the proposed changes in the language of APA’s model licensure act will only have an effect on the use of the title “school psychologist” for specialist-level school psychologists credentialed through their state boards of education. APA proposes removing the following exemption language from the current model act: “It is recognized that school psychologists who are certified by the state education agency are permitted to use the term school psychologist or certified school psychologist as long as they are practicing in the public schools” (lines 235–238). The proposed changes to this model licensure language directly addresses both the title of “school psychologist” and the practice of psychology in settings in which school psychologists are employed, including public schools.

School psychology title and school-based practice would be at risk if state legislatures were to implement an APA model licensure act that does not include the school psychology exemption. If the exemption for the title of school psychologist and schoolbased practice is removed from the model act, there is the potential for a conflict between state educational agencies and other state regulatory agencies, such as psychology boards, about which agency has the right to credential school psychologists and whether or not school-based practice is within the purview of state departments of education. While changes in APA’s model licensure act have the potential to create confusion and pose a threat to school psychology title and practice if enacted in a state as written, it is important to remember when assessing the potential impact of such a change that there are well established regulations, laws, and precedents in many states protecting school psychology practice. In all but one state (Texas) the credential for school psychology practice in the schools is regulated by state boards of education. Although national organizations such as APA and NASP are key stakeholders in credentialing and licensing matters, the authority to establish professional credentials is ultimately determined by individual states. That said, every school psychology state association needs to be vigilant in monitoring regulations in a variety of legislative and regulatory bodies to protect the title “school psychologist” and the practice of school psychology.

A side-by-side comparison of the existing language and proposed changes is available on the NASP website at http://www.nasponline.org/standards/MLA_Analysis _9_07.pdf. What follows are direct quotes taken from APA’s proposed model licensure act that highlight sections of the proposed language that could have the potential to conflict with the delivery of comprehensive school psychological services. The most important language in APA’s proposed model act with respect to school-based practice is that which relates to scope of practice, regulation of title, delineation of practice settings, and the clear risk of criminal prosecution for engaging in the practice of psychology without a license.

Regulation of Practice. Lines 6–8 clearly state APA’s intent that their model licensure act is intended to regulate not only titles, but also the practice of psychology:

As APA policy, the Model Act serves as a prototype for drafting state legislation regulating the practice of psychology. State legislatures are encouraged to use the language of this document and the policies that it espouses as the model for their own state licensure law. [italics added]

Furthermore, lines 101–106 of the proposed model act define the practice of psychology as follows:

3. Practice of psychology is defined as the observation, description, evaluation, interpretation and modification of human behavior by the application of psychological principles, methods and procedures for the purposes of (a) preventing, eliminating, evaluating or assessing symptomatic, maladaptive, or undesired behavior; (b) evaluating and assessing and/or enhancing individual, group, and/or organizational effectiveness—including personal effectiveness, interpersonal relationships, work and life adjustment, health and individual, group and/or organizational performance, or (c) assisting in legal decision making. [italics added]

Note later, in lines 108–120, the scope of practice protected under the proposed model act and how many of these practices are provided within the context of comprehensive school psychological services in schools and other educational settings:

Practice of psychology includes, but is not limited to (a) psychological testing and the evaluation or assessment of personal characteristics, such as intelligence, personality, cognitive, physical, and/or emotional abilities, skills, interests, aptitudes, and neuropsychological functioning; (b) counseling, psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, hypnosis, biofeedback, and behavior analysis and therapy; (c) diagnosis, treatment and management of mental and emotional disorder or disability, alcoholism and substance abuse, disorders of habit or conduct, as well as of the psychological aspects of physical illness, accident, injury, or disability; (d) psycho-educational evaluation, therapy and remediation; (e) consultation with physicians, other health care professionals and patients regarding all available treatment options, including medication; and (f) consultation to individuals and organizations including advising management on human behavior in organizations; individual psychological assessment for selection and/or development; test and survey development, validations and interpretation; and organizational assessment, diagnosis and intervention. Psychological services may be rendered to individuals, families, groups, and/or organizations. The practice of psychology shall be construed within the meaning of this definition without regard to whether payment is received for services rendered. [italics added]

Regulation of Title. The school psychology exemption found in most current state psychology licensing laws has had several effects: (a) credentialing for school psychology is now the purview of state education agencies, not psychology boards, (b) state credentialing requirements for school psychology are mostly consistent with NASP standards for training and credentialing, and (c) the practice and the title of school psychologist is now primarily associated with school-based practice.

APA’s Model Act for State Licensure of Psychologists not only defines the practice of psychology, but it limits the use of any title that refers to an expertise in any area of psychology. While some have suggested that school psychologists should simply adopt new titles, the Model Act in lines 122–126 clearly intends to have total authority over all titles associated with psychology:

Psychologist: Means any person licensed as a psychologist under this act and includes a person representing himself or herself to be a psychologist if that person uses any title or description of services incorporating the words psychology, psychological or psychologist or if he or she uses any term that implies that he or she possesses expert qualification in any area of psychology.…

Delineation of practice settings. The proposed language in lines 477 and 481–484 limits the practice of psychology to only licensed psychologists and indicates that they may practice in every setting, including schools (given that the school psychology exemption would no longer be included in APA’s model licensure act should the proposed changes be ratified by the APA governance). This section reads:

There should be an exemption from licensure for persons engaged solely in teaching in academic institutions, or research in academic and/or research institutions. The exemption should not be determined on the basis of work setting or place of primary employment, but on the basis of the purpose of the activity as defined in Section B3 (Practice of Psychology). [Reference to lines 101–120; italics added]

Risk of Criminal Prosecution. It is also interesting to note that in lines 459–461 APA’s model licensure act clearly advocates for criminal action against those who would either use the title psychologist or practice psychology unless they are licensed psychologists as defined in the act:

Any person who shall represent himself or herself as a psychologist in violation of this Act, or who shall engage in the practice of psychology in violation of this Act, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not less than [ ] dollars and not more than [ ] dollars and, in addition thereto, may be imprisoned for not more than [ ] months.

If a Challenge Arises in Your State

While understanding the implications of change to APA’s Model Act is important, the most important thing that school psychologists can do is to carefully monitor legislation and regulations in their own state. It is important to keep in mind that school psychologist credentialing varies significantly across the country and that credentialing is essentially within the purview of each individual state. As a result, while it is vital to understand national credentialing standards, it is equally critical to understand how school psychologists are credentialed in your state in order to effectively advocate for school psychologist title and practice.

NASP Advocacy has worked diligently with others in the area of credentialing and standards to develop tools for state associations and school psychologists to use in advocating for school psychology. These materials were shared at the NASP convention with national, state association, and student leaders from across the country in a variety of forums. The materials can be accessed online at http://www.nasponline.org/ standards/stateadvocacyroadmap.aspx. If you have questions on this important topic, please address these to standards@naspweb.org and your question will be referred to the appropriate NASP staff member or leadership person for a response.

Kathy Pluymert, PhD, NCSP, is the School Psychology Coordinator of Community Consolidated School District #15 in Palatine, IL.