Competency-based assessment in clinical neuropsychology at the post-doctoral level: Stages, milestones, and benchmarks as proposed by an APPCN work group

Abstract

Objective: In recent years, there has been considerable progress in developing competencies in Clinical Neuropsychology. The field also needs to work towards consistency in competency-based assessment of the development of each competency to ensure competent, independent practice. The purpose of this manuscript is to a) document the relevant literature, b) describe the process applied by an Association of Post-Doctoral Programs in Clinical Neuropsychology (APPCN) workgroup on Competency-Based Assessment, and c) propose a framework and assessment tool for competency-based assessment at the post-doctoral training level. Methods: The work group conducted a literature review of competency-based assessment in Clinical Neuropsychology and related fields, considered various constructs for assessment, delineated a framework that can be flexible for program-specific goals, and created a tool for assessment. The workgroup then asked for review of the framework and assessment tool by APPCN Board of Directors, the APPCN Executive Committee, and Program Directors from APPCN and non-APPCN programs. Revisions were made following this review. Conclusions: This manuscript and proposed assessment tool invite constructive feedback within the community for ongoing evolution of the process and the tool. The proposed assessment tool is intended to be implemented flexibly within post-doctoral programs to respect their specific training goals while simultaneously providing underlying consistency in the method of assessing a recently proposed set of competencies within Clinical Neuropsychology. Creation of competency-based assessment tools across all training levels within Clinical Neuropsychology that facilitate continuity and hierarchical development is a long-term goal.

Keywords:

• Post-doctoral training
• competency-based assessment
• clinical neuropsychology

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).