Survey of evaluation policies and procedures in clinical neuropsychology postdoctoral fellowship programs

Abstract

Objective

The objectives of this study were to examine current procedures that are used to evaluate competency development in clinical neuropsychology at the postdoctoral level and to investigate policies and procedures for the management of performance that is below expectations during the postdoctoral fellowship.

Method

Clinical neuropsychology fellowship program directors were invited via email with multiple reminders to participate in an online survey between 1/26/2023 and 3/31/2023.

Results

Most programs administer a competency-based written evaluation of fellow performance (92%) and have a written policy for managing performance that is below expectations (86%). However, greater variability was reported regarding the use of other evaluation tools, including fellow self-assessments (46% of programs), program evaluations (57% of programs), supervisor evaluations (73% of programs), and exit interviews (82% of programs). Moreover, there was variability between programs with regard to the specific competencies that were measured and how performance that is below expectations is managed.

Conclusions

Competency-based evaluations and clear, written policies and procedures for management of performance that is below expectations are recommended. Such tools and policies provide clear expectations for fellowship outcomes, promote regular communication between fellows and supervisors, foster early identification of gaps in training, facilitate program quality improvement, and increase opportunities to support and intervene during the course of fellowship training.

Keywords:

• Clinical neuropsychology
• postdoctoral training
• competencies
• evaluation
• feedback

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.