FROM THE BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS
Dwarakanath G. Rao and Dionne R. Powell
Dwarakanath G. Rao, M.D., is chair of the Board on Professional Standards.
Dionne R. Powell, M.D., is secretary of the Board on Professional Standards.
Wisdom lies neither in fixity nor in change, but in the dialectic between the two.
—Octavio Paz
With this, our last column, we say goodbye from the Board on Professional Standards. This 70-year-old standards and approval body, long the symbol and substance of psychoanalytic training standards, is scheduled to sunset in June 2017 upon membership approval of bylaw changes.
The Board on Professional Standards (BOPS) was respected as the guardian of psychoanalytic education amidst times of social and political change. It was the intellectual and professional home for a large number of analytic educators over the decades. It was also the target of critics, legitimate and disaffected. Through it all, BOPS established and maintained standards for psychoanalytic education for generations of analysts in over 30 APsaA institutes. It held firm on frequency of analytic sessions, peer review through certification, and the training and supervising analyst system. Over the years, no aspect of psychoanalytic education was left unexplored. Admission, progression, immersion, site visits, consultation, troubleshooting morale and ethics issues, faculty progression, candidate welfare, training of non-medical and non-clinician candidates, distance analysis, liaison with new and existing institutes—these were issues BOPS committees and COPE study groups took up enthusiastically, providing an experiential basis for establishing standards and procedures. BOPS was also instrumental in approving the William Alanson White Institute and the American Institute of Psychoanalysis for affiliation with APsaA. At its best, BOPS demonstrated that it was a nuanced and flexible resource providing both regulation and consultation in a collegial atmosphere.
Regulatory functions of BOPS have been externalized in the American Association for Psychoanalytic Education (AAPE), and consultative functions become the province of the APsaA Department of Psychoanalytic Education (DPE). This trail-blazing separation of functions may seem unwieldy at first glance. In reality, we have known for some time that externalizing regulatory functions promotes healthy growth and protects institutes in an increasingly regulatory climate.
AAPE, ACPEinc, IPA: What’s the Difference?
As background, it is important to underscore that IPA standards are different from current APsaA standards and are proposed as APsaA’s future baseline upon BOPS sun setting. There will be a range of standards in APsaA.
Seven APsaA institutes have joined the AAPE, which will conduct joint site visits with the Accreditation Council for Psychoanalytic Education (ACPEinc). As other institutes discuss the AAPE option, two questions continue to cause confusion. One, what are AAPE standards, and how do they compare with International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) standards? AAPE standards are APsaA (BOPS) standards as of January 2017. AAPE standards in the original APsaA model require three supervised cases, including more than one gender, for graduation; IPA requires only two cases and does not expect different genders. AAPE allows child-focused training independent of adult training as well as integrated child/adult training; IPA does not currently allow child-focused or child-only training.
AAPE requires preparatory and facilitating clinical experience for academic and non-mental health candidates; IPA does not have preparatory expectations for non-clinician candidates. AAPE curriculum, progression, graduation requirements are based on IPA requirements but are generally more specific and detailed. AAPE encourages certification by an external board for faculty and requires it for training and supervising analyst appointment. IPA does not require certification. AAPE establishes educational standards, provides oversight, and conducts joint site visits with ACPEinc for national accreditation, and consults on standards matters with member institutes. IPA has a rigorous initial approval process for new institutes, but does not conduct subsequent site visits or provide a mechanism for external oversight or vetting of training and supervising appointments. IPA does not provide accreditation services.
AAPE standards encompass two models: The “original APsaA model” requires four-to-five times a week frequency for training analysis and supervised cases. The “William Alanson White model” allows three times a week frequency as floor, but requires a minimum of four supervised cases and additional psychotherapy experience for graduation. IPA currently requires four-to-five times a week frequency, but is considering a change to three-to-five times a week frequency for the Eitingon model.
A second question that comes up frequently: What is the difference between AAPE and ACPEinc? AAPE is a group of institutes that studies, establishes, and maintains educational standards. ACPEinc is an accrediting agency that uses its core standards as baseline but will apply AAPE standards in accrediting AAPE institutes. Some ask: Why not opt for accreditation by ACPEinc alone? While this is certainly an option, it will not take advantage of the combined expertise of AAPE and ACPEinc during joint site visits. AAPE will provide expert consultation on creating a developmental pathway for lifelong faculty learning, including support for certification and new methods for vetting and approval of training and supervising analyst appointments.
AAPE brings the universally admired site visit process honed over several decades of experience to the site visit process, and ACPEinc brings national regulatory knowledge in keeping with the requirements of the U.S. Department of Education. Together, these two overlapping but unique skill sets will make a joint site visit a more rewarding experience for those institutes that wish to follow AAPE standards.
We encourage colleagues and institutes to familiarize themselves with the implications of these far-reaching changes within APsaA as well as in the world of IPA. We welcome questions and your comments. For more information on AAPE, visit aape-online.org.
We once again take this opportunity to thank the selfless colleagues who carried out the educational mission of the Board on Professional Standards for 70 years. We would need an entire TAP issue to be able to list these accomplishments and to express our deepest gratitude. We know in our hearts that your spirit of service and dedication will live on in the work of future educators.