Personality Assessment/Child - Graduate School of Applied and
Transcription
Personality Assessment/Child - Graduate School of Applied and
GSAPP, Rutgers University Department of Applied Psychology PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT: CHILD Course 820:636:01 Karen L. Haboush, Psy.D. Phone: (732) 249-2777 Teaching Assistant: Cassia Mosdell Teaching Assistant: Alison Tripptree Spring 2015 Monday 9:15-12:00 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] e-mail. [email protected] __________________________________________________________________________________________ Goal: To introduce students to the assessment of child and adolescent personality through the use of child-focused measures, including: projective-expressive techniques, objective tests, narrow-band self-report inventories, clinical interviewing, and play techniques. Utilizing a data-based approach, integration of objective and projective measures and case formulation will be emphasized, along with the manner in which social-emotional assessment is generally conducted within schools. This includes the application of play techniques. Case studies will be utilized to further student's understanding of diagnostic profiles, including assessment of child trauma. Objectives: 1. Students will learn the theoretical models underlying methods of child personality assessment and develop a framework for conducting data-based evaluations. 2. Students will demonstrate skill and competence administering, scoring and interpreting various self-report measures, behavior rating scales, and projective-expressive techniques. 3 Students will understand the ethical and legal issues surrounding personality assessment, including those regarding projectives, FERPA and privacy concerns, and assessment with diverse populations. 4. Students will be able to write a comprehensive psychological report, including a well-integrated formulation of the child‘s social-emotional functioning. Reports will follow a problem-solving model, including databased discussion of results clearly linked to the referral question and relevant recommendations. All readings are on Sakai. COURSE OUTLINE Week 1: 1/26/15 Introduction to the Course: A Framework for Data-Based Personality Assessment; Psychometric and Projective Theories Readings: Merrell Ch.1, Ch. 8 Pgs. 225-229 Week 2: 2/2/15 Empirical Support for Psychodynamic Theory, Assessment and Intervention; Legal and Ethical Issues Surrounding Personality Assessment: Conducting Personality Assessment in Schools, Psychological Report Writing Readings: Shedler ; Rabin; Haboush (“Current Status”) Bring to Class: Bring APA Ethical Guidelines to class (under “Readings”) Week 3: 2/9/15 Assessment of Culturally Diverse Populations; The Clinical Interview: A Framework; Self-Report Measures: Personal Problems Checklist Readings: Merrell Ch. 14 & 5(up to pg. 161); Dana; Presley et al. Week 4: 2/16/15 Play: Interviewing & Observation-Social-Emotional Functioning & Child Development Assessment of Internalizing Disorders: Self-Report and Objective Measures for Assessing Depression and Anxiety Children's Depression Inventory-II, Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale; Readings: Bettleheim; Merrell Ch. 7(up to pg.207) & Ch. 10(up to pg. 315; 330332); Lilienfeld et al.*up to pg. 31 Bring to Class: X Interview (Under “Reports”) Week 5: 2/23/15 Assessment of Internalizing and Externalizing Disorders: Self-Report and Objective Measures for Assessing Depression, Anxiety, and Conduct Issues Readings: Merrell Ch. 8 (pgs. 235-242); Flanagan ("A Place for Projective Assessment"); Due: Observation of Child’s Play Week 6: 3/2/15 Projective Assessment: Human Figure Drawings Administration; Interpretation of Developmental and Emotional Indicators (Koppitz system) Readings: Cummings Ch. 7;Oster & Gould, pgs. 13-28 Bring to class : Koppitz Emotional Indicators and Psych. Eval. of Children’s HFD* Week 7: 3/9/15---In Class Exam Projective Assessment:: Human Figure Drawings House-Tree-Person (HTP), Readings: Lilienfeld et al. pgs. 47-51; Picard & Lebaz Bring to Class: Koppitz Ch.5 (Social & Cultural Values) 3/16/15 SPRING BREAK! ENJOY! Week 8: 3/23/15 Projective Assessment of Family Relations: Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD); Sentence Completion Task; Evaluating Physical Abuse and Cultural Factors in Interpretation Readings: Veltman & Brown:; Oster & Gould pgs. 33-52; Goldner & Scharf Bring to Class: La Voy et al. Week 9: 3/30/15 Introduction to Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: TAT Readings: Merrell Ch. 8 (pgs. 229-235 and 252-261); Obrzut & Bolieck Ch. 6 Bring to class: Henry Ch. 12 Week 10: 4/6/15 Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: Overview and Administration of the TAT, CAT; Developmental Issues Readings: Graves, Lilienfeld et al..*pgs. 39-47; Bring to Class: Teglasi Week 11: 4/13/15 Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: TAT, CAT, Roberts-II---Interpretation; Working with Sexually Abused & Culturally Diverse Populations: TEMAS Readings: Flanagan (“Critical…”); Cardalda et al. Practice Assessment #1 Complete Psychological Report Due: See below Week 12: 4/20/15 Assessment of Trauma and Dissociation : Trauma Symptom Checklist; Guest Speaker Readings: Haboush, Selman, & Sievering* (pp. 117-144 & 148-151) ; Garo et al. . Week: 13: 4/27/15 Assessment of Trauma, School Play-Based Interventions, Providing Assessment Feedback to Parents and Children; Reading: Amir & Weisel; Tharinger et al.*; Edgar-Bailey et al. Week 14: 5/4/15 Objective Test/Projective Technique: Issues Surrounding the Rorschach (Exner's Comprehensive System) in School Psychology Practice and Utility with Diverse Populations; Readings: Yalof & Abraham Due: In Class Case Presentations Week 15: 5/11/15----End of Year Class Held at Karen's Office (including food & play therapy room access!) Summary and Evaluation of Course; Due: In Class Case Presentations Practice Assessment #2 Due: Complete psychological report—see below Additional readings may be assigned. (Please note: Course outline may be subject to change). Grading Criteria: Grades for this course will be based on: In-Class Exam=20% Two reports=25% EACH for a total of 50% Class presentation on Testing Case=7.5% Written Play Observation paper 7.5% In class practice scoring; active class participation, completion of the assigned readings, and outside supervisor feedback: =15% Class participation criteria : ACTIVE class participation counts toward your grade including: reading the assigned articles and chapters, sharing examples of testing cases that you may be working with, and contributing to class discussions. Class participation allows me to gauge your understanding of the course content and readings. Students are encouraged to discuss case examples from their practica during class since this class emphasizes case presentations. All projects are due on the date indicated on the course outline. Because we are a large group and the course material is complex. I want the class to maintain a comfortable and supportive learning environment for all. Therefore, all cell phones should be turned off and put away during class. Please refrain from side conversations and note writing with classmates. These gestures are distracting, exclude others and do not make for a supportive and professional learning environment. We have a good deal of material to cover and the complexity of the course content inevitably lends itself to questions, so please don’t hesitate to ask! LAPTOPS: In–class use of laptops for purposes other than notetaking (ie, being on Facebook, in chat rooms), will result in loss of ability to use your laptop in class. This behavior is inconsistent with professional decorum. Supervision: You should receive supervision for each of the two practice reports you complete. In addition to any outside supervision you might receive in your practicum if you complete the testing there, you may also receive supervision from the two teaching assistants with whom you will meet twice this semester, once for each report you complete. Please schedule to meet with the teaching assistant in a pair (with another student). The main purpose of supervision is to assist you with the interpretation and synthesis of test data. You should come to supervision prepared to discuss your test data. Please coordinate with your classmate early in the semester and contact your supervisor ASAP to schedule meetings to ensure that your reports can be submitted on time. Your supervisor will provide feedback about your performance that will be considered toward your grade. Practicum Requirements: Because practicum sites vary in their approach towards social-emotional testing, interpretation and report writing, this course is NOT designed to prepare students for the specific requirements of their individual practicum settings. Instead, this course is designed to provide a conceptual overview regarding interpretation and report writing. If students conduct testing on children in their practicum site, the reports submitted for this class should be written to satisfy the course requirements and not the specific requirements of the practicum site. All test data (xeroxed copies are permissible) should be submitted along with the written report so that I can review the raw data. GSAPP can not require that your practicum site provide you with children to test. However, if your practicum supervisor is assigning you testing cases and is also willing to supervise you on the ENTIRE battery, even if it is more than you actually need to submit for your practicum site, than please notify the instructor. You may be able to use that supervision to meet the course requirements. Ethical Issues: Students are responsible for adhering to the following ethical considerations: 1) Because the majority of students will be administering and interpreting personality measures for the first time, students are responsible for advising parents that they are functioning in a training capacity. As a result, students must advise parents that they can not provide interpretive feedback upon completing a practice assessment, unless testing is conducted as part of your practicum. The assessment is conducted solely for the purpose of the student's training. Obtain parental consent for assessment using the consent form provided by instructor. Include this form along with your test data. 2) Additionally, students should not administer personality measures to family and friends. This places students in a dual relationship and raises serious concerns given the sensitive nature of personality findings. 3) Students are responsible for contacting their supervisors to arrange meeting times and following through on their supervisor's recommendations. Arrangements will be made for small group supervision. Students should come to supervision prepared to discuss their own interpretations. All supervisors must be approved by the course instructor (including, for example, a practicum supervisor who agrees to provide testing supervision in addition to the supervision which they already provide to meet the practicum requirements). Please contact your supervisors early in the semester to schedule supervision times! 4) If you are concerned that any of your test data suggest a child might be at-risk for self harm, you must report this to your practicum supervisor if the testing is done at your practicum. Otherwise, if it is a practice case, please notify me. Reports: Test protocols must be included with all reports. All data and protocols and report should be submitted in HARD copy, not electronically. Testing must be conducted on two different children between the ages of 4-18 #1 Due on 4/13/15 Intelligence test (specifics will be discussed in class) Two projective drawings (either HFD/HTP/KFD) One sentence completion task CDI /RADS One of the Beck Youth Inventories One story telling technique #2 Due on 5/11/15 Intelligence test (specifics will be discussed in class) One projective drawing (select a different drawing task from first case) One sentence completion task One of the eck Youth Inventories CDI/RADS/TSCC One story telling technique (select a different technique from first case) Grading criteria for Reports: Reports should include all of the sections outlined in the format provided by the instructor. Each section of the report will be evaluated for both content and writing style. Errors of punctuation, spelling, grammar, inappropriate language detract from the professionalism of reports and will lower your grade. Content should be clear, relevant and comprehensive. Any reservations about the validity of findings should be noted. There should be a clear linkage between the referral question, observations, choice of measures, and interpretation of results. The referral question should be answered by supporting data. GSAPP, Rutgers University Consent for Practice Testing I hereby consent to be given/have my child be given individually administered psychological tests for practice purposes only. I understand that: A) The examiner is a student at the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University who is learning to administer these tests. B)Identifying information will be held strictly confidential. The report will be shared with the course instructor, Dr. Karen Haboush C)Because the results of these tests are invalid due to the practice nature of the testing, the results can not be shared with me. D) I have the right to terminate the testing at any time. ___________________________________________________________ Child's Name ____________________________________________________________ Signature of parent/guardian ____________________________________________________________ Signature of adolescent ____________________________________________________________ Date Personality Assessment: Child 18:820:636:1 Readings Crespi, T.D., & Politikos, N.N. (2008). Personality assessment in school-based practice: Considerations, challenges, and competence. The School Psychologist, 62, 12-16. Cummings, J. A. (2003). Projective drawings. In H.M. Knoff (Ed.), The assessment of child and adolescent personality (pp. 199-244). New York: The Guilford Press. Dana, R.H. (1998). Projective assessment of Latinos in the United States: Current realities, problems, and prospects. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 4, 165-184. Flanagan, R. (2003). A place for projective assessment in school psychology practice? The School Psychologist, 57, 116-118. Haboush, K.L. (2006). Current trends in projective assessment. New Jersey Psychologist, 56, 27-28. Haboush, K.L. , Selman, J.S., & Sievering, K. (2008). Traumatized youth: New roles for school psychologists. In D.H. Molina (Ed.). School psychology: 21 st century issues and challenges (pp. 117-155). New York: Nova Science. Henry, W.E. (1973). The analysis of fantasy. Malabar, Florida: Robert E. Kreiger Publishing. Kamphaus, R.W., & Pleiss, K.L. (1993). Comment on "The use and abuse of human figure drawings". School Psychology Quarterly, 8, 187-188. Koppitz, E.M. (1968). Psychological evaluation of children’s human figure drawings. New York: Grune & Stratton. Koppitz, E.M. (1984). Psychological evaluation of human figure drawings by middle school pupils. Orlando, Florida: Grune & Stratton. Knoff, H.M. (1993). The utility of human figure drawings in personality and intellectual assessment: Why ask why? School Psychology Quarterly, 8, 191196. LaVoy, S.K., Pedersen, W.C., Reitz, J.M., Brauch, A.A., Luxenberg, T.M., & Nofsinger, C.C.(2001). Children’s drawings: A cross-cultural analysis from Japan and the United States. School Psychology International, 22, 53-63. Lilienfeld, S.O., Wood, J.M., & Garb, H.N. (2000). The scientific status of projective techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 27-66. Obrzut, J.E., & Boliek, C.A. (2003). Thematic approaches to personality assessment with children and adolescents. In H. M. Knoff (Ed.), The assessment of child and adolescent personality (pp. 173-198). New York: The Guilford Press. Presley, G., Smith, C., Hilsenroth, M., & Exner, J. (2001). Clinical utility of the Rorschach with African Americans. Journal of Personality Assessment, (77), 491-507. Rabin, A.I. (1986). Concerning projective techniques. In A.I. Rabin (Ed.). Projective techniques for adolescents and children. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Shedler, J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 65, 98-109. Teglasi, H. (2001). Essentials of TAT and other storytelling techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Tharinger, D.J., Finn, S.E., Hersh, B., Wilkinson, A., Christopher, G.B., & Tran, A. (2008). Assessment feedback with parents and preadolescent children: A collaborative approach. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 600-609. Yalof, J., & Abraham, P. (2001). Re-Examining the Rorschach test in school psychology practice. The School Psychologist, 55, 97-112.