The philosophy of the Carolyn A and Peter S Lynch School Doctoral Program in Counseling Psychology — accredited by the American Psychologcal Association (Office of Program Consultation and Accreditation, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242; 202 336-5979) — arises from three interrelated values comprising our Program’s philosophy. First, we believe that counseling psychologists must possess a comprehensive, rigorous, and contemporary knowledge base in psychology, generally, and counseling psychology, specifically, that is grounded in a developmental-contextual perspective. Second, we believe the scientist-practitioner model best integrates the areas of theory, research, and practice such that it is the ideal training model for professional psychology. The third value that guides our training is the commitment to social justice, manifested both by our focus on multicultural issues and training, as well as our commitment to training students to assume diverse practice, research, and program development roles addressing socio-political systems and underserved client populations.
Because of our belief that a comprehensive and contemporary knowledge base is essential for the scientific and professional practice of Counseling Psychology, we offer courses and other training experiences that present the most current developments in theoretical and research directions to students. In addition, we seek to infuse a developmental-contextual perspective throughout our training, thereby furnishing students with an organizing rubric upon which to build subsequent learning. The developmental perspective that we embrace encompasses the life span and the interrelated set of roles that individuals occupy within the life space (Erikson, 1968; Lerner, 2002; Super, 1990). We include attention to the wide scope of human development, including the cognitive, vocational, cultural, interpersonal, emotional, and intrapsychic domains of human experience. Using a developmental-contextual perspective to organize this perspective (e.g., Lerner, 2002), we regard human development as embedded in a context of social, economic, political, cultural, and historical influences that have an interactive and recursive relationship to intrapersonal growth processes. More precisely, we view many of the decisional dilemmas and adjustment concerns of traditional counseling psychology discourse as reflecting natural human strivings for growth and adaptation in a world that differentially offers access to relational and economic resources. The developmental-contextual framework provides the broad parameters for our training program. Within this infrastructure, we emphasize the core knowledge and skills that define contemporary counseling psychology. Moreover, our overall approach to doctoral education is consistent with the principles of the Model Training Program in Counseling Psychology, which represents the collective input of the Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs and the Society of Counseling Psychology (Murdock, Alcorn, Heesacker, & Stoltenberg, 2005). Derived from this philosophy and the collective wisdom within counseling psychology is our first training goal, its objectives, and the related competencies that we seek to develop in our students.
Goal 1:Students will demonstrate the foundational knowledge essential for the scientific and professional practice of Counseling Psychology. As such, we expect our graduates to be well-equipped with a knowledge base that will allow for the implementation of the scientist-practitioner model of counseling psychology. Three objectives along with corresponding competencies that flow from this general goal include:
Objective 1.1: Students will have knowledge of the theoretical and scientific foundations of Counseling Psychology.
Competency 1.1a: Students will demonstrate knowledge of theory and research pertaining to the professional core of counseling psychology, including multicultural issues, ethics, counseling theories, career development, social advocacy, and psychology of race, class, and gender.
Competency 1.1b: Students will demonstrate knowledge of theory and research of psychological foundations of counseling psychology with an emphasis on life-span development, including history and systems, developmental psychopathology, biological bases of behavior, cognitive and affective bases of behavior, and social bases of behavior.
Objective 1.2: Students will have foundational knowledge of the professional practice of Counseling Psychology (including ethical principles) in research and practice.
Competency 1.2a: Students will demonstrate knowledge of the implications of theory and research in the professional core for the practice of counseling psychology.
Competency 1.2b: Students will demonstrate knowledge of the implications of theory and research in the psychological foundations for counseling psychology.
Objective 1.3: Students will have attitudes essential for life long learning, scholarly inquiry, and professional problem solving as psychologists.
Competency 1.3a: Students will demonstrate professional development skills and behaviors that reflect a commitment to lifelong learning.
Our second goal and its objectives are derived from the belief that the scientist-practitioner
model is the ideal training model for professional psychology. Thus, central
to the mission of the Counseling Psychology Program at the Lynch School is the
clear and unequivocal endorsement of the scientist-practitioner model for psychological
training. We see the commitment to the scientist-practitioner role as providing
the conceptual infrastructure for the curriculum (Alcorn et al., 1998; Stoltenberg,
Pace, Kashubeck-West, Biever, Patterson, & Welch, 2000). The scientist-practitioner
model “recognizes the interdependence of theory, research and practice”
and “emphasizes systematic and thoughtful analyses of human experiences
and judicious application of the knowledge and attitudes gained from such analyses”
(Meara, 1988).
By emphasizing the scientist-practitioner model in our training, we seek to have our students function at the nexus of science and practice in a manner that transcends and informs the actual occupational role that they may occupy. Specifically, we emphasize that persons involved in practice be able to evaluate their treatments, learn from the body of scientific psychology in planning their work, be aware of the limitations to current knowledge, and employ a scientific attitude toward their work. Furthermore, for the person engaged in research, he or she must be able to derive questions of applied concerns that contribute to the scientific basis of practice. Derived from this philosophy is our second training goal and its objectives.
Goal 2: Students will demonstrate the ability to implement the scientist-practitioner model within the arenas of both research and clinical practice. As such, we expect our graduates to demonstrate the ability to have science and practice inform each in their research and clinical practice utilizing a strong knowledge base of psychological theory, measurement, design, and statistics. Three objectives and corresponding competencies that flow from this general goal include:
Objective 2.1: Students will have knowledge of research methodology to examine clinical, theoretical, and societal questions.
Competency 2.1a: Students will demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge of research methodology to examine clinical, theoretical and societal questions.
Objective 2.2: Students will have knowledge to evaluate psychological research, learn to incorporate psychological research into practice, and know about relevant practice issues to inform programs of research.
Competency 2.2a: Students will demonstrate the ability to evaluate psychological research critically and incorporate psychological research into practice, as well as utilize relevant practice issues to inform programs of research.
Objective 2.3: Students will have developmentally appropriate skills in counseling psychology practice and advocacy, including the design and implementation of psychological interventions at the individual, group, and systemic levels.
Competency 2.3a: Students will demonstrate developmentally appropriate skills in counseling psychology practice and advocacy, including the design and implementation of psychological interventions at the individual, group, and systemic levels.
The commitment to social justice is the third value from which our Program’s
training goals and objectives are derived. This value is shared by the larger
institution of Boston College. That is, Jesuit education regards the purpose
for education and professional training to be not simply the acquisition of
knowledge, but the constructive and responsible use of that knowledge in service
to others, specifically, to pursue social justice. This institutional mission
is operationalized within the Lynch School and other professional schools at
Boston College. The professional schools at
Boston College prepare professionals, including psychologists, teachers,
nurses, social workers, lawyers, and managers, who will “serve others”
and the public interest through socially responsible and ethically sensitive
actions that improve the lives of children, families and communities, particularly
in urban settings. The Counseling Psychology Program shares those commitments
and attempts to foster student interest and skills in working with diverse
populations in underserved communities. Consistent with the traditions of counseling
psychology, our model also promotes “sensitivity to social, economic,
and political factors that diminish, marginalize, or otherwise limit a client's
access to full participation in the society” (Murdock et al., 2005, p.
19). We view the sociocultural context as a crucial factor that shapes the
development and well-being of individuals, groups, and systems. As such, knowledge
about the socio-cultural context is essential for implementing all the roles
of a counseling psychologist.
Our valuing of social justice is reflected most directly in our emphases on the critical analysis of the socio-cultural context, commitment to multicultural training, as well as our commitment to training students to assume diverse practice roles in a varied set of systems and client populations. More precisely, we envision our graduates having the ability to understand the nature of socio-political forces that serve to differentially provide access to people and to have the skills to seek change at the systemic and or policy level. In a recent Major Contribution published in The Counseling Psychologist (TCP) authored by a number of program faculty, the social justice aspects of the program were defined and examined. In this article by Goodman, Liang, Helms, Latta, and Sparks (2004), “the social justice work of counseling psychologists (is defined) as research and professional action designed to change societal values, structures, policies, and practices such that disadvantaged or marginalized groups gain increased access to these tools of self-determination. Drawing on an ecological model of social analysis, we propose that social justice work occurs on three different levels: the micro level, including individuals and families; the meso level, including communities and organizations; and the macro level, including social structures, ideologies and policies (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Moane, 2003; Trickett, 1996). Implicit in this conceptualization is the idea that counseling psychologists interested in social justice must work to change social structures, not just individuals (McIntosh, 1988; Young, 1990).”
Derived from this philosophy is our third training goal and its objectives.
Goal 3: Students will demonstrate the ability and knowledge to enable the growth of the individuals, families, and systems with whom they work and the good of the community at large in both their research and practice. Two objectives that emerge from this general goal include:
Objective 3.1: Students will obtain knowledge necessary to understand individual, family, and community strengths in the context of their socio-cultural milieu.
Competency 3.1a: Students will demonstrate the acquisition of knowledge about themselves as culturally embedded within a socio-historical perspective and will also demonstrate knowledge about how to infuse socio-cultural perspectives into their research and practice as counseling psychologists.
Objective 3.2: Students will develop competence in counseling practice and research to work with persons who are under-served by society and psychology, including persons of varying racial or ethnic backgrounds, disenfranchised classes, genders, sexual orientations, and those differently-abled
Competency 3.2a: Students will demonstrate knowledge in the design and delivery of research studies, individual counseling practices, and systemic interventions that reflects a focus on under-served populations.
Program Requirements
Graduation from our Doctoral Program requires the completion of sequential,
cumulative, and increasingly complex training experiences designed to prepare
students for entry-level Post-Doctoral positions. These training experiences
are derived from our Program philosophy and aimed to meet the goals and objectives
specified previously. The specific training requirements that our Doctoral students
complete entail formal course work, practicum training, and other training experiences
designed to meet the goals and objectives of our program (i.e., research assistantships,
teaching and supervision opportunities, testing placements, First Year Experience).
Our formal Doctoral curriculum includes prerequisite, required, and elective coursework spanning Areas A through F as represented in our Program of Studies (see Appendix A). (Please note that funds available to the school and program for tuition reimbursement are generally not sufficient to cover student electives above and beyond the electives that are required in the relevant program of study.) Specifically, these areas include the Professional Core (Area A), Statistical and Research Design (Area B), Psychological Measurement (Area C), Psychological Foundations (Area D), Advanced Practicum (Area E), and Internship in Counseling Psychology (Area F). Additionally, students must pass Doctoral Comprehensive Examinations, complete a 2,000-hour Pre-Doctoral internship, and successfully defend a Doctoral dissertation that indicates an ability to perform scholarly empirical work in psychology.
The Doctoral Program is designed for full-time study, and it is expected that
students will complete the majority of the Program as full-time students. A
three-year academic residency is required. While 54 credit hours meet the Ph.D.
requirement in the Lynch School, the Counseling Psychology Program requires
additional credit hours in order to meet accreditation and licensure standards.
For students who are admitted with a Master’s degree in Counseling or
a related field, the minimum number of credits generally required for the degree
is 66. For students admitted without the Master’s degree (i.e., Direct
Admit students), the minimum number of credits generally required for the degree
is 81. All students in the Doctoral Program are expected to have completed
a Master’s level practicum. Students in the direct admit program will
complete a Master’s level practicum in their second year. Students with
a Master’s degree in Counseling will need to submit a form indicating
completion of the practicum). The Director of Training is responsible for evaluating
and approving the Master’s level practicum sequence.