Prefatory Remarks by Wyatt Ehrenfels
I do not think raising the spectre of a "personality conflict" between him and the training director (to which he refers as Dr. PPPP) will bode well for the doctoral candidate, because such an argument, while tactful, suggests a stalemate, and the stakeholders know that 'all ties go the runner' (Dr. PPPP) and that no-fault or not, a divorce must ensue. This means that if the town isn't big enough for Dr. PPPP and the doctoral candidate, that it is the candidate who is inevitably handed his walking papers. Nevertheless, I believe the facts laid out in the doctoral candidate's appeal illustrate a noxious mixture of harassment and neglect not uncommon to relationships between psych profs and students they do not like personally. It's how psych profs sabotage careers, and the discrimination is concealed or legitimated by a normatively structured and socially appropriate protocol that masquerades as due process. The doctoral candidate is right here to call attention to the sham process, but in writing this appeal, is he stepping up to a faux microphone (not unlike the one at which actor Tom Cruise was sprayed with a media professional's water pistol?)
Specifically, the training director to whom the dislocated doctoral candidate refers as Dr. PPPP made no effort to dispense with the formality of a due evaluation process, and yet Dr. PPPP was given to fits of informal evaluation during which she expressed feelings rooted more in personality and personal preferences than in industry standards. Dr. PPPP injected into the professional relationship a subtle form of covert social aggression evidenced by destructively vague and unsubstantiated interpretations of the candidate's performance that withheld expectations and made it virtually impossible for the candidate to demonstrate an ability to adjust to requirements of both a personal and programmatic nature. Any third party would be logically compelled by the facts presented below to conclude that the candidate had been denied an opportunity to participate in his own development as a student and thus was set up to fail. Dr. PPPP's managed neglect of the candidate's training was evidenced by a pattern of behaviors in which she withheld or garbled critical information about his performance (either completely or until it was too late for the candidate to address), and Dr. PPPP misrepresented this information (and key elements of the formal evaluation process) to third parties ad hoc to get away with making what was largely a personal and not a professional, competency-based evaluation. In the candidate's appeal, he argues that the details of his case are consistent with a theory most parsimoniously and diplomatically encapsulated by the term 'personality conflict' and offers support for the argument that his dismissal is a disproportionate, if any, reflection of his current skills nor his aptitude for work in this field.
The Doctoral Candidate's Letter Appealing His Dismissal
All information that could be used to identify the program or program faculty has been removed from the letter.
Dear Subcommittee Members:
I am in receipt of your decision to dismiss me from the Counseling Psychology program. What follows is a synopsis of facts that I feel warrants a decision to reinstate me into the program. My wish is to graduate and get a job with my degree.
My primary point is that my clinical supervisors and faculty in the YYYY’s Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology did not inform me earlier in my six-year tenure as a doctoral student that they believed my clinical skills to be below threshold. In fact, throughout the first five years, I was told just the opposite. As I will illustrate, the Department commended me academically, and my clinical skills were rated to be ‘average’ to ‘above average,’ with no mention of problems. I should have been informed well before my internship at ZZZZ’s Counseling Center if the Departmental faculty believed my skills needed improvement.
I feel that I was not informed of any “grave” skill problems before my internship because there were none. My progress toward my doctorate seemed to be first thwarted during my internship at ZZZZ’s Counseling Center. I feel that the course of my internship was seriously impacted by a personality conflict that the Training Director at the Counseling Center, PPPP, had with me. Similarly, I feel that the subsequent evaluations of my clinical skills during my remediation at the YYYY have been colored by the stilted evaluations of me from ZZZZ.
This is why I have included in this appeal my experiences while an intern at ZZZZ. Part I below summarizes this time period while Part II encapsulates my experiences while undergoing remediation at the YYYY last semester. Finally, Part III outlines my strengths.
Part 1: Internship at ZZZZ
I feel that PPPP’s personality problem with me adversely affected her ability to serve in her role as Training Director. For instance, she seemed to take personal offense when I asked to return to the Counseling Center after she had taken me and the other three interns on a two-hour tour of the city in her car shortly after I had moved there. I told her that my motive for wanting to return to the Counseling Center was to familiarize myself with the Counseling Center’s computer system and “Policies and Procedures” manual. It was not my intention to offend her; my priorities were simply to become comfortable with the Counseling Center’s operations before I began seeing clients, not to spend time driving around the city.
Earlier in the year, I talked with PPPP about why she was treating me the way she was, and she divulged to me that she took offense to my use of the term “professional reports” approximately one week earlier. [I had asked PPPP if we, as interns, were going to learn how to write ‘professional reports’ summarizing client assessment data, meaning the type of reports that we are taught to write in graduate school (for example, integrated test battery reports that are filled with technical psychological jargon). She let me know that she was quite offended because she concluded that my question implied that the manner in which she preferred to write assessment reports, which involved writing a letter to the client using layman’s terms, was not professional. I tried to assure her that I meant no offense, but I had the vague sense that she did not believe me.]
Nonetheless, I asked her if, in the future, she could please let me know more directly when she has something to talk with me about. She responded by saying she thought she had. At my inquiry to find out if she and I were “OK” (i.e., can we move on in terms of our professional relationship), PPPP said that she thought we just had a bad week. However, minutes earlier she commented that I was “the most paranoid intern” she had seen and that she did not know if I had “the capability of seeing the forest through the trees.” PPPP also remarked to me, “You walk around here thinking you are better than everyone.”
She felt that I possessed “sub par clinical skills,” but I never really felt PPPP was truly invested in her role as the Training Director in helping me to improve and succeed. In fact, it actually felt quite the opposite. In the final summary letter that PPPP wrote to my Department after I left the Counseling Center, PPPP suggested that I was provided with regular and consistent updates “several times through the year” about how I was progressing with respect to satisfactorily completing the internship. I do not agree with this statement, and this portion of the letter sent to the Department was not included in the final summary letter sent to me. PPPP concluded both letters with the recommendation that I complete a second internship (not be dismissed from my academic program). These examples point to the personality conflict PPPP apparently had with me.
Whether or not PPPP had a personality conflict with me is irrelevant insomuch as three crucial meetings involving PPPP, my supervisors, and myself were either delayed, forgotten about, or cancelled without being rescheduled. These meetings, proposed in December, 2003, were deemed important in that they were designed to periodically discuss and assess my clinical progress throughout the final semester of my internship. However, as illustrated by the following, the meetings did not take place as planned, and I was subsequently told that I would not pass the internship:
Proposed Meeting: February 27th, 2004, 8:00 am (Meeting #1): Held
Though there was an apparent concern about my skill level, this meeting did not take place until the last business day in February – over one month into the semester. The theme of this meeting seemed to be that my skills were steadily improving but that my progress would still need to be monitored.
Proposed Meeting: Not held
Delayed for approximately 2-3 weeks because PPPP was unwilling to meet at 8 am, and we were unable to find an alternate time that worked with everybody’s schedule until roughly one month later, April 20th.
Proposed Meeting: April 20th, 2004, 10:30: Not held
Meeting #2 still did not take place. AAAA, one of my supervisors and Director of the Counseling Center, accidentally forgot about the meeting and was apologetic. While waiting for this meeting to begin outside of AAAA’s door, BBBB, another one of my supervisors, commented to me that she thought I was doing well (i.e., no cause for alarm or concern about failing the internship).
Proposed Meeting: April 26th, 2004, noon: Not held
Meeting #2 still did not take place. PPPP was out of the office for this entire week and neither notified me ahead of time nor afterward regarding rescheduling this meeting.
She was out of the office because a family member was going through a personal tragedy. I understand such events; my wife QQQQ had a miscarriage weeks after I returned from LLLL. However, PPPP made no attempt to reschedule the missed meeting.
Proposed Meeting: May 13th, 2004, 11:30 am: Held
The purpose of this meeting was to inform me that though I had improved “unquestionably,” I would fail the internship unless I could continue working on my skills and receiving supervision beyond July, 2004 in HHHH, NNNN. Even though I had shown “unquestionable” improvement, AAAA’s “Intern Evaluation” of me, which I later received, was lower, overall, than it was at the end of December, 2003 (overall average rating of 3.0 at end of December, 2003 vs. overall average of 2.83 in May, 2004.) A rating of 3.0 indicates the competency level is “adequate, with some back-up supervision” while a rating of 2.0 indicates “some skill, but needs some supervision.”
The second meeting of the year intended to monitor the progress of an intern whose skills were in question did not take place until roughly finals week, 10 weeks prior to the end of the internship. I feel it is the Training Director’s responsibility to keep such meetings (attended by the Training Director – PPPP, my two supervisors – BBBB and AAAA, and myself) “regular,” as they were originally stated they would be. They certainly should have been more regular for an intern whose skills eventually ended up warranting, in their opinion, failing the internship.
During the meeting, PPPP stated that she found it difficult to believe that I had never been given an indication from the YYYY that my clinical skills were not adequate. She blamed my Department at the YYYY, adding that she had found out that another intern from the Department at the YYYY was also having difficulties at his/her internship site.
Up until this meeting, I believed I was progressing fine with respect to my clinical skills. I was doing all that I could do. In fact, during one of my supervision sessions in May with BBBB, I asked her to please be more critical of my skills with respect to what needs to be improved. BBBB assured me that she would definitely inform me of anything that needed attention, as she said she had been doing consistently.
During this time, I was spent countless hours corresponding with and applying to approximately 13 psychology postdoctoral sites. I had no reason to believe that I would be prevented from beginning a postdoctoral experience. In fact, my supervisors wrote postdoctoral letters of recommendations, one to the YYYY Counseling Center, on my behalf as late as April 6th, 2004. Of course, these letters gave no indication of the possibility of me not passing the internship. Therefore, I was still definitely not getting the message that my clinical skills were below what was needed to successfully complete the internship. In fact, I was now receiving the opposite message.
Also at this meeting, PPPP mistakenly reported that I was informed after Christmas Break that I was “in trouble” with respect to amassing the necessary number of client-contact hours when in fact, at that time, I had accrued the second highest # of client-contact hours among the 4 interns. (Interns did not have access to their cumulative clinical hour totals but were apprised of this information roughly every four weeks, much less so during the second semester.).
On May 18th, 2004, I was informed that by the staff that the YYYY would not be allowing me to continue my internship training in HHHH, NNNN. However, I did not feel that it was the YYYY’s responsibility to complete my training that was begun at anyway.
Later that day, AAAA privately accepted “some responsibility” in not helping me get to the point where I need to be clinically. AAAA’s sentiment seems to be in contrast to how PPPP, the Training Director, felt. I never really felt she had been truly invested in helping me to succeed, and I did not feel that she respected me. In fact, it felt quite the opposite. I left my internship two months early, choosing to return to HHHH, NNNN to be with my wife after I was told that I would not pass the internship. Nonetheless, AAAA arranged for me to receive my full salary for these two months of my internship.
RRRR, AAAA’s supervisor, presided over my appeal hearing at weeks before I left . (The audiotape of the hearing is available upon request; also, please see document #1 for the internship appeal, dated May 22nd, 2004.). RRRR admitted that he had never presided over such an appeal hearing, and he upheld the ’s training committee’s decision to not allow me to pass the internship. However, during the final minutes of the appeal hearing at ZZZZ, RRRR led me to believe that I would be able to finish my internship in HHHH.
However, he was mistaken and apparently misunderstood EEEE, my advisor at the YYYY, on the telephone (Please see document #2.). This was a serious breakdown in communication because during the appeal hearing at , RRRR was under the impression that the YYYY faculty was open to me finishing my internship in HHHH with the YYYY faculty. Also, at the conclusion of my appeal hearing at ZZZZ , AAAA encouraged me to think of my not completing my internship as an “Incomplete” rather than as a “Failure” because, in his opinion, all I needed was a few more months to successfully complete the internship.
The heart of my appeal at ZZZZ was that due process was not followed – my supervisors and the Training Director at did not meet with me to discuss my progress during the second half of the internship as promised. I don’t feel that the meetings were deemed important enough to have. Had the missed meetings been rescheduled, I feel like I would have had a better opportunity to have successfully completed the internship. Because of the personality conflict that PPPP had with me, I believe that she did not fulfill 100% of her responsibility to help me. I feel that I was not provided with enough support from primarily PPPP, the Training Director and lead mentor.
At the other extreme, hypothetically-speaking, I could have had a Training Director who said, “WWWW, we are going to do absolutely everything in our power to make sure you pass this internship. We know you moved here from NNNN, and we’re not going to let you down. We’re glad you’re here. We are going to meet every other week for 15 minutes to provide you with updates. We can see your work ethic is strong. We care about you as an intern and we really want you to succeed. We feel it’s our job to do everything in our power to do so.”
Toward the end of my time at the Counseling Center, DDDD, the YYYY’s Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology’s Director of Internship Training during my internship at ZZZZ, expressed some regret to me that he had not communicated with me earlier in my internship year about what was happening at ZZZZ. Just before I left , DDDD signed off on my internship readiness form so I could apply for another internship, as I expected he would, even after it was clear that I was not going to successfully complete my internship. However, I did not obtain the internship that I had applied for a month or so later. I was later told by an official from that internship site that only those candidates with a background in neuropsychology, which I do not have, were seriously considered for the internship slots. However, if I would have secured that internship and successfully completed it, I would be graduating now.
On the morning after I moved back to HHHH from LLLL , I met with EEEE, who told me that he did not tell RRRR that the YYYY faculty was open to me finishing my internship in HHHH with the YYYY faculty. I was flabbergasted. He informed me that this was because the faculty did not want to set a precedent (i.e., no interns completing their degree programs from our Department at the YYYY-HHHH have ever been permitted to finish his/her internship away from their internship site.) Later, however, I was able to get the ‘go-ahead’ to request that the Training Committee let me continue my internship in HHHH with non-YYYY supervisors while still under the overall general supervision of the ZZZZ’s Training Committee, but the Training Committee denied this request. RRRR never responded to my subsequent e-mails, and I was again left ‘holding the bag.’
As I was preparing to apply again for a second internship, this time in the Fall, 2004, I was told that the Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology faculty had decided by at least the necessary 2/3 vote that I would not be allowed to apply for internship. This new policy regarding voting on internship applicant candidates was not listed as departmental policy at the time the vote took place. The policy was listed as being “Approved by the Counseling Psychology Faculty XX/X/XX,” several months after the vote took place (Please see document #3.). I am still confused about this. Also, I believe I was the first student to be required to follow this new policy.
The previous protocol had been for the Departmental Training Director to simply verify that he/she agreed that the student applying for internship was ready to apply (Please see document #4 for an example.). This is the procedure I followed when I submitted my two previous predoctoral internship applications.
Part II: Remediation at the YYYY
I don’t believe UUUU’s “supervision” of me during the recent probation period that began in January of this year and ended in late April was adequate. It wasn’t supervision or “remediation” – the dictionary defines remediation as support and correcting. There was virtually no support. Approximately half-way through my work with UUUU, I asked her if she was an assessor or a supervisor, and she replied “Both.” I asked her this because I did not feel much support from her. I received very few positives from UUUU. For most of the remediation, I feel there was my agenda and another agenda – the other agenda involving my remediation being just a formality prior to dismissal.
Moreover, throughout my remediation, all 6 of my clients were mock or fake clients who were practicing doctoral level psychologists and who were told ahead of time that I was in remediation. My supervisor, UUUU, assured me that my “clients” would not be commenting on my skills but rather how it felt to be a client of mine. However, I can’t help but think that they behaved differently than real clients and that their assessment biased their verbal report to UUUU.
Supervision should not only involve assessment, criticism, and direction. It should also include positive reinforcement and methods of motivation to ensure success. I feel that my remediation did not have a balance of both assessment and positive supervision; it was lopsided in the negative.
Part III: WWWW’s Strengths
I am keenly aware of my clinical weaknesses, which all therapists have - especially students in training. However, I feel that my strengths far outweigh them and define me as a potentially good therapist. Some of my strengths include:
- hard-working
- tenacious
- excellent problem-solver
- knowledge of my limitations
- strong desire to help/caring
- openness and a willingness to learn
- very intelligent
- attentive to detail
- positive attitude
It seemed like many faculty members and supervisors in the Department agreed with the above listing, at least during my first five years as a student. Not only did I not receive feedback that hinted at clinical skill problems, but my overall progress in the program, along with my clinical skills, were commended and lauded. The following excerpts taken directly from my annual evaluations clearly illustrate that it is the official opinion of the Department that, since I began as a student in XXXX, my academic (3.96 GPA) and clinical record are beyond reproach (Please see academic transcript – Document #5, curriculum vitae – Document #6, and evaluations of clinical skills – Document# 7, Document #8, Document #9, and Document #10.).
How could I have believed differently? As another university’s Department of Education guidelines state, “Ongoing student evaluations [are provided] to assure early detection of problems that may interfere with student performance and progress.”
Timeline - Department’s Annual Review of WWWW
2000 (Please see document #11)
“The faculty recently met to review the status of all doctoral students in the department. Specifically, the faculty discussed both the academic and professional progress of our students. We commend you (emphasis added) on the fine way you are completing the requirements of your program. We would like to specifically cite your outstanding performance (emphasis added) in the ethics class” [highest grade in the ethics class].
2001 (Please see document #12)
“The faculty recently met to review the status of all doctoral students in the department. Specifically, the faculty discussed both the academic and professional progress of our students. We commend you (emphasis added) on the fine way you are completing the requirements of your program. We commend you (emphasis added) on your performance with the Hickman High School practicum and your outstanding work with the students and families (emphasis added). We also recognize your good work as practicum coordinator and we congratulate you on receiving the TTTT Scholarship from the College of Education. We do, however, encourage you to be more proactive in terms of establishing a personal research agenda. As you are aware, doctoral students in OOOO are expected to produce two research products prior to the dissertation, one of which could be a pilot to the dissertation research.”
(This feedback was noted and the research has since been completed.)
2002 (Please see document #13)
“The faculty recently met to review the status of all doctoral students in the department. Specifically, the faculty discussed both the academic and professional progress of our students. On the basis of our review, we commend you (emphasis added) on the fine way you are completing the requirements of your program. We also congratulate you for your presentation at the KKKK convention, for receiving two College of Education scholarships, for receiving travel support from the Graduate Student Association, and for the creative way in which you proposed to QQQQ. That is one marriage proposal that will not be soon forgotten.”
(At this point, I was on-track to achieving the doctorate and had met most of the requirements for a masters degree. Obviously I felt secure enough academically to propose to my now-spouse.)
2002 (Please see document #14)
“The faculty recently met to review the status of all doctoral students in the department. Specifically, the faculty discussed both the academic and professional progress of our students. On the basis of our review, we commend you (emphasis added) on the fine way you are completing the requirements of your program. We also congratulate you for the research paper you presented at the KKKK Conference in Tucson, AZ, with your advisor titled ‘...’ You are also commended (emphasis added) for passing your doctoral comprehensive examinations, being placed in an internship site for the next year, and for having a successful dissertation proposal meeting. Good luck on your internship this next year and on collecting data for your dissertation” (emphasis added).
May 12, 2004 (Please see document #15)
“On the basis of our review, we commend you on the fine way you are completing the requirements of your program as well as your internship at . (emphasis added). We congratulate you on having a research paper accepted for presentation at the 2004 …convention in ... We look forward to you completing your data collection and defending your dissertation this summer (emphasis added).”
(Please note that there is no mention of probation or dismissal in this letter from my department, which was dated only six days prior to the date on my written notice from YYYY that I was not going to pass my internship.)
In summary, I was given very positive annual reviews each year. Further, I was offered a scholarship 4 out of 6 years that I was enrolled, and, under EEEE’ supervision, I successfully served as a supervisor of a practicum student (please see document #16 for this student’s evaluation of my supervision.). As you know, providing quality supervision is not possible unless one can demonstrate the appropriate skills himself/herself.
The next paragraph contains an excerpt from a letter of recommendation from my advisor, followed by written observations regarding my clinical skills from supervisors and former clients.
In October of 2002, in a letter recommending me for internship, a faculty member wrote,
"He [WWWW] seems to have a reputation around the Department as being extremely conscientious and assiduous. I can remember WWWW achieving the highest grade in one of my classes, and course records indicate that he had attained the highest grade in his Fall, 1999 ‘Ethical and Legal Issues in Psychology’ class. With the exception of one ‘B,’ WWWW has received straight ‘A’s’ thus far in his YYYY coursework. Due to his stellar academic achievement, the College of Education awarded WWWW three consecutive scholarships in as many years.” (Please see document #17.)
In another October, 2002 letter of recommendation for internship, another faculty member wrote:
“WWWW rotated into this position [psychology clerk] midsummer and I was immediately impressed by his work ethic, attention to detail, and positive attitude. In addition, he quickly established rapport with ward personnel, patients and administrative personnel alike; within a few weeks of his entry into the program, I began to receive a number of very positive comments regarding WWWW’ high level of professionalism and dedication to his clients.
As stated previously, the patient population is one that tends to be relatively chronic and ‘hard core.’ As such, these clients can be quite manipulative and confrontational, as well as verbally aggressive. WWWW managed to regulate his relationships with these individuals in a very effective manner; he expressed sincere and appropriate empathy, but at the same time was assertive when the situation called for it.
I was particularly impressed with WWWW’ group work. One of these groups, based on motivational interviewing principles, was one that we ran together. He did an excellent job of utilizing motivational interviewing principles and patients on the ward frequently remarked that this group, as well as another group that WWWW ran on self help programs, was one of their most valued group experiences.
On a personal level, WWWW has an easygoing and relaxed personal style (emphasis added), and a good sense of humor. He takes to supervision very well (emphasis added) and is always very well prepared for supervisory sessions. His standards of personal and professional conduct have always been above reproach.
.
In conclusion, I have no hesitation in providing WWWW with a very strong recommendation (emphasis added) for internship. As a faculty member at the University Medical School, my department is associated with two APA-approved Clinical Internship Programs in the area and my experience with these interns indicates WWWW would be a highly competitive applicant at either one of them.” (Please see document # 18.)
Likewise, a group member in a therapy group that I co-led wrote the following in a letter to me: “I just wanted to let you know that the group and myself all agree that you were an amazing group leader. You were by far our favorite. We wanted to tell you the last day of group time but we felt bad saying that in front of the other group leaders. You seem way ahead of the game and we enjoyed having you as a group leader. You have so much knowledge and you lead the group perfectly! Thank you so much.” (Note: This individual’s positive feedback motivates me to strive to be an even better therapist.)
Also, while at during my internship, a client gave me a card saying, “You have helped me more than you know. I have learned a lot about myself and others. I took a chance on coming to get help, and it turned out to be the best thing I’ve done for myself. So, I will keep taking chances and will always remember this one.”
Finally, I had sessions with fake or mock clients in the same building that I had successfully seen ‘real’ clients several years earlier with no problems. In fact, I was rated as ‘above average’ in several areas. What follows are excerpts from these letters (Please see document #7, document #8, document #9, and document #10):
“I believe that his [WWWW’] abilities are commensurate with his level of training, that his clinical progress over the last 4-5 months reflects a steady increase in skill, and that all areas of potential growth represent what might be considered ‘normal’ learning points.” (Winter, 2001).
“One aspect of my supervision with WWWW that I have enjoyed the most has been watching his increasing comfort with clients. This growing comfort is apparent in both his nonverbal and verbal communications in session. This seems to have had major impact upon his work and his effectiveness with clients.” (Fall, 2001)
“WWWW possesses excellent clinical skills for his level of training and experience.” (Fall, 2001)
“His ability to conceptualize his clients was very strong for his level of experience and training. WWWW was very receptive to both positive and constructive feedback from the group and instructors and utilized this information in subsequent work with his clients. He was able to integrate feedback and other information and apply it in session with his clients.” (Fall, 2001). These statements are in contrast to UUUU’s evaluation of me: “In sum, you lack the foundation in which to embed future knowledge and learning.” (February, 2005; please see document # )
“I have seen WWWW enthusiastically put suggestions regarding interventions into practice, with good results.” (Winter, 2001).
“WWWW was very open to learning and went out of his way to help other practicum students out of class. He served as a leader in the practicum class.” (Fall, 2001).
“His written formulations were very good and are expected to become more refined with additional experience. His ability to conceptualize his clients is strong for his level of experience and training.” (Winter, 2001).
“Finally, WWWW was extremely well prepared for supervision, bringing specific questions and clinical issues for consultation. WWWW’ use of his time made our work together the most structured and efficient of any supervision I’ve conducted. Moreover, he was very open and honest about his feelings and about his role in the dynamics of his therapeutic relationships and interventions with clients. I believe his openness in these matters enhanced his self-awareness in-session and subsequently increased the effectiveness of his interventions by providing an alternative perspective from which to view clients’ issues.” (Winter, 2001).
In contrast, today [(several years later (not earlier)], my clinical skills have been assessed by the subcommittee as being “gravely lacking.” How can I go from being a “gifted” (as touted by one of your peers, GGGG, a former supervisor of mine and senior staff therapist at the YYYY Counseling Center) therapist to a therapist who had only “moments” of competence, as assessed by UUUU? I am dumbfounded to discover that my skills are now so gravely below threshold whereas UUUU told me herself that she did not think my skills had deteriorated over time. In fact, she could not explain the above conundrum. All she could offer was that she was not here for “that [earlier] part” of my training.
How can my skills be as bad as portrayed if training directors from my Department signed off on my internship readiness form twice? If my skills are so poor, I should have been informed years ago; i.e., when I began seeing real clients. I accept my weaknesses and am willing to work on them. However, I feel my strengths far outweigh my weaknesses and I should not be dismissed. There is an extreme contrast between observations of my clinical skills made prior to my internship and thereafter, and the skills involved and assessed in both were very similar. That is, I was not introduced to very many new challenges while on my internship at the Counseling Center at ZZZZ.
Given that the official departmental annual reviews in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004, as well as letters from clinical supervisors, commended me and informed me that I was doing a fine job, dismissing me from the program seems wholly unwarranted and contradictory. After approximately 1000 hours of pre-internship support, supervision, and clinical hours, one would expect to be informed of clinical deficits. I believe that something went very wrong during my internship at the Counseling Center. I am apparently the first student from the Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology to not successfully pass an internship, and I feel that the recent evaluations of me have erroneously omitted my strengths. I feel like I am “falling through the cracks” as I felt while on my internship.
Further, dismissing a student with my motivation level seems like a waste. As one of my former YYYY counseling center practicum supervisors stated, “I have observed WWWW to be perhaps the hardest working supervisee I have encountered in my experience as a clinical supervisor over the last three years.” (Please see document # 10.) Dismissing such a motivated student who was informed of perceived deficits so late in his academic career can only reflect an oversight on the part of the training program.
If I am denied the opportunity to go on to earn a doctorate, my earning power will be significantly lower, making it that much more difficult to get a job with a high enough salary to pay back my student loans. How can I account for the past 6 years, and what do I have to show for giving the university $50,000 in tuition? If this investment in time and money is wasted, I have been done a grave disservice. I currently make $19,000/year, hardly enough to support a wife and a newborn baby due in early September, let alone pay back my student loans. I urge you to reconsider your decision. These last few years have really taken their toll on my family and me, notwithstanding other life events to include moving to LLLL months after being married and being separated from her for a year maintaining two households in two states (NNNN, LLLL) while my spouse was beginning a new business my spouse having a miscarriage three weeks after I left During these last two years, I have really had to dig deep to find my faith and maintain my self-concept and self-worth. The only motivation I had was to keep my dream alive myself.
As I go back and reflect, I realize that I am a smart, competent, hard-working individual. I have worked hard over the past six years to become the best I can be. I have demonstrated my commitment and been commended along the way. Official departmental letters from faculty and clinical supervisors are in agreement that I was well on my way to earning a doctorate. In contrast, the Training Committee at ZZZZ had reservations that I feel were instigated by the Training Director, PPPP.
Nonetheless, I feel we can collectively figure out a way to get me through this degree program. In my opinion, I am now ready to apply for a 2nd internship, and I firmly believe that experience will be a very positive one that the Department will be proud of. I truly believe that with your support, I can be an asset to the program and ultimately earn a doctorate.
I appreciate the opportunity to present my appeal, and I trust you will make a good and positive decision.
Sincerely,
WWWW, M.S.
fireflySun.com Report List
16 Points Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels
16 Points Page: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychology Careers: Careers in Psychology Wyatt Ehrenfels
Adventure on APAGS listserv: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Cancer Research Appendices: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Cancer Research Discussion: Wyatt Ehrenfels
New APA Journal Gives Ground to Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
EPPP Study Materials Reflect Field's Biases, Weaknesses: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Questions Frequently Asked of Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Uncovers Dishonest Hiring Practices at Gallup Organization: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Why Google Is Too Sleazy for the Street: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychology Impaired by Materialistic Bias: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychology Curriculum Reveals Humpty Dumpty: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals Hidden Odds & Obstacles to Graduate Admission: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Cancer Research Introduction: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Overpowers UCLA Psychology Professor: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Brad Jesness Deals Counselors & Therapists Some Major Blows: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Cancer Research Methodology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Brad Jesness Deals Counselors & Therapists Some Major Blows: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Shows Solidarity for Kindred Critic Dennis Fox: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Cancer Research Results: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychologists Abuse Usenet to Stalk Its Critics: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Eludes Detection to Protect Key Allies: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychotherapist Scott Adams Offers Positive Commentary on Wyatt Ehrenfels memo: Scott Adams
Authors, Scholars Join Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Lays Out Two-Pronged Case against Dually Disordered Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Alice Andrews: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Bill Arnott: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Doubling Down: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Gambles by Splitting Critique: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Authors, Scholars Unite to Support Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Dream Researcher Gail Bixler: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Our Fear of Exposure Therapy: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Interviews with Internal Correspondent: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Suffer from Professional Analogue of Borderline Personality Disorder: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Student Defies Psychology Professor's Warning Not to Correspond with Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Chides Daniel Dennett for Evangelical Atheism in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Argues Psychology Graduate Education Not Worth the Money: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychology Professors Acknowledge Student Complaints about Curriculum: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Answers Critics, Campaign of Diversionary Tactics: Wyatt Ehrenfels
American Psychological Association Denies Listserv Members Access to Wyatt Ehrenfels OKTV Broadcast Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Talks about the Dissertation Experience: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses a Methodology for Dream Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dreaming from Psychologist Negative Thinking: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Urban E-Zine Entelechy Publishes Wyatt Ehrenfels Essay: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dream Research against Vaunted Psychology News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Customizes Probe to Explore Dreaming-Waking Interface: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Kindred Critic Dennis Fox: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Elio Frattaroli: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Political Scientist John Freie: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Biologist John Hewitt: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Shows Support for Embattled Psychology Graduate Student: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels Students on True Callings: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Amuses with Proposal of Psychology Graduate Program Insurance: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Corrective Statistical Procedure Emblematic of Psychology's Flaws: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Brad Jesness Target of Malicious Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Medal-Winning Author M.J. John: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Critical of Vaunted Cornell Research Claiming Opposites Do NOT Attract: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Criticizes Berkeley Psychology Professors for Left Wing Bias: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Links to Education and Appropriations Subcommittees: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Thunders Away at Psychology's Load-Bearing Premises: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels High School Students on Choice of College Major: Wyatt Ehrenfels
APPIC Match Service Helps Veterans Hospital Psychologists Discriminate against Applicants w/ Disabilities: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Psychology Professional Development at Odds with Adult Maturation: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Republishes Work of College Curriculum Critic and FOX News Writer Wendy McElroy: Wendy McElroy
Wyatt Ehrenfels Likens Psychological Research to Premature Ejaculation: Wyatt Ehrenfels
According to Social Psychologist Wyatt Ehrenfels, Diversity Is Skin Deep, Black-and-White at University of Michigan: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Dismantles Psychology's Standard Defenses against Criticism: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Points to Hypocrisy in Terror Management Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Revitalized Pocket Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Publishes Critique in Revolution Issue of New Therapist Magazine: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Is Psychology at Odds with Itself?: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Campaign Not Intend to Offend Psychology Majors: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Why Community Access Television Is Coming Around to Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels's Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Onion of Obstacles Awaits Psychology Majors: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology Prejudiced against Psyche: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Newsweek Report Surveys Dream Research Wasteland: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Assails Culture of Student Character Assassination in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology as Bloated Minor: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Multicultural Fetish Belies Suppression of Individual Freedom, Ideas in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology Research as Games without Frontiers, ADHD Science: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Uses Evolutionary Theory, Natural Selection to Impugn D-Volving Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals American Psychological Association as Lobbying Tour de Force: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Shares Bizarre Tale of Application for University Position: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses Predictive Power of Tornado Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Preface to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels
In a Drugged States, New Mexico Legislators Give Psychologists Prescriptive Authority: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun Press Release: Katheryn Moyer
Brad Jesness Exposes Malicious Stalking by Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness
Psychology Majors Respond to Wyatt Ehrenfels fireflySun.com: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Personality Taxonomy: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Blueprint for Blighted Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
From Position of Ignorance, APA Official Diverts Attention from/Urges Skepticism for, Wyatt Ehrenfels APPIC Discrimination Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Comes to Terms with Roiled Psychology Graduate Student and News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Responses to Wyatt Ehrenfels Campaign to Reform Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Independent Publisher Offers Glowing Review of Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Robert Roerich: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Play Games with Rules: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Physicist Jeff Schmidt: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Malicious Stalking by Psychologists Abusing Psychotherapy News Group: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals Groupthink, Abuse in Psychology Faculty Evaluation of Graduate Students: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Begins Sequel to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Counseling Center Hiring Preference for Gays, Lesbians: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Diagnoses the Diagnosticians with the Shadow DSM: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Prominent UC-Davis Dream Researcher Dodges Wyatt Ehrenfels Draft of Reformers: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Management Consulting Maven R. Mallory Starr: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels Dream Research with Cancer Patients: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Short Falls of Teaching in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Popular Psychotherapy All about Controlling Chaos: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Washington National Cathedral Site of Synchronicity in Novel by Social Psychologist: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Value of a Degree in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Strategy for Self-Science of Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Wyatt Ehrenfels Attacks Psychology on Two Fronts: Wyatt Ehrenfels
Connie Vaughn Teams with Wyatt Ehrenfels to Explain Why She Is Not a Psychology: Connie Vaughn
Benjamin Willard Elected President of Wyatt Ehrenfels Fan Club: Benjamin Willard
Wyatt Ehrenfels Identifies Flaws in U.S. News Report of Psychology Employment Prospects: Wyatt Ehrenfels
