The Clinical Neuropsychologist
ISSN: 1385-4046 (Print) 1744-4144 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ntcn20
Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’ Christopher L. Grote To cite this article: Christopher L. Grote (2016) Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’, The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30:8, 1151-1153, DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549
Published online: 21 Oct 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ntcn20 Download by: [Ryerson University Library]
Date: 22 October 2016, At: 05:12
The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2016 VOL. 30, NO. 8, 1151–1153 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549
Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’ This special issue of The Clinical Neuropsychologist, ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology,’ appears to be the first publication of its kind on this topic. For that, this issue’s authors and I extend our utmost appreciation to the journal editor, Dr Yana Suchy, for supporting and nurturing this project from its inception. The impetus for this series of articles began when I organized a symposium for the 2015 meeting of the International Neuropsychological Society (INS) in Denver, Colorado, regarding the education and training models among a few different countries around the world. That symposium included Drs Ponsford, Hokkanen, Bodin, and Butts, and presented on topics now written about in this issue. In reviewing the wide variations in how individuals in disparate places come to be regarded as ‘neuropsychologists,’ and how they practiced, it was thought that there might be some benefit to expanding the number of countries surveyed. There were two primary objectives in conceptualizing the format of this issue and the articles therein. First, this special issue was intended as an opportunity to memorialize the development of neuropsychology in countries around the world. Describing this historical perspective also created the opportunity to document the varied current models of education, training, and related requirements for recognition as a ‘neuropsychologist.’ Second, these articles offer the opportunity for everyone to learn from everyone else. Not one country’s neuropsychologists can claim to have found the answer to all of life’s (or neuropsychology’s) questions; thus, this special issue is intended to lay out some of the challenges inherent in each of our country’s place of training and practice, what has been done to address these challenges, and what challenges remain. As the reader will see, questions about the optimal duration and type of education and training, the methods by which one’s work is compensated, or the best ways of addressing supply and demand of neuropsychologists are universal. It is hoped, and intended, for the reader to learn about the challenges of preparing to work, and then practice, as a neuropsychologist in other countries, and the possible solutions therein. The sharing of this type of knowledge may then allow neuropsychology professionals from around the world, as well as in the United States, to incorporate these ideas when refining education and practice in one’s own country. As the guest editor of this special issue, I readily admit to two apparent limitations. First, the readers may question the rationale for selection of some countries and not others. Admittedly, it was a difficult decision to determine which countries to include. One important question was, of the word’s 195 countries, which ones would best represent a sampling of the variety of ways in which neuropsychology is taught or practiced. Additionally, an important goal was to have a somewhat proportional representation of the world’s population.
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
1152
C. L. Grote
For example, as about 60% of the world’s population lives in Asia, that continent is represented by the most countries in this special issue (China, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, and South Korea). Unfortunately, Africa, home to about 16% of the world’s population, is only represented by South Africa, as authors for other African countries were not readily identifiable. The European continent is represented by Finland and Spain, South America by Argentina, Oceania by Australia, and North America by Canada, Mexico, and the United States. In sum, 14 countries from the world’s six continents (excluding Antarctica) are represented here. Still, a number of colleagues, upon hearing the countries represented in this issue, have responded with, ‘how could you not include (my favorite country)?’ In response to that, readers should consider that this issues have already been allotted a very generous number of pages, and only so many articles could be included. Further, I readily admit that the sample of countries was to some extent a sample of convenience, based on recommendations from colleagues as to who might be invited to contribute an article. Of note, I had originally expected some of the invited authors to politely decline the invitation because of time constraints, in which case I would have approached an author from another country; interestingly, however, I found a universal acceptance by the invited authors. Further, out of 15 authors from 15 countries who had originally accepted the invitation to contribute articles, 14 have followed through and are included in this special issue, with only one author withdrawing from the project because of unanticipated personal and professional circumstance. Thus, the reader may find solace in the possibility that perhaps their ‘favorite’ country may indeed have originally been asked to contribute. A second possible limitation of this special issue is that of an ‘American-centric’ organization or framework. Because of the diversity of training models and practices around the world, I intended to impose a certain amount of order or structure on the authors in how they organized their article, so as to facilitate meaningful comparisons. In response to this imposed structure, some of the authors commented that they could not always follow the suggested template or could not provide the requested information, such as the estimated number of (neuro) psychologists in their country or their compensation. Further, while documenting each country’s contributions to scientific and research studies in neuropsychology was not a requested focus of these articles, some authors did elaborate on this topic. Overall, however, the content of this issue is intended to allow the reader to discern what is similar or different from one country to the next on variables of interest, particularly as they related to education, training, and practice. In addition to the review of the 14 countries, there is an article regarding postdoctoral training in the United States. It includes the history of how this level of training came to be considered essential, what experiences are meant to be included during these two years, and some remaining challenges in how applicants are recruited and matched to particular institutions. It appears that only the United States routinely requires a two-year postdoctoral fellowship, at least if one considers the standards for admission to candidacy for board certification set out by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology. Those who train in Canada often do seek out a two-year postdoctoral fellowship, but this does not seem quite as common as it is in the United States. Otherwise, it appears that no other country included in this special issue routinely requires fellowship training, or necessarily even a doctoral degree, for one to be considered a neuropsychologist. Therefore, this article is provided to
The Clinical Neuropsychologist
1153
those who might consider establishing such a standard, or at least provide for the existence of these education and training experiences. Again, I am quite indebted to Dr Suchy for her patience and expert guidance in executing this project. In addition, she and others, including Drs Gordon Chelune and Robert Bornstein, were very kind and helpful in suggesting neuropsychologists for particular countries to be invited to participate in this special issue. Of course, I appreciate the willingness of the other authors in this special issue to contribute their time and efforts to this endeavor. Finally, I am indebted to my colleagues at Rush University Medical Center who helped review and edit the articles. These include Drs Julia Novitski, Kathleen Hazlett Elverman, Donna Kwan and Evan Schulze, and Ms Megan Herodes. Without their considerable assistance, this project could not have been accomplished. Christopher Grote Special Issue Guest Editor Departments of Behavioral Sciences and Neurological Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA [email protected]
ISSN: 1385-4046 (Print) 1744-4144 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ntcn20
Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’ Christopher L. Grote To cite this article: Christopher L. Grote (2016) Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’, The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30:8, 1151-1153, DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549
Published online: 21 Oct 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ntcn20 Download by: [Ryerson University Library]
Date: 22 October 2016, At: 05:12
The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2016 VOL. 30, NO. 8, 1151–1153 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1218549
Prologue to special issue of ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology’ This special issue of The Clinical Neuropsychologist, ‘International Perspectives on Education, Training and Practice in Clinical Neuropsychology,’ appears to be the first publication of its kind on this topic. For that, this issue’s authors and I extend our utmost appreciation to the journal editor, Dr Yana Suchy, for supporting and nurturing this project from its inception. The impetus for this series of articles began when I organized a symposium for the 2015 meeting of the International Neuropsychological Society (INS) in Denver, Colorado, regarding the education and training models among a few different countries around the world. That symposium included Drs Ponsford, Hokkanen, Bodin, and Butts, and presented on topics now written about in this issue. In reviewing the wide variations in how individuals in disparate places come to be regarded as ‘neuropsychologists,’ and how they practiced, it was thought that there might be some benefit to expanding the number of countries surveyed. There were two primary objectives in conceptualizing the format of this issue and the articles therein. First, this special issue was intended as an opportunity to memorialize the development of neuropsychology in countries around the world. Describing this historical perspective also created the opportunity to document the varied current models of education, training, and related requirements for recognition as a ‘neuropsychologist.’ Second, these articles offer the opportunity for everyone to learn from everyone else. Not one country’s neuropsychologists can claim to have found the answer to all of life’s (or neuropsychology’s) questions; thus, this special issue is intended to lay out some of the challenges inherent in each of our country’s place of training and practice, what has been done to address these challenges, and what challenges remain. As the reader will see, questions about the optimal duration and type of education and training, the methods by which one’s work is compensated, or the best ways of addressing supply and demand of neuropsychologists are universal. It is hoped, and intended, for the reader to learn about the challenges of preparing to work, and then practice, as a neuropsychologist in other countries, and the possible solutions therein. The sharing of this type of knowledge may then allow neuropsychology professionals from around the world, as well as in the United States, to incorporate these ideas when refining education and practice in one’s own country. As the guest editor of this special issue, I readily admit to two apparent limitations. First, the readers may question the rationale for selection of some countries and not others. Admittedly, it was a difficult decision to determine which countries to include. One important question was, of the word’s 195 countries, which ones would best represent a sampling of the variety of ways in which neuropsychology is taught or practiced. Additionally, an important goal was to have a somewhat proportional representation of the world’s population.
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
1152
C. L. Grote
For example, as about 60% of the world’s population lives in Asia, that continent is represented by the most countries in this special issue (China, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, and South Korea). Unfortunately, Africa, home to about 16% of the world’s population, is only represented by South Africa, as authors for other African countries were not readily identifiable. The European continent is represented by Finland and Spain, South America by Argentina, Oceania by Australia, and North America by Canada, Mexico, and the United States. In sum, 14 countries from the world’s six continents (excluding Antarctica) are represented here. Still, a number of colleagues, upon hearing the countries represented in this issue, have responded with, ‘how could you not include (my favorite country)?’ In response to that, readers should consider that this issues have already been allotted a very generous number of pages, and only so many articles could be included. Further, I readily admit that the sample of countries was to some extent a sample of convenience, based on recommendations from colleagues as to who might be invited to contribute an article. Of note, I had originally expected some of the invited authors to politely decline the invitation because of time constraints, in which case I would have approached an author from another country; interestingly, however, I found a universal acceptance by the invited authors. Further, out of 15 authors from 15 countries who had originally accepted the invitation to contribute articles, 14 have followed through and are included in this special issue, with only one author withdrawing from the project because of unanticipated personal and professional circumstance. Thus, the reader may find solace in the possibility that perhaps their ‘favorite’ country may indeed have originally been asked to contribute. A second possible limitation of this special issue is that of an ‘American-centric’ organization or framework. Because of the diversity of training models and practices around the world, I intended to impose a certain amount of order or structure on the authors in how they organized their article, so as to facilitate meaningful comparisons. In response to this imposed structure, some of the authors commented that they could not always follow the suggested template or could not provide the requested information, such as the estimated number of (neuro) psychologists in their country or their compensation. Further, while documenting each country’s contributions to scientific and research studies in neuropsychology was not a requested focus of these articles, some authors did elaborate on this topic. Overall, however, the content of this issue is intended to allow the reader to discern what is similar or different from one country to the next on variables of interest, particularly as they related to education, training, and practice. In addition to the review of the 14 countries, there is an article regarding postdoctoral training in the United States. It includes the history of how this level of training came to be considered essential, what experiences are meant to be included during these two years, and some remaining challenges in how applicants are recruited and matched to particular institutions. It appears that only the United States routinely requires a two-year postdoctoral fellowship, at least if one considers the standards for admission to candidacy for board certification set out by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology. Those who train in Canada often do seek out a two-year postdoctoral fellowship, but this does not seem quite as common as it is in the United States. Otherwise, it appears that no other country included in this special issue routinely requires fellowship training, or necessarily even a doctoral degree, for one to be considered a neuropsychologist. Therefore, this article is provided to
The Clinical Neuropsychologist
1153
those who might consider establishing such a standard, or at least provide for the existence of these education and training experiences. Again, I am quite indebted to Dr Suchy for her patience and expert guidance in executing this project. In addition, she and others, including Drs Gordon Chelune and Robert Bornstein, were very kind and helpful in suggesting neuropsychologists for particular countries to be invited to participate in this special issue. Of course, I appreciate the willingness of the other authors in this special issue to contribute their time and efforts to this endeavor. Finally, I am indebted to my colleagues at Rush University Medical Center who helped review and edit the articles. These include Drs Julia Novitski, Kathleen Hazlett Elverman, Donna Kwan and Evan Schulze, and Ms Megan Herodes. Without their considerable assistance, this project could not have been accomplished. Christopher Grote Special Issue Guest Editor Departments of Behavioral Sciences and Neurological Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA [email protected]
