This chapter describes the development of an internationally relevant model of core competences for practitioner psychologists. These competences provide a mechanism to facilitate international practice and enhance global mobility by promoting a coherent professional identity and a foundation for mutual recognition and reconciliation of differences related to professional preparation, credentialing and conduct of practicing psychologists around the world. Achieving mutual recognition and professional mobility across countries depends on promoting greater professional cohesion about what it means to be a psychologist. This involves developing common understandings of how the profession remains consistent despite the national, regional, and cultural differences that exist. There is a need to promote the profession across the world and explain the unique perspective that psychologists bring to addressing human and societal problems. We must find the core commonalities that define the profession of psychology as distinct from other helping professions despite variations across the globe in training, credentialing, and practice. The international community of psychologists and psychology organizations must take bold and innovative action to deal with these challenges. The International Declaration on Core Competences in Professional Psychology was developed by the International Project on Competences in Psychology (IPCP) and endorsed by the major international psychology professional organizations in 2016. The chapter outlines the methods used to develop the initial draft set of competences that became the final Declaration and discusses how to expand and enhance the Declaration to make it more relevant and useful to various potential users. The chapter concludes with a proposal to explore the use of these core competences to promote a coherent global professional identity and to facilitate international practice and mobility.

In this special issue, Conoley et al. (2020) repeat the call for a paradigm shift in school psychology graduate education from the individual level to the system level and from secondary and tertiary intervention to primary prevention and implementation science to optimize environments for children's overall health and success. This article describes how school psychology training, as organized by professional standards of practice and credentialing, has evolved to its current status as a recognized specialty of practice within psychology. A review of the history of the accreditation and approval of school psychology programs, as well as the current status of competencies within these standards and procedures are presented. In addition, school psychology as a distinct specialty; various certifications, credentials, and licensure; professional identities; and recent developments in technology, telehealth, and cross-state credentialing are examined. The article includes a summary of how competencies are reflected in the most recent revisions of American Psychological Association accreditation, National Association of School Psychologists approval standards, and credentialing organizations such as Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards. Finally, we conclude with the assertion that development and adoption of these standards, competencies and professional recognition certifications, which are informed by the current zeitgeist in both health and education more broadly, might propel school psychology to fulfill the promise not yet achieved as outlined by Conoley and colleagues (2020). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

This article reviews the strengths and weaknesses of the current requirements for continuing professional education for psychologists to renew their license to practice. Whereas most states already require completion of classroom or workshop instruction during each license renewal cycle, the authors argue for a more comprehensive system of continuing professional development (CPD) that will focus on the ongoing assessment of competence throughout the professional's career and thus better ensure public protection from the incompetent or unethical practitioner. The authors describe the major elements of this more comprehensive CPD process and how adoption of such a system in psychology licensing laws would require participation in a variety of learning activities that focus on professional engagement, practice relevant topics and better assessment of instructional outcomes; provide peer input and monitoring to better identify gaps in knowledge or skills; and reduce instances of professional isolation that could lead to lapses in judgment and decision making, occupational stress, and ultimately impairment or burnout. Challenges for the profession to move to a system of CPD, and the need for studies that can determine whether using CPD in licensure renewal requirements actually produce the desired outcomes, are also addressed. Public Significance Statement This article reviews the current requirements for a psychologist to renew their license to practice and discuses both the strengths and weaknesses of this process. The authors argue for a more comprehensive system of continuing professional development that will focus on the ongoing assessment of competence throughout the professional's career and thus better ensure public protection from the incompetent or unethical practitioner.

Introduction Occupational licensure has recently been a focus of media and legislative attention, leading to debates regarding the value of and need for professional regulation. Objective The aim of this study is to systematically identify, analyze, visualize, and interpret scholarship in this important domain. Methods This study uses a bibliometric analysis of the articles published on occupational licensure in the peer-reviewed literature as indexed in bibliographic databases. Results The occupational licensure research is focused around the emergence of a number of areas of inquiry: educational preparation, economic impact, labor market entry, benefits of occupational licensure, adverse impacts on minority groups, and scope of practice. A single researcher is central to the literature and views the topic through an economic and labor-market participation lens. Conclusions The absence of scholarship relating to public protection must be urgently addressed if occupational licensure models that are proportionate to the level of risk posed by the practitioner are to be developed and enforced.

The regulation and licensure of master's level practitioners in psychology has been a discussion within the American Psychological Association for many years. This article entitled Regulatory and Licensure Issues Derived from the Summit on Master's Level Training in Psychological Practice reviews the licensure and regulatory considerations of independent master's level practice in psychology, identifies the concerns, potential actions, impact on the profession, areas of consensus, and future considerations. Prominent among the topics were (a) the impact upon doctoral level practice in psychology and (b) the challenge of differentiating master's level scope of practice, competencies, and title from doctoral level psychologists. A review of the licensure status of other health professions indicates that doctoral level licensure is the standard for health professions and the master's level licensure is standard for mental health professions. This factor is discussed in the context of the goal of maintaining the doctoral level status for psychologists while recognizing a new master's level licensure under the rubric of psychology. Public Significance Statement This article is based on the Regulatory and Licensure Workgroup discussions during the Summit on Master's Training in Psychological Practice. It highlights the key regulatory and licensure considerations that need to be addressed in consideration of a new category of master's level licensed practitioners in psychology.

The Licensure of Consulting and Industrial–Organizational (I-O) Psychologists (LCIOP) Joint Task Force has been examining the controversial issue of licensing I-O and consulting psychologists since 2014. We argue that constructive engagement with licensure is important for setting the future direction of the laws and regulations that govern professional psychology. We review relevant background information, current pressures on regulators, and recent developments in this area. We outline recommendations for jurisdictions’ regulators as well the I-O and consulting psychology communities to consider, discuss, and possibly act on. Others are invited to join the constructive, sometimes vigorous discussions we have enjoyed within the LCIOP Joint Task Force.

The history of licensing and credentialing in psychology and its relationship to education and training are reviewed. The purposes, processes, and methods that licensing boards utilize are discussed in both the credentialing of entry-level licensees and in the responsibility to monitor and investigate complaints from the public. Finally, current challenges facing licensing boards, particularly the use of technology in the education of psychologists and in provision of psychological services and the inconsistency in licensure requirements across jurisdictions, are explored.

Using the literature from decades of study of the management of limited, shared, common-access resources, Hatcher (this issue, pp. 126-140) describes the historical development of the internship match imbalance, the current forces in psychology training and organizational interests that make resolution of the problem difficult, and the complex interorganizational governance structure that this literature suggests must be created and endorsed by the relevant stakeholder groups to resolve the imbalance problem. Included in Hatcher's analysis is a discussion of the role of psychology licensing laws in accommodating students who fail to obtain an accredited or approved internship through the matching system offered by the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC, 2011). The purpose of this commentary is to offer the perspective of the Association of State and Provincial Boards (ASPPB) to Hatcher's description of (a) the effects of requirements contained in psychology licensing laws on the internship imbalance problem and (b) the possible role that both ASPPB and psychology licensing boards can play in helping to address this problem.

This article provides one stakeholder's reaction to the 2 articles that describe the efforts to foster a shift toward assessment of competencies in the training and credentialing of psychologists. Both the competency benchmarks and the competency assessment toolkit articles are major advancements in psychology's attempts to move away from traditional measures of professional competence and to adopt a competency assessment approach. However, both articles leave many significant questions and challenges unanswered. This article identifies the difficulties that lie ahead in the hope of facilitating continued work along this path.

Sharpless and Barber (this issue) have written a thoughtful article questioning the validity, effectiveness, and transparency of the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). This response has 3 goals: to clarify the purpose, structure, and validity of the EPPP; to provide some previously unavailable information that addresses concerns Sharpless and Barber raise about passing rates and assessing competence to practice; and to endorse some of the recommendations the authors make for future investigation and evolution of the psychology licensure examination process.

Psychology licensing laws have a short history and were created to regulate the professional interactions between a psychologist and a client within a single jurisdiction. Societal and technological changes in the way psychologists are trained and practice challenge licensing boards to provide new mechanisms to regulate professional behavior that recognize these changes yet still offer adequate protection of the public. This article describes the problems psychologists encounter related to professional mobility, temporary practice across jurisdictional boundaries, distance learning, and consistency in the handling and reporting of disciplinary actions. The article also describes the efforts of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards to help its licensing board members to address these challenges. Finally, the article raises some potentially dramatic changes being considered in the way psychologists are admitted to professional practice using a competency assessment approach to complement the traditional use of course credits, supervised experience hours, and performance on a knowledge-based exam.

Lengthy efforts on the part of professional psychology to establish licensure have resulted in many inconsistencies among licensing laws. Efforts at standardization by licensure bodies through the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards has led to a common licensing examination across the United States and Canada, and mechanisms facilitating mobility. Some continuing concerns are working against standardization. New issues of distance practice and an expanding scope of practice (e.g., prescription privileges) are just beginning to be faced. Globalization will require looking at licensure through a larger lens across state, provincial, and national borders.

The 2005 recipients of the APA Professional Contribution Awards were selected by the 2004 Board of Professional Affairs (BPA). The members of BPA in 2004 were Jalie A. Tucker, PhD, MPH (Chair); Rosie Phillips Bingham, PhD; Stephen T. DeMers, EdD; Rita Dudley-Grant, PhD, MPH; Kristin A. Hancock, PhD; Keith N. Humphreys, PhD; Larry C. James, PhD; Richard J. Klimoski, PhD; and Annette M. La Greca, PhD. Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Independent or Institutional Practice in the Private Sector

Professional mobility for psychologists has been a problem since states first passed psychology licensing laws because of relatively small but crucial variations in licensing requirements. Although the profession of psychology and the association of psychology regulatory bodies in the United States and Canada (i.e., the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards [ASPPB]) have recognized this problem for decades, little progress was made in resolving it. Recently, the ASPPB launched two different approaches to facilitating professional mobility: one to forge agreements between regulatory bodies to accept each other's. licensees, and another to certify or endorse individual psychologists who meet ASPPB standards for licensure and therefore can be recommended to licensing boards for relicensure. The specific requirements of each of these programs and their success in addressing the professional mobility problem are described.

The complex, multifaceted process of psychology regulation in the United States and in Canada gets a comprehensive treatment in this much-needed resource volume. Both present and future psychologists will increase their understanding, awareness, and appreciation of the profession, including its historical and legal contexts; its standards for education and training, credentialing, and discipline; and the ways in which practitioners can avoid common problems and maintain professional conduct in daily practice. Psychologists at all levels will increase their understanding of the rationale and methodology of psychology regulation and will heighten their awareness of common areas of professional misconduct. Chapters deconstruct and compare the codes of professional conduct while providing an extensive review of laws and regulations affecting practice and of the enforcement of codes of conduct. An exhaustive chronology of the profession of psychology and its training models provides an historical context and deeper insight into the ways in which today's psychology evolved. The text presents a strategy for self-assessment which will increase practitioners' self-awareness of ethical behavior.

This article provides an overview of the miniseries as well as a health care reform context for exploring the emerging role for psychologists in the delivery of health and mental health services to children in the school setting. The articles comprising the miniseries look at the past, present, and foreseeable future to determine both the opportunities and obstacles for comprehensive, school-based psychological services to children.