1 / 11

The EPF Systematic Research on Education: Level 1

The EPF Systematic Research on Education: Level 1. Mary Target PhD; the EPF Working Party on Psychoanalytic Education; Presented by Mira Erlich-Ginor. Institutes Participating in the Research Australia Israel Austria Norway Dutch Paris Finland Polish German Porto Alegre

ulmer
Download Presentation

The EPF Systematic Research on Education: Level 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The EPF Systematic Research on Education:Level 1 Mary Target PhD; the EPF Working Party on Psychoanalytic Education; Presented by Mira Erlich-Ginor

  2. Institutes Participating in the Research Australia Israel Austria Norway Dutch Paris Finland Polish German Porto Alegre Greece Spanish Hungary Swedish Swiss

  3. Level One Factual mapping of educational procedures across training organisations One per organisation (may be multiple institutes) Quantitative results

  4. Structure of Level One 19 organisations submitted questionnaires Questions covered: Selection procedure, criteria Intake figures Training procedures: analysis, supervision, appointment of supervisors, curriculum, feedback and assessment, graduation, other aspects and exceptions

  5. Admission • Similar intake procedures and criteria, except France • Characteristics of admitted Candidates • Gender : 72% women / 28% male • Profession: 67% psychologists/SWs • 30% Medically qualified • Age: 20-29 2 % • 30-39 39 % • 40-49 48 % • 50+ 6 %

  6. Training characteristics • Length of the training • Average in years • Duration of training 7 • Minimum length of training 5.5 • Maximum length of training 10 • Across Institutes: 91% of admitted candidates ultimately qualify • Personal Analysis • 4 days per week personal training analysis. Before starting seminars • Paris Society: no “Training Analysis” nor “Training analysts”; 3 times a week; Training starts after termination of personal analysis.

  7. Supervised cases • Many variations on every possible criterion: • Requirements for Beginning: • - 2 years of theoretical training • - Minimum of sessions of personal analysis, (usually 400 sessions) • - Assessment or second round of interviews • Setting • 4 session a week (except Paris) • + couch (except Austria)

  8. Frequency and duration of Supervision • The spectrum goes from: once a week up to graduation • to: whatever is agreed between supervisor and supervisee. • Number of minimal supervised cases • 2 cases (7 institutes) • 3 cases (6 institutes)

  9. Interim Assessment • No review of overall progress- (Swiss, Paris, Dutch) • Yearly assessments (by Supervisors, Seminar leaders) • Written work as part of candidate assessment (10 institutes) • Theory paper (5 institutes)

  10. Graduation Requirements Average in Hours training cases (N:6) 785 Pt with training cases(n:14) 0 Individual supervision (n:8) 180 Compulsory theoretical seminars (n:9) 295 Voluntary theoretical seminars (n:6) 113 Clinical seminars (n:9) 121

  11. Procedures for qualification • Fulfill the above mentioned requirements, no further demands • Interview with a training Analyst • Candidate and Supervisor present the case before a committee (France) • Write a clinical (and) theoretical paper • Training Committee approves of paper • Defense of paper in front of Society

More Related