The Latest on State Licensure and
Activities of the State Affairs Committee
Kalen F. Pieper
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
The topic of state licensure usually meets with one of the following
reactions:
(1) I do not know anything about licensure and state laws and don't want to.
(2) I know enough about licensure to know that:
a. I am exempt from becoming licensed.
b. I don't want to have anything to do with licensure.
(3) The state that I live in requires that I become licensed, therefore:
a. I have become licensed.
b. I have tried to become licensed but have run into roadblocks.
A special task force was assembled in 1993 to reexamine SIOP's policy
on licensure, given these varied perspectives from SIOP's members. In the
July 1996 issue of TIP, Mike Campion published SIOP's new Policy on
Licensure (Campion, 1996). Specifically the policy stated,
"SIOP recognizes that some states require that certain areas of I-O practice be licensed. SIOP
members should be allowed to be licensed in these states if they desire, and SIOP
should provide guidance to state licensing boards on how to evaluate the
education and training of an I-O psychologist." In addition, the policy stated that industrial and organizational psychologists, as citizens, obey the laws in the
states in which they live and work.
The purpose of this article is to update our members on recent
activities regarding licensure.
Licensure of the title "psychologist" (known as a title law) and/or the
practice of "psychology" (known as a practice law) is restricted in almost
every state in the U.S. and province in Canada. The laws differ significantly by state
and range from preventing I-O psychologists from becoming licensed, to
having a separate policy for I-O psychologists. State licensure
requirements differ but are comprised of a few main components:
- Completion of a PhD/PsyD from an accredited university
- Supervision for a period of time from a licensed psychologist
- Achieving a qualifying score (varies by state) on the Examination
on Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP)
- Passing an oral exam conducted by the state board
SIOP's State Affairs Committee's primary responsibility is to
promote the interest of the Society and its members regarding licensure. This
objective is achieved by staying abreast of state laws that impact our
membership and working with relevant state psychological associations, licensing
boards, and SIOP membership to effect changes in licensure requirements,
where needed.
The State Affairs Committee's main activities in 1999 were to:
(a) Identify states/provinces in need of change,
(b) Create resources for SIOP members who have questions
regarding licensure.
Identify States/Provinces Where Change Is Needed:
In order to identify states/provinces in need of change, the
committee reviewed the current licensure laws for each state/province and identified
areas in which the definition of psychology encompassed I-O practice, but
the requirements for licensure made it difficult for I-Os to become licensed.
Seventeen states/provinces were identified:
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- Connecticut
- District of Columbia
- Illinois
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Manitoba
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- New Mexico
- North Dakota
- Rhode Island
- Saskatchewan
- Tennessee
- Wisconsin
A survey was then developed and distributed to members of the
identified states (around 670 surveys were distributed) to determine if the SIOP
members of these areas felt a need to change the current licensure laws. We
received approximately 130 responses. From these replies, 5 states were targeted
for further action:
- Connecticut
- Illinois
- Michigan
- Tennessee
- Rhode Island
As this article is going to press, the State Affairs Committee is
further exploring each of these states by coordinating efforts with SIOP members
of these states (through local I-O groups where possible), reviewing the
procedure to change the state law, if desired by members, and working with
the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards to develop tactics
for change.
The committee will repeat these activities annually to determine
necessary action for the upcoming year.
Develop Resources That Will Educate SIOP Membership On
and Address Questions Regarding Licensure
Thanks to the efforts of Janet
Barnes-Farrell, Ara Wade, and Kris
Canali, the State Affairs Committee has developed a web page on the SIOP
website. This web page covers general information and questions
regarding licensure. In addition, the page provides a link to each state/province board
so that members can gain specific information.
In addition, each State Affairs Committee member has been
designated point person of a state/province. This individual will serve as the initial
contact for our membership with any questions/concerns they may have
regarding their state's laws. See the attached table for your representative.
The State Affairs Committee will meet during the SIOP conference.
We will be setting aside 1 hour of this meeting for members to stop by and
discuss any issues/concerns they may have regarding licensure. Watch the
announcement board for time and location of this meeting.
The State Affairs Committee has spent the last few years identifying
areas in need of change and developing some basic communication tools to
communicate with the membership. We hope you find these resources useful
and look forward to your comments and ideas for future activities of the
committee.
Table 1. State Allocation
|
Name
|
States
|
|
David W. Arnold
|
Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa
|
|
Donald L. Fischer
|
Arkansas,
Kansas, Missouri
|
|
Michael Flanagan
|
California,
Hawaii, Alaska
|
|
Greg Gormanous
|
Louisiana,
Alabama
|
|
Theodore Hayes
|
South
Dakota, Montana, Nebraska
|
|
Norman Hertz
|
Nevada,
Oregon, Utah
|
|
Alison Mallard
|
Florida,
Georgia, South Carolina
|
|
William McDaniel
|
Kentucky,
Tennessee, Oklahoma
|
|
Morton S. McPhail
|
Texas,
Wyoming, Colorado
|
|
Peter M. Scontrino
|
Alberta,
Canada, British Colombia, Idaho, Washington
|
|
Kalen F. Pieper
|
Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire
|
|
Sandra Lionetti
|
Delaware,
New Jersey, New York
|
|
Janet Barnes-Farrell
|
Connecticut,
Rhode Island, New Brunswick, Canada
|
|
Margaret Barton
|
North
Dakota, Wisconsin
|
|
Timothy Crespin
|
Ohio,
West Virginia, Pennsylvania
|
|
Kimberly Schneider
|
Mississippi,
New Mexico, Arizona
|
|
Jill K. Wheeler
|
Maryland,
North Carolina, Virginia, Dist. Of Columbia
|
|
Seth Kamen
|
Vermont,
Quebec, Ontario
|
|
Kyle Lundby
|
Winnipeg,
Michigan, Minnesota, Saskatchawan
|
References
Campion, M. (1996). Policy on licensure, Society for Industrial-Organizational
Psychology (SIOP), The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist,
34(1) 16-21.
April 2000 Table of Contents |
TIP Home | SIOP Home