Educational Retreat March 16, 2013

 Present: Devra Adelstein, Debbie Bonem, Vera Camden, Drew Clemens, Colleen Coakley, Ingrid Geerken (reporter), Bunny Griffin, Anna Janicki, Richard Lightbody (chair), Kay McKenzie, Joanne Naegele, Judy Pitlick, Catherine Sullivan, Sue Tucker.The Meeting was convened at 8:40.Dr. Lightbody opened the meeting by stating our objective: to introduce specific innovations in our training programs to allow for more participation by students.Some givens were:

1. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Program [PPP] is a great success and doing well.
2. Psychoanalyst Training Program [PTP] does not have enough candidates.
3. PTP child analysis has begun an exciting collaboration with HPC.
4. We do not have enough TA’s.
5. CPC has a strong presence in and involvement with APsaA.
6. Cleveland has many universities and cultural and medical institutions.

Some Questions were:

1. How can we give credit to PPP students that will count towards PTP graduation?
2. What would an Early Admission Program look like here?
3. If we encourage students to become early admission candidates, should they have preliminary psychotherapy with TA?  Or faculty, realizing they would soon have to change.  Or, with the waiver of certification occasionally possible, would they have to change necessarily?
4. How can we encourage greater participation by faculty, members, and candidates in extra events, e.g. visiting speakers and Visiting Scholar?

We defined a new category of students eligible for CPC classes and events:CPC candidates (not faculty); HP candidates; PPP students (not graduates); students taking CPC seminars.These four groups will, for example, be invited to meet with Judy Chused to hear a case discussion. Debbie is creating a master list of all these groups for future reference.Anna Janicki began the meeting with a provocative and inspirational power point that aimed at providing a vision for the Center. She proposed we create a new mission statement, such as: “The mission of the CPC is to develop psychoanalytically trained therapists.”  There was some discussion as to whether a hierarchical distinction had been made between psychotherapy and psychoanalysis such that non-analysts reported feeling inferior and excluded. Kay McKenzie clarified the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis as a model for change. Drew Clemens synthesized much of the discussion arguing for training theorists and clinicians in a broad University-like atmosphere.Institute Waiver of the Requirement of an Analysis with a Training Analyst: It was clarified that “Institutes may request a waiver of the requirement for a training analysis should they have an applicant who is already engaged in an ongoing analysis of significant duration with an analyst who is not a Training Analyst.” (from Standards document from APsaA website). This waiver can only be granted once to any one analyst.There was some discussion about applying the title “candidates” to both PPP and PTP students; many, like Judy Pitlick, were in agreement that this would be beneficial to a sense of inclusiveness. Drew Clemens, dissenting, had reservations that such a title might set expectations that could not necessarily be met. Richard Lightbody agreed to find out whether according to APsaA students at all levels of involvement could be called candidates. Devra Adelstein suggested that we follow the model of Ph.D. candidates, with some stopping at the Masters level without prejudice.Vera Camden reminds us that Early Admission is a priority. Anna Janicki would like us to attract a much younger group of students. We are reminded of the tripartite system of Psychoanalytic training that includes immersion in course work, supervision, and a personal analysis. Joanne Naegele suggests that there should be a more rigorous admissions process from the beginning, so that students could be advanced more readily. Carl Rak (in absentia) strongly favored applying credit from PPP courses to subsequent training in the PTP and offering credit to students who attend PTP classes if they later became candidates. It was agreed that students seeking credit would have to be evaluated in their coursework by the instructors.As a hypothetical, PPP students becoming PTP candidates and seeking credit might be re-interviewed by 2 analysts. Early admission students might have already participated in Clinical Moments, and audited or taken candidate classes for credit (with an evaluation). Camden reminds us that such a requirement will make a demand on faculty to make evaluations, keep records, and to file such paperwork in a systematic way at the Center.It was agreed that we are hoping to devise an admission and progression system such that there is ONE POINT OF ENTRY for students, who can take classes towards eventual graduation as a psychoanalyst or psychotherapist.It was also agreed that checkpoints were needed along the way of training. Once admitted, students would enter checkpoints at:1) entry into the PPP;2) entry into Early Admissions candidacy;3) entry into the PTP (after secondary interviews by EC admissions committee).Bonem raised the dilemma that psychoanalytic training does require a certain amount of “brining” or immersion. She asks that we also try to recruit not only highly trained psychotherapists, but also those needing remediation.Ingrid Geerken raised the idea that creating a division of interdisciplinary courses (for example in a School of the Psychoanalytic Imagination) would create another pathway for academics and others in the community, such as artists, interested in psychoanalysis, both applied and clinical. Vera Camden mentioned as an example Jeffrey Longhofer’s interdisciplinary program at Rutgers University. Many, including Anna Janicki and Catherine Sullivan, felt that there was already enough of a vision to begin offering such courses. There was some discussion as to how such an interdisciplinary and frankly cultural approach was in fact excellent training for clinical work.  The courses would be offered for a fee to the community but might also offer credit applied towards future training. The New Directions writing program was mentioned in this light.There emerged a vision of three divisions (PPP, PTP, and Interdisciplinary Psychoanalytic Studies, IPS) in which courses could be offered for credit towards psychoanalytic training.Drew Clemens proposes an individualized curriculum, such that credit is granted for successful completion of courses. This would allow each student to customize his or her learning experience.Catherine Sullivan mentioned the importance of creating a community for those clinicians interested in deepening their knowledge and technique; Colleen Coakley has assembled an innovative think tank in which different parts of the CPC community can share information and ideas. It was reiterated that the Center needs to become technologically up-to-date so that it can offer interdisciplinary classes and long-distance learning. There is already a collection in place for donations towards a “technology cart.”Three hypothetical Early Admissions candidates were discussed. For example,1)     The young academic seeking a masters in social work who would like to begin training but does not have the economic resources to do so all at once.2)     The highly trained psychotherapist who is already auditing courses but has a young family and a full practice and might be more amenable to training part-time.3)     The academic (non-mental health professional) who is in analysis and has become interested in training but might not be aware that CORST is a viable option in Cleveland.It was agreed that assigning mentors early on to every Early Admissions candidate would be a critical factor in the process. There was general agreement that: 1) there needed to be a mechanism put in place for Early Admissions; 2) that there should be more pathways for granting credit towards the PTP training; and 3) that the highly successful PPP program should not be needlessly disrupted.As a result, there was the creation of an Early Admissions committee that would make a proposal by the Annual Meeting (June 18) towards implementation of such a mechanism. It would have its own authority to act (as a subcommittee of the EC). Kay McKenzie agreed to chair, other volunteers include Debbie Bonem, Ingrid Geerken, Carl Rak, and Vera Camden.Some preliminary ideas towards this end include a 1-page application (including transcripts and cover sheet), and a meeting with a member of the Early Admissions committee to set up a personalized program. The EC and Board would need to approve the application process.Anna Janicki concluded the meeting with a power point that humorously addressed the issues at hand with illustrations by Vickie Todd.The meeting concluded with good feeling at approximately 12 noon.Ingrid M. Geerken, Ph.D. (reporter)

COMMENTS?

Please send comments to webmaster@psychoanalysiscleveland.org and they will be posted here.