Assessment is seen as an ongoing dialogue between the candidate and his/her Advisors, faculty members, and supervisor. It focuses on professional competence, mastery of the theory and clinical practices outlined in the curriculum, as well as the development of the capacity to work symbolically. It takes place within three basic venues: immediate “point-of-contact” between candidate and faculty including a minimum of one meeting per trimester with a candidate’s primary Advisor, an oral or written examination, and a graduation project. Upon admission to the program, 2 of the three of a candidate’s original Admissions Committee are assigned as his/her on-going Advisory Committee. These 2 are augmented by a third analyst chosen by the candidate during their first year.
One of these advisors shall be selected to become the candidate’s primary Academic Advisor. The purpose of the Advisory Committee is to help keep track, along with the candidate, of what courses have been taken and may be needed, and what supervision hours completed, to participate in mediation should unusual circumstances arise, and to function as an all-purpose guidance group throughout training. In the learning community model, the Advisory Committee serves as the primary source of information and advisement and given its excellent knowledge of the candidate, it can serve as well as a critical feedback mechanism for areas that need attention.
Point-of-contact assessments are on-going discussions between a candidate and his/her instructors and supervisors that focus on areas of proficiency and on areas where additional learning is necessary. These assessments remain between candidate and faculty member, i.e., in the context in which they arise. While an end-of-class summary meeting is desirable as a focused period of reflection, point-of-contact assessment is meant to be on-going so that candidates may benefit immediately from faculty feedback.
Written summaries are available to the candidate upon request, and a notation of satisfactory final assessment in each class is necessary for credit to be accrued. As well, candidate evaluations of each class are gathered in both individual written form and community-wide in-person meetings
Candidates are expected to demonstrate their understanding and competency of Jungian psychoanalytic theory and practice. This is done via a comprehensive exam. The examination may be either oral or written, at the candidate’s discretion, and may be taken at any time during training, also at the candidate’s discretion.
When the candidate feels ready to take the examination, and has discussed it with the Advisory Committee, he/she shall notify the Director of Training who shall help the candidate form his/her Exam Committee. This committee shall be comprised of one person (selected by the candidate) from the candidates’ Advisory Committee, one person assigned by the DoT from the JPA Exam Committee Panel and a final analyst selected by the candidate from amongst the body of JPA analysts.
While the form of the Exam is left open for the candidate to develop with their Exam Committee, the content is expected to show mastery of the 7 major thematic areas presented in the catalogue. These are: Symptom and Symbol Formation, Fields of Psychological Process, Theory and Practice of Dreams, Transformational Systems, Mythopoeisis and Mythologems, Psyche-Soma Conjunctions, and Analytic Attitude and Techniques.
Each area should be covered both with a discussion of relevant Jungian theory and illustrated with clear clinical examples of these theoretical stances in application. Many examinations include a degree of reflection on the part of the candidate concerning what proficiencies a graduated analyst should have. The exam thus comprises the candidate’s manifestation of these proficiencies in theory and practice.
The candidate’s exam committee is encouraged to operate in a consensual style in its review of the exam. A candidate may be asked to rewrite portions of the exam at the request of the committee members. The goal of the exam is for everyone to be satisfied with the experience as a constructive part of becoming an analyst as well as a manifestation of analytic knowledge and practice.
In the event that the committee is unable to come to a consensual determination, the matter may be referred to the Training Committee for further discussion and, if necessary, a final decision.
The Graduation Project
The Final Project is an original project or paper, developed in conjunction with an advisor, and a member of the Consultation/Advising Panel. Its purpose is to demonstrate and provide an opportunity for the integration of a candidate’s development and work. Candidates are encouraged to explore in small groups or individually, an aspect of the curriculum that is of particular interest to them. Faculty consultation is encouraged and given throughout this intensive study. When the candidate, advisor, and Consultation/Advising Panel member consider the project complete, it is presented to the entire training community.
In preparing to develop the final project, the candidate notifies the Director of Training that he/she is ready, and the Project Committee is formed. This committee is comprised, like the Exam Committee, of one analyst chosen from the candidates’ advisory committee, one assigned from the JPA Project Committee, and a final analyst also selected by the candidate from the JPA body. Any of these may serve as the primary reader/advisor to the candidate.
The parameters of the final project are quite open as to form and content. It comprises the opportunity to delve deeply into an area of theory and practice that the candidate feels drawn to, and then to present this work to the community as a whole. Although envisioned as a much more openly creative process than the Exam, the candidate may be asked to rewrite portions at the request of the committee. Once the committee approves, the candidate may request a date for its presentation at a JPA Colloquium.
Every effort is made for this process to be a consensual one, with differences worked out in discussion amongst the committee members and the candidate. In the event that this is not possible, the matter may be referred to the Training Committee for discussion and/or final decision.
The Training Committee shall be informed no later than one month before the colloquium of presentation that the candidate is ready to present his/her work to the community. The presentation itself is intended to be a demonstration of readiness for graduation and a contribution to the on-going programs and development of the JPA learning community.
Mediation of Unusual Circumstances: In cases where there is a strong difference of opinion or perception between a faculty member and a candidate regarding the work of the candidate, a mediation session is convened. The purpose of mediation is to enlarge the understanding of the training issues involved and to discuss solutions to the training issues raised. The mediation committee will consist of the candidate, the instructor or supervisor, a member of the Consultation/Advising Panel, and a faculty member of the candidate’s choosing. Should the mediation committee fail to resolve the issues raised, the matter will be referred to the Steering Committee of the JPA for review and consideration. The JPA training program reserves the right to ask a candidate to leave the program should his/her competence prove unsatisfactory.
Note: candidates may take a leave-of-absence should circumstances warrant. This is granted in conjunction with a candidate’s Consultation/Advising Panel, and approved by the Steering Committee.
If a candidate does not attend a given class or event, he/she will not receive credit (make-ups or emergency absences may be scheduled at the discretion of the instructor).