1. Counselor Evaluation Policy
Second Reading

2. Concern
“performance to be evaluated by other faculty who are familiar with the professional, legal and ethical issues specific to counseling”

3. Original Policy
“The PAF shall first be reviewed by a peer-level committee convened by the Chair of the Psychology Program, and comprised of tenured faculty.”
Proposed Policy
“Formation of the peer-level review committee. The appropriate administrator in Faculty Affairs will work in coordination with the Director of CAPS to identify knowledgeable tenured faculty to serve as potential evaluators.”

4. Response
Psychology faculty are not excluded from serving as evaluating faculty
Expanding the pool of faculty to include other potential faculty with expertise, knowledge, experience
Most knowledgeable to convene committee is CAPS director (knowledge of counselor duties) and Academic Affairs administrator (knowledge of all faculty)
Faculty being reviewed are not psychology program faculty

5. Concern
Question: With regards to proposing to remove the language about direct and indirect services. How does Director make distinction between direct and indirect services?

6. Response
The overlap between types of services (direct/indirect) is great
Director ultimately determines appropriateness of service
The Director would have to address how they distinguish between services