GSAPP, Rutgers University
Department of Applied Psychology
PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT: CHILD
Course 820:636:01
Karen L. Haboush, Psy.D.
Phone: (732) 249-2777
Teaching Assistant: Cassia Mosdell
Teaching Assistant: Alison Tripptree
Spring 2015
Monday 9:15-12:00
e-mail: [email protected]
e-mail: [email protected]
e-mail. [email protected]
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Goal: To introduce students to the assessment of child and adolescent personality
through the use of child-focused measures, including: projective-expressive
techniques, objective tests, narrow-band self-report inventories, clinical
interviewing, and play techniques. Utilizing a data-based approach, integration
of objective and projective measures and case formulation will be emphasized,
along with the manner in which social-emotional assessment is generally
conducted within schools. This includes the application of play techniques. Case
studies will be utilized to further student's understanding of diagnostic profiles,
including assessment of child trauma.
Objectives:
1. Students will learn the theoretical models underlying methods of child
personality assessment and develop a framework for conducting data-based
evaluations.
2. Students will demonstrate skill and competence administering,
scoring and interpreting various self-report measures, behavior rating
scales, and projective-expressive techniques.
3 Students will understand the ethical and legal issues surrounding
personality assessment, including those regarding projectives, FERPA and
privacy concerns, and assessment with diverse populations.
4. Students will be able to write a comprehensive psychological report,
including a well-integrated formulation of the child‘s social-emotional
functioning. Reports will follow a problem-solving model, including databased discussion of results clearly linked to the referral question and
relevant recommendations.
All readings are on Sakai.
COURSE OUTLINE
Week 1: 1/26/15
Introduction to the Course:
A Framework for Data-Based Personality Assessment;
Psychometric and Projective Theories
Readings: Merrell Ch.1, Ch. 8 Pgs. 225-229
Week 2: 2/2/15
Empirical Support for Psychodynamic Theory, Assessment and Intervention;
Legal and Ethical Issues Surrounding Personality Assessment:
Conducting Personality Assessment in Schools,
Psychological Report Writing
Readings: Shedler ; Rabin; Haboush (“Current Status”)
Bring to Class: Bring APA Ethical Guidelines to class (under “Readings”)
Week 3: 2/9/15
Assessment of Culturally Diverse Populations;
The Clinical Interview: A Framework;
Self-Report Measures:
Personal Problems Checklist
Readings: Merrell Ch. 14 & 5(up to pg. 161); Dana; Presley et al.
Week 4: 2/16/15
Play: Interviewing & Observation-Social-Emotional Functioning & Child
Development
Assessment of Internalizing Disorders: Self-Report and Objective Measures for
Assessing Depression and Anxiety
Children's Depression Inventory-II,
Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale;
Readings: Bettleheim; Merrell Ch. 7(up to pg.207) & Ch. 10(up to pg. 315; 330332); Lilienfeld et al.*up to pg. 31
Bring to Class: X Interview (Under “Reports”)
Week 5: 2/23/15
Assessment of Internalizing and Externalizing Disorders: Self-Report and
Objective Measures for Assessing Depression, Anxiety, and Conduct Issues
Readings:
Merrell Ch. 8 (pgs. 235-242); Flanagan ("A Place for Projective
Assessment");
Due: Observation of Child’s Play
Week 6: 3/2/15
Projective Assessment: Human Figure Drawings
Administration; Interpretation of Developmental and Emotional Indicators
(Koppitz system)
Readings: Cummings Ch. 7;Oster & Gould, pgs. 13-28
Bring to class : Koppitz Emotional Indicators and Psych. Eval. of Children’s HFD*
Week 7: 3/9/15---In Class Exam
Projective Assessment:: Human Figure Drawings
House-Tree-Person (HTP),
Readings: Lilienfeld et al. pgs. 47-51; Picard & Lebaz
Bring to Class: Koppitz Ch.5 (Social & Cultural Values)
3/16/15
SPRING BREAK! ENJOY!
Week 8: 3/23/15
Projective Assessment of Family Relations: Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD);
Sentence Completion Task;
Evaluating Physical Abuse and Cultural Factors in Interpretation
Readings: Veltman & Brown:; Oster & Gould pgs. 33-52; Goldner & Scharf
Bring to Class: La Voy et al.
Week 9: 3/30/15
Introduction to Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: TAT
Readings: Merrell Ch. 8 (pgs. 229-235 and 252-261); Obrzut & Bolieck Ch. 6
Bring to class: Henry Ch. 12
Week 10: 4/6/15
Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: Overview and Administration of the TAT,
CAT; Developmental Issues
Readings: Graves, Lilienfeld et al..*pgs. 39-47;
Bring to Class: Teglasi
Week 11: 4/13/15
Storytelling/Apperception Techniques: TAT, CAT, Roberts-II---Interpretation;
Working with Sexually Abused & Culturally Diverse Populations: TEMAS
Readings: Flanagan (“Critical…”); Cardalda et al.
Practice Assessment #1 Complete Psychological Report Due: See below
Week 12: 4/20/15
Assessment of Trauma and Dissociation :
Trauma Symptom Checklist;
Guest Speaker
Readings: Haboush, Selman, & Sievering* (pp. 117-144 & 148-151) ; Garo et al.
.
Week: 13: 4/27/15
Assessment of Trauma,
School Play-Based Interventions,
Providing Assessment Feedback to Parents and Children;
Reading: Amir & Weisel; Tharinger et al.*; Edgar-Bailey et al.
Week 14: 5/4/15
Objective Test/Projective Technique: Issues Surrounding the Rorschach (Exner's
Comprehensive System) in School Psychology Practice and Utility with Diverse
Populations;
Readings: Yalof & Abraham
Due: In Class Case Presentations
Week 15: 5/11/15----End of Year Class Held at Karen's Office (including food &
play therapy room access!)
Summary and Evaluation of Course;
Due: In Class Case Presentations
Practice Assessment #2 Due: Complete psychological report—see below
Additional readings may be assigned.
(Please note: Course outline may be subject to change).
Grading Criteria: Grades for this course will be based on:
In-Class Exam=20%
Two reports=25% EACH for a total of 50%
Class presentation on Testing Case=7.5%
Written Play Observation paper 7.5%
In class practice scoring; active class participation, completion of the assigned
readings, and outside supervisor feedback: =15%
Class participation criteria : ACTIVE class participation counts toward your grade
including: reading the assigned articles and chapters, sharing examples of
testing cases that you may be working with, and contributing to class discussions.
Class participation allows me to gauge your understanding of the course content
and readings. Students are encouraged to discuss case examples from their
practica during class since this class emphasizes case presentations. All projects
are due on the date indicated on the course outline.
Because we are a large group and the course material is complex. I want the class
to maintain a comfortable and supportive learning environment for all.
Therefore, all cell phones should be turned off and put away during class. Please
refrain from side conversations and note writing with classmates. These gestures
are distracting, exclude others and do not make for a supportive and professional
learning environment. We have a good deal of material to cover and the
complexity of the course content inevitably lends itself to questions, so please don’t
hesitate to ask!
LAPTOPS: In–class use of laptops for purposes other than notetaking (ie, being on
Facebook, in chat rooms), will result in loss of ability to use your laptop in class.
This behavior is inconsistent with professional decorum.
Supervision: You should receive supervision for each of the two practice reports you
complete. In addition to any outside supervision you might receive in your
practicum if you complete the testing there, you may also receive supervision from
the two teaching assistants with whom you will meet twice this semester, once for
each report you complete. Please schedule to meet with the teaching assistant in a
pair (with another student). The main purpose of supervision is to assist you with
the interpretation and synthesis of test data. You should come to supervision
prepared to discuss your test data. Please coordinate with your classmate early in
the semester and contact your supervisor ASAP to schedule meetings to ensure that
your reports can be submitted on time. Your supervisor will provide feedback about
your performance that will be considered toward your grade.
Practicum Requirements: Because practicum sites vary in their approach towards
social-emotional testing, interpretation and report writing, this course is NOT
designed to prepare students for the specific requirements of their individual
practicum settings. Instead, this course is designed to provide a conceptual
overview regarding interpretation and report writing. If students conduct testing
on children in their practicum site, the reports submitted for this class should be
written to satisfy the course requirements and not the specific requirements of the
practicum site. All test data (xeroxed copies are permissible) should be submitted
along with the written report so that I can review the raw data.
GSAPP can not require that your practicum site provide you with children to test.
However, if your practicum supervisor is assigning you testing cases and is also
willing to supervise you on the ENTIRE battery, even if it is more than you actually
need to submit for your practicum site, than please notify the instructor. You may
be able to use that supervision to meet the course requirements.
Ethical Issues:
Students are responsible for adhering to the following ethical considerations:
1) Because the majority of students will be administering and interpreting
personality measures for the first time, students are responsible for advising
parents that they are functioning in a training capacity. As a result, students
must advise parents that they can not provide interpretive feedback upon
completing a practice assessment, unless testing is conducted as part of your
practicum. The assessment is conducted solely for the purpose of the student's
training. Obtain parental consent for assessment using the consent form provided
by instructor. Include this form along with your test data.
2) Additionally, students should not administer personality measures to family
and friends. This places students in a dual relationship and raises serious
concerns given the sensitive nature of personality findings.
3) Students are responsible for contacting their supervisors to arrange meeting
times and following through on their supervisor's recommendations.
Arrangements will be made for small group supervision. Students should come to
supervision prepared to discuss their own interpretations. All supervisors must be
approved by the course instructor (including, for example, a practicum supervisor
who agrees to provide testing supervision in addition to the supervision which they
already provide to meet the practicum requirements). Please contact your
supervisors early in the semester to schedule supervision times!
4) If you are concerned that any of your test data suggest a child might be at-risk
for self harm, you must report this to your practicum supervisor if the testing is
done at your practicum. Otherwise, if it is a practice case, please notify me.
Reports:
Test protocols must be included with all reports.
All data and protocols and report should be submitted in HARD copy, not
electronically.
Testing must be conducted on two different children between the ages of 4-18
#1 Due on 4/13/15
Intelligence test (specifics will be discussed in class)
Two projective drawings (either HFD/HTP/KFD)
One sentence completion task
CDI /RADS
One of the Beck Youth Inventories
One story telling technique
#2 Due on 5/11/15
Intelligence test (specifics will be discussed in class)
One projective drawing (select a different drawing task from first case)
One sentence completion task
One of the eck Youth Inventories
CDI/RADS/TSCC
One story telling technique (select a different technique from first case)
Grading criteria for Reports:
 Reports should include all of the sections outlined in the format provided by
the instructor.
 Each section of the report will be evaluated for both content and writing style.
Errors of punctuation, spelling, grammar, inappropriate language detract
from the professionalism of reports and will lower your grade.
 Content should be clear, relevant and comprehensive.
 Any reservations about the validity of findings should be noted.
 There should be a clear linkage between the referral question, observations,
choice of measures, and interpretation of results. The referral question should
be answered by supporting data.
GSAPP, Rutgers University
Consent for Practice Testing
I hereby consent to be given/have my child be given individually administered
psychological tests for practice purposes only. I understand that:
A) The examiner is a student at the Graduate School of Applied and
Professional Psychology, Rutgers University who is learning to administer
these tests.
B)Identifying information will be held strictly confidential. The report will
be shared with the course instructor, Dr. Karen Haboush
C)Because the results of these tests are invalid due to the practice nature of
the testing, the results can not be shared with me.
D) I have the right to terminate the testing at any time.
___________________________________________________________
Child's Name
____________________________________________________________
Signature of parent/guardian
____________________________________________________________
Signature of adolescent
____________________________________________________________
Date
Personality Assessment: Child
18:820:636:1
Readings
Crespi, T.D., & Politikos, N.N. (2008). Personality assessment in school-based
practice: Considerations, challenges, and competence. The School
Psychologist, 62, 12-16.
Cummings, J. A. (2003). Projective drawings. In H.M. Knoff (Ed.), The assessment
of child and adolescent personality (pp. 199-244). New York: The Guilford
Press.
Dana, R.H. (1998). Projective assessment of Latinos in the United States: Current
realities, problems, and prospects. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 4, 165-184.
Flanagan, R. (2003). A place for projective assessment in school psychology
practice? The School Psychologist, 57, 116-118.
Haboush, K.L. (2006). Current trends in projective assessment. New Jersey
Psychologist, 56, 27-28.
Haboush, K.L. , Selman, J.S., & Sievering, K. (2008). Traumatized youth: New roles
for school psychologists. In D.H. Molina (Ed.). School psychology: 21 st
century issues and challenges (pp. 117-155). New York: Nova Science.
Henry, W.E. (1973). The analysis of fantasy. Malabar, Florida: Robert E. Kreiger
Publishing.
Kamphaus, R.W., & Pleiss, K.L. (1993). Comment on "The use and abuse of human
figure drawings". School Psychology Quarterly, 8, 187-188.
Koppitz, E.M. (1968). Psychological evaluation of children’s human figure
drawings. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Koppitz, E.M. (1984). Psychological evaluation of human figure drawings by
middle school pupils. Orlando, Florida: Grune & Stratton.
Knoff, H.M. (1993). The utility of human figure drawings in personality and
intellectual assessment: Why ask why? School Psychology Quarterly, 8, 191196.
LaVoy, S.K., Pedersen, W.C., Reitz, J.M., Brauch, A.A., Luxenberg, T.M., & Nofsinger,
C.C.(2001). Children’s drawings: A cross-cultural analysis from Japan and
the United States. School Psychology International, 22, 53-63.
Lilienfeld, S.O., Wood, J.M., & Garb, H.N. (2000). The scientific status of projective
techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 27-66.
Obrzut, J.E., & Boliek, C.A. (2003). Thematic approaches to personality assessment
with children and adolescents. In H. M. Knoff (Ed.), The assessment of
child and adolescent personality (pp. 173-198). New York: The Guilford
Press.
Presley, G., Smith, C., Hilsenroth, M., & Exner, J. (2001). Clinical utility of the
Rorschach with African Americans. Journal of Personality Assessment, (77),
491-507.
Rabin, A.I. (1986). Concerning projective techniques. In A.I. Rabin (Ed.).
Projective techniques for adolescents and children. New York: Springer
Publishing Company.
Shedler, J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American
Psychologist, 65, 98-109.
Teglasi, H. (2001). Essentials of TAT and other storytelling techniques. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Tharinger, D.J., Finn, S.E., Hersh, B., Wilkinson, A., Christopher, G.B., & Tran, A.
(2008). Assessment feedback with parents and preadolescent children: A
collaborative approach. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,
39, 600-609.
Yalof, J., & Abraham, P. (2001). Re-Examining the Rorschach test in school
psychology practice. The School Psychologist, 55, 97-112.