Part 1, the description of your practicum site and your activities there, should include the following:

The history of the site.

The philosophy and mission statement of site.

The structure and governance of the site (e.g., if it is a public agency, which governmental agency funds it; does it have a board of directors, and how are they selected; if it’s a private agency who owns it). What is the chain of command?

The staff (which professionals are represented and what are their duties).

What populations are served? What problems are addressed? What services are offered (details such as individual, group, case management, medication management, psychoeducational groups, etc.)?

Are there particular programs within the overall umbrella agency?

How does a client proceed through the system: How are they referred, and by whom; who does the assessment and what does it entail; who does selection and treatment planning and what does it involve; how are cases assigned, etc.?

Are there assessments and treatments, or are they integrated (or is there no formal assessment)?

What theoretical orientations are represented among the clinical staff?

How is the training program run: What are the details of supervision (by whom, what degree and profession, for how long, covering what, from what theoretical orientations); is there a didactic component; are there students from other professions at the site?

Staff and supervision services: Are there organizational and educational meetings? Case conferences? Presentations by outside professionals?

What did you do, in detail; i.e., how many assessments, of whom (children, adolescents, adults, families, couples, geriatric patients…), for what problems, and what was included in assessment battery?

Similarly for therapy. List problems, number of clients seen with that problem and modality (individual, group, psychoed group). Give demographic information about clients; e.g., how many children, adults, families). Note proportion of time spent in assessment versus therapy. A table with numbers is helpful (demographics, problems, testing versus treatment).

Include one case study (5-8 pp.), describing patient’s referral source, presenting problem, behavioral observations, problem description from interview, testing (if any), diagnosis, treatment plan, course of therapy, and outcome. Omit this if you are doing an extended case study for the second half of your practicum paper.

Briefly describe any inservice training or site-sponsored training you received.

Did you receive what you had anticipated and what was promised?

What was the quality of the experience (supervision, support, etc.)?

Was it appropriate for your level of entry skills, and was it appropriate training for a clinical psychologist?

What did you learn?

What were the shortcomings of the training; what could be improved upon or added to the experience?

What was your personal response, as much as you are comfortable sharing (what did you learn about your strengths and weaknesses)? How did the experience affect your plans to become a practicing psychologist? Did the training help you develop more specific career goals (in either a positive or negative direction)?

The second part of the thesis is either an extended case study or a literature review on a topic appropriate to your practicum experience.

A case study should include a description of the client, his or her presenting problems, admitting diagnoses, assessment information, case conceptualization, treatment plan, how the plan was implemented (and modified, if necessary), and the client’s response and progress. In your description of the case conceptualization and treatment plan you must describe the theoretical orientation used and how it was operationalized; that is, not just name the orientation, but describe its principles and how they were manifest in your selection of goals and your actions during therapy. The integration of your actions with psychological theory and research is the critical issue in this section of your practicum paper. Include a reference section (see below re APA style).

The lit review proposal is the means whereby your committee reviews whether you have chosen an appropriate topic, whether you have a good argument, and whether you have a clear organization and adequate references to support your argument. Your proposal is a condensation of the review; instead of making your points and illustrating them, you just list what points you will make and note the studies you will use to support them. It should be clear from the proposal what your topic is, what your question and argument are, what points you will cover, and what references you will use. You should also make clear just what will be expanded in the literature review. You can do this by explicit statements; for example, "In the first section of my paper I will review studies which show that medication side effects contribute to the lack of compliance with pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia (Alpha & Beta, 19967; Laurel & Hardy, 1976; Spanky & Ourgang, 1998)."

There are different expectations for a literature review at the graduate versus the undergraduate level. For graduate level reviews you are not just reporting information but synthesizing, critiquing, and making an argument. Note, however, that you are not making an emotional point, but a point based on the research done on your topic. You must provide a balanced presentation; that is, you are not likely to find research that is "wrong." Rather, your task will be to point out limitations of previous research, neglected areas, progress made in addressing your topic, and interesting directions for future research.

The best preparation for writing a literature review is to read one or more reviews in the literature (see in particular the Psychological Bulletin) for models of arguments, professional and scientific language, organization, and APA (Publications Manual, 4^th Edition) style.

As an exercise, put the topic of your review in the form of a question; for example, "Is group therapy an effective psychotherapy modality for children with behavior disorders?" Then put it in the form of an argument (that is, your conclusions based on your reading of the literature); for example, "Some research suggests that group therapy can be effective in improving communication skills and facilitating expression of emotions other than anger, but other research indicates that group therapy does not significantly reduce problematic behavior. Our ability to draw conclusions from the literature is limited because the procedures for leading groups and participant selection criteria are not always clearly described or vary widely."

Introductory paragraph: Your opening introductory paragraph (or two) should do several things: It should state the topic and describe some evidence supporting its importance; it should state your specific question and argument; and it should describe the plan of the paper. After reading this section the reader should know what point you will be making, what topics will be covered in the course of making your point, and in what order the topics will be addressed.

Subsequent paragraphs: Most paragraphs should begin with a sentence that makes a clear transition from the previous paragraph. This sentence or the next should also make a general assertion or claim. The following sentences in the paragraph provide specific evidence to support this assertion (or disprove it, if you are critiquing someone else's claims), typically a description of the results of one or more studies. The closing sentence describes how the evidence supports (or doesn't support) the initial assertion, or how the evidence qualifies the initial assertion.

Describing research: You should describe (succinctly) what the point of the study was, what the population was or groups were, what the treatment was (if appropriate), what was measured, and the results. Do not go into details unless those details are pertinent to your point (e.g., if participants were chosen using criteria that are now outdated or problematic, and one of your points is that judgment of research is affected by this issue). Do not give descriptions of multiple studies that make the same point (you can just note that similar results were found by Smith, 19967; Jones, 1987; or just note that the results of the study are consistent with subsequent or earlier research).

Making an outline: Make an outline of your paper that states each point you will be making, in the order you will be making them, and with the specifics you will be referring to (typically research reports) for each point. This will help you organize the sequence of your paper and help you keep your paragraphs well structured and their points clear. For example:

Group therapy for behavior disorders facilitates expression of emotion

Jones and Smith (1997)

several other studies with same results using slightly different outcome measures (briefly noted)

Group therapy for behavior disorders improves communication skills in general

Rowan and Martin (1988), Smith and Smith (1989)

one study opposite results (Tom and Jerry, 1994)

Problems which make comparison among studies difficult:

Lack of specification of what done in groups

e.g., Jones and Smith description, Smith and Smith

Lack of reporting of inclusion and exclusion criteria, or significant differences in groups from study to study

Rowan and Martin (19988) included children with psychotic features

Smith and Smith (1989) only noted "referred by school for problem behavior"

When translating your outline into a narrative, remember to make clear transitions between points. For example, the transition from the first to the second point noted above might be: "Group therapy has also been shown to improve general communication skills in children with behavior disorders, although the evidence has not been as consistent as that on the expression of emotion."

Some people have difficulty beginning with an outline. An alternative is to just sit down and generate ideas, writing without concern for order or organization (sometimes called "freewriting"). The goal is to generate a great deal of material, without concern for editing. Then read what you have generated, select important issues you want to cover, and organize them into an outline. You will probably find a lot you can throw out and a lot of repetition; however, you will also find some important points that you want to include and see some areas that will need to be expanded upon.

Conclusion section: In your conclusion section review your argument and the extent to which it is supported by the evidence. Note any qualifications of your own or others' assertions. If you recommend further research, you must be specific and note what particular kind of research is necessary to address what particular point. Be specific in your conclusions; don't make vague, general, fuzzy statements that no one could dispute but that also don't say much (e.g., "the development of appropriate treatment is necessary for this difficult problem").

You are required to follow APA style in writing your proposal and literature review, following the criteria of the latest edition of the Publication Manual (currently the 4th). Pay particular attention to how to cite references in the body of the review and in the reference section. The Manual also has valuable sections on the basics of writing, including rules for use of commas, pronouns, parallel structure, subject and object verb agreement, and the appropriate verb tenses for scientific writing. Please remember to use a spell-checker on your material; also have an acquaintance read your paper, as the spell-checker will not catch all mistakes (e.g., using "affect" for "effect").