RAPSters comment on APS Survey

Here’s some of the comments on the APS survey that RAPSters  have have emailed us or posted.

(It’s better to post them yourselves in the ‘comments’ box below the post – names are not included).

Here they are:

  1. “Yeah good advice. I was completely aware of the limitations and attempts to bias, so yes boxes must be written in. The initial question to rank order variables was a joke! Love the way you are sitting on them.”
  2.  “I was stopped by the first question which asks for a rank order of importance of various factors for the government to take into account when setting rebates. I object to ranking on the basis that it is only useful when the items to be ranked lie along a single dimension. “
  3. “I noticed that! I didn’t read the preamble because it was an obvious attempt to bias my starting point, a blatant manipulation to frame our responses. Do they think we are stupid??!! We’re as trained as they are in questionnaire design!!”
  4. Just letting you know I completed the APS survey and took every opportunity in the comments boxes to state my objections to the 2 tier system for medicare rebates. Anyone can do that and still have their vote counted I think. Also if lots of people do something similar to what I did, including pointing out where the survey questions were loaded the APS will get lots of current messages from current members. What do you think?
  5. I was gobsmacked by the survey. We are forced into answering questions that don’t even address the issues. It was a farce. I was also gobsmacked that they would even consider a 3 tier system after the failure of the 2 tier system. What were they even thinking of putting up such a ridiculous survey? … Oh, I know, to placate us. No change expected!
  6. Yes. The survey was appalling. I have developed surveys for both my theses and also for work over many years. It was disgusting.I love the way the APS thinks the Clinical Psychs are soooo well trained and much more skilled than Generalists. Well, this little humble Generalist is heaps better at survey design than they are!!
    But it was useful. It let us see their true colours. I was ambivalent about spilling the Board until now. Now I am all for it.
  7. I just completed the APS survey.  You are right the survey is cleverly worded to give the responses they seek.  It is also interesting that they encourage psychologist who are not in private practice to complete the survey.  This makes sense as academics etc. are likely to be in the clinical college. Thanks for your help
  8. U are right about the survey it is cleverly structured to corner people . I hope they see it.  I checked my responses twice to make sure. I can’t express the disdain I have for the aps. The people in power are just not nice people. I can’t imagine any organisation which turns on its own fee paying members.  The word clinical is a generic word meaning one who treats how can they virtually ‘copy write’ this word . Many of the older clinical  members of the aps did a two year part time diploma. Several who have PhDs got them in Philosophy or education etc. they disgust me.

5 thoughts on “RAPSters comment on APS Survey

  1. My response to question 1: “Q1: I am curious as to how you developed this heriarchy of priorities? Their selection and composition seem loaded in meaning and consequences, as well as divisive. If we communicate to the government that ‘complexity’ is the most important, then this could well be construed by a government hell-bent on cutting Public Health, to shift even more funds toward ATAPS and other convoluteted, difficult to access schemes. This would thereby shoot general public – BetterAccess – in the foot. If, on the other hand, we voted for Psychologist Years of Experience the next question begging would be how to validate this?? Some practitioners did not proceed with Masters pathways, whereas others have fulfilled their annual PD remit, some for many decades. How is this to be regulated? If we respond with formal qualifications, we similarly reinforce the current, class based system. APAC competences are the qualifications engine room, and it has snuffed-out any action in response to the several hundred protests challenging Counselling Psychology competences. Similarly, how are we to identify competences, if we voted for that – especially when the Clin Psych College and its highly successful lobbyists have demoted all other forms of applied mental health practice. Let me have one guess on which group decides upon competences??

  2. I too was very aware of the APS surveys ‘false construct’ about some psychologists being more superior than others & loading the outcome of the questions to support their scewed view of psychology as a hierarchical system. I pointed out that the term Psychologist was all that should be required to claim a single Medicare rebate. NO HIERARCHIES!
    Also that there was not just one type of academic endeavour in psychology that was more superior to another, like the Clin Psych’s care of the APS have duped the Government into believing.
    Why is my 40 years of clinical experience in the field regarded as any less worthy than a newly completed academic program in order to claim the same Medicare rebate. It is outrageous!
    I told them they were scary!
    Their questions were loaded & an insult to our intelligence & Psychological expertise.

  3. Yes. The survey was appalling. I have developed surveys for both my theses and also for work over many years. It was disgusting.I love the way the APS thinks the Clinical Psychs are soooo well trained and much more skilled than Generalists. Well, this little humble Generalist is heaps better at survey design than they are!!
    But it was useful. It let us see their true colours. I was ambivalent about spilling the Board until now. Now I am all for it.

Leave a Reply