Kiel, PP 7372

ArgosyUniversity

COURSE SYLLABUS

PP 7372

Projective Personality Assessment

Wednesdays 6:00pm-8:45pm

Spring 2010

Faculty Information

Faculty Name: Mark Kiel, Psy.D., C.G.P

Campus: Chicago

Contact Information: (312) 777-7671;

Office Hours: M-Th* (also avail by phone)

*Please call to schedule an appointment

Teaching Assistant: TBA

CATALOG DESCRIPTION:

This course will cover the Exner Comprehensive System for the Rorschach as well as selected projective tests. In addition to understanding theoretical underpinnings, the student will be expected to develop some competence in the administration, scoring and interpretation of these instruments. The class will include a laboratory in which skills in administration and interpretation can be practiced.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

This course offers a comprehensive introduction to projective personality testing in the field of professional psychology. While students will be exposed to actual testing materials, administration guidelines, and interpretive strategies, this course does not provide the ability or qualifications to independently obtain or use the instruments covered. The in-vivo utilization of certain projective tests with non-clinical volunteers for projects in this course is designed to increase awareness of projective testing as a clinically useful assessment approach. Consequently, students will gain a deeper understanding of the nature and utility of projective testing in professional practice. To this end, the lecture subject matter, reading material, discussion topics, and project assignments offer students the opportunity to:

  • Understand the concept of the “projective hypothesis” as the fundamental construct underlying projective personality testing.
  • Gain a working knowledge of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), Children’s Apperception Test (CAT), Tell Me a Story (TEMAS), Draw-A-Person (DAP), Draw-A-Person-of-the-Opposite-Sex (DAPOS), Draw-A-Person-in-the-Rain (DAPIR), Draw-A-Tree (DAT), Draw-A-House (DAH), Kinetic-Family-Drawing (KFD), Incomplete Sentence forms,and the Rorschach Inkblot Test.
  • To gain proficiency at scoring the Rorschach using the Exner Comprehensive system.
  • Appreciate the strategies psychologists use to interpret the results of projective personality tests and thereby gain a deeper understanding of personality functioning as well as symptom development and maintenance for a wide variety of clinical populations.
  • Critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses including the cultural-specific limitations of projective testing instruments and thereby increase clinical sophistication in referring individuals for testing and in reading psychological reports.
  • Develop listening skills that attend to and accurately decipher manifest content, latent content, and interactive influences between self and other.
  • Integrate data from multiple sources (e.g., background information, clinical observations, projective test results) into accurate, concise, well-written, and meaningful reports in a manner deeply respectful to issues of diversity and difference.
  • To appreciate the strategies used to interpret the results of projective personality tests and thereby gain a deeper understanding of personality functioning as well as symptom development and maintenance. These strategies include analysis of theme, intra-psychic and interpersonal needs, and preoccupations and defensive styles.

TEXT:

Required:

Exner, John. A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th Edition)

Exner, John (2003). The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System. Volume 1: The Rorschach, basic foundations and principles of interpretation. Wiley and Sons: New York. ISBN 0-471-38672-3

Levy, Ascher. A Beginner’s Workbook for the Interpretation of the Rorschach Comprehensive System

Two readings do not have ISBN numbers, as they are a workbook and a guide. Please be aware that neither will be immediately required.

The packet by ISPP faculty Dr. Levy will be coordinated through the school.

The workbook's full title by Dr. Exner is called:

"A Rorschach Workbook for the Comprehensive System, 5th Ed." - J.E. Exner, Jr. (2001).

It is readily available for $45.00 at:

Wood, J.M., Nezworski, M.T., Lilienfeld, S.O, Garb, H.N (2003). What’s Wrong with the Rorschach? Science Confronts the Controversial Inkblot Test. Wiley and Sons: New York. ISBN#: 0-7879-6056-X

Suggested: (and Reserve)

Course Packet

Allison, Blatt and Zimet (1988). The Interpretation of Psychological Tests.

Bellak, L. and Abrams, D.M. (1997). The TAT, CAT and SAT in clinical use (6th Edition).Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Groth-Marnat, Gary. (2003). Handbook of Psychological Assessment (4th Edition).

Henry, W. (1973). The analysis of fantasy: The Thematic apperception technique in the study of personality.

Rabin, A. I. (1981). Assessment with projective techniques. New York: Springer (BA)

Rapaport D., Gill, M and Schafer, R. (1968) Diagnostic Psychological Testing.

Course Packet and Recommended Readings:

Barbopoulos, A., Fisharah, F., Clark, J., & Khatib, A. (2002). Comparison of

Egyptian and Canadian children on a picture apperception test.

Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8(4), 395-403.

Cramer, P. (1999). Future directions for the Thematic Apperception Test. Journal

of Personality Assessment, 72(1), 74-92.

Dana, R. H. (1993). Assessment I: An emic perspective. In Multicultural assessment perspectives for professional psychology (pp. 141-166).Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Dana, R.H. (1998). Projective assessment of Latinos in the United States: current

realities, problems and prospects. Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, 4(3),

165-184.

Garb, H., Lilienfield, S., Wood, J., & Nezworski, M.T. (2001). Toward a resolution of the

Rorschach controversy. Psychological Assessment, 13(4), 433-448.

Garb, H., Lilienfield, S., Wood, J., & Nezworski, M.T. (2002). Effective use of projective

techniques in clinical practice: let the data help with selection and interpretation.

Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 33(5), 454-463.

Hibbard, S., Tang, C.Y.P., Bolz, S., & Somerville, A. (2000). Differential validity of the

Defense mechanism manual for the TAT between Asian Americans and Whites.

Journal of Personality Assessment, 75(3), 351-372.

Holaday, M., Smith, D.A., & Sherry, A. (2000). Sentence completion tests:

A review of the literature and results of a survey of members of the society for

personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74(3), 371-383.

Lerner, P.M. (1991). Major scores: The dimensions of the Rorschach. In Psychoanalytic

Theory and the Rorschach (pp.67-93). Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.

Schafer, R. (1982) Thematic Analysis. In Psychoanalytic interpretation in Rorschach testing.

(pp. 114-139). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Smith, D. & Dumont, F. (1995). A cautionary study: Unwarranted interpretations of the

Draw A Person test. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 26, 298-303.

Vass, Z. (1998). The inner formal structure of the H-T-P drawings: An exploratory study.

Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54(5), 611-619.

Weiner, I, B. (2001). Advancing the science of psychological assessment: the Rorschach

Inkblot Method as exemplar. Psychological Assessment, 13(4), 423-432.

Curricular Map:

This assessment course is developmentally appropriate for second doctoral students. It is designed to meet three primary curricular goals: Psychodiagnostic Assessmen, Human Diversity, and Scholarship.

Goal 1: Prepare professional psychologists to accurately, effectively, and ethically select, administer, score, interpret, and communicate findings of appropriate assessment methods informed by accepted psychometric standards and sensitive to the diverse characteristics and needs of clients.

Goal 3: Prepare professional psychologists to analyze the complexity and multidimensionality of human diversity, and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to understand diverse worldviews and the potential meaning of social, cultural, and individual differences for professional psychological services.

Goal 5: Prepare professional psychologists to critically evaluate the current and evolving body of scholarly literature in psychology to inform professional practice.

This course accomplishes these goals by the course objectives listed below, as well as by emphasis on:

1)The Theory, Science and Practice of Psychometric and psychodiagnostic principles.

2)The selction, administration and scoring of metrics with volunteers.

3)Attention to Emic and Etic perspectives on assessment, dignostics and psychometrics.

4)The writing of reports that integrate and synthesize overt and covert psychological data with attantion to human diversity and development, limitations of metric insturuments, and the Projective Hypothesis.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

Course Objective / Program Goal / Method of Assessment
Demonstrate working knowledge of the interpretation of apperception tests / Goal 1-Assessment / Assignments 1,3 and Final
Demonstrate working knowledge of the interpretation of the Rorschach Inkblot Test and the Exner System / Goal 1-Assessment / Assignments 2, 4 and
Final
Demonstrate working knowledge of the interpretation of other Projective Techniques / Goal 1-Assessment / Final Assignment
Compare empirical support for and against the use of projective techniques / Goal 1-Assessment
Goal 4- Historical Context / Classroom discussion
Psychometric Quiz
Examine issues of diversity in regards to response and interpretation of projective tests / Goal 3- Diversity / All assignments
Demonstrate knowledge of scoring and interpretation of test materials / Goal 1-Assessment / All written assignments
Evaluate the use of quantitative versus qualitative test data / Goal 1-Assessment
Goal 5- Scholarship / Psychometric Quiz
Demonstrate use of direct vs. indirect data in psychological testing / Goal 1-Assessment / Psychometric Quiz
Develop more advanced proficiency in conceptualization of case material / Goal 1-Assessment / Assignments 3, 4 and Final
Synthesize projective material into conceptual whole / Goal 1-Assessment / Final Assignment

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND SCHEDULE OF ASSIGNMENTS:

Grading requirements:Grading scale:

A / 100 – 93
A- / 92 – 90
B+ / 89 – 88
B / 87 – 83
B- / 82 – 80
C+ / 79 – 78
C / 77 - 73
C- / 72 – 70
D+ / 69 – 68
D / 67 – 63
D- / 62 – 60
F / 59 and below
Project 1: Case 1: Background Information, Observation, and TAT/CAT / 15%
Project 2: Case 1: Project 1 plus: Projective Drawings & Sentence
Completion and integrated analysis / 30%
Project 3: In-vivo Rorschach Administration with TA, Weekly Scoring / 10%
Project 4: Case 2: Background Information, Observation, and Rorschach
(Including Structural Summary) / 35%
Attendance & Participation / 10%
100%

Project 1:Students conduct a mock clinical interview and administer 10 TAT or CAT cards, Projective Drawings (DAP, DAPOS, DAPIR, DAT, DAH, and KFD), and a sentence completion test to an adult or child volunteer (i.e., Case 1).** The subject must not be related to or in a professional or meaningful personal relationship with the student, and an appropriately executed release must be obtained prior to interviewing and testing (a copy will be provided in class). Under no circumstance may students provide feedback about the testing results to their subjects or their parent(s). The submitted project (stapled, double-spaced unless otherwise indicated, traditional font, and one-inch margins) includes the following sections (use underlined words only as section headers) that should immediately follow each other (see Project Guidelines for additional information):

  • Cover Page
  • Confirmation of Signed Release to Test form (signed name partially redacted)
  • Demographic Information (adequately disguised)
  • Background Information
  • Behavioral Observations
  • TAT/CAT Transcript & Analyses: Verbatim transcript (single-spaced) of entire protocol with analyses of five (5) responses (double-spaced) inserted directly under the transcription for that card
  • Note: Although analyzing 5 responses, administer all 10 cards for later interpretation.
  • Drawings (single spaced inquiries and responses following each drawing; no interpretations necessary)
  • Sentence Completion form (no interpretations necessary)
  • Analysis of Contextual Factors (i.e., interactive influences between self and other)
  • Self-Critique

Project 2:Students complete the analysis of each test from Project 1 by providing an interpretation for each of the ten (10) TAT/CAT responses, one integrated interpretation for all of the projective drawings, and one integrated interpretation for the sentence completion test. They may add to, remove, or change interpretations proposed in the initial project based upon additional insights and information including instructor and TA feedback. Drawing upon the salient features gleaned from all available data (e.g., background, observations, all testing data, TA/instructor feedback), students add an integrated Personality Functioning section before the Analysis of Contextual Factors. Before the Self-Critique, students should add a Conceptualization Changes section that addresses any interpretive differences between this and the initial project (i.e., provide an explanation of how inclusion of additional data from the same protocol influenced subsequent analyses). Similarly, students should augment the Self-Critique to reflect additional insights gained during the completion of this project.

Project 3:Students will administer one Rorschach in the presence of the TA. Students are encouraged to use each other for this project. The TAs will provide available times for this assignment.

Project 4:Students conduct a mock clinical interview and administer the Rorschach to a child (preferably 8+ years) or adult volunteer (i.e., Case 2).** The subject must not be related to or in a professional or meaningful personal relationship with the student, an appropriately executed release must be obtained prior to interviewing and testing, and under no circumstances can students provide feedback to subjects or their parent(s). The submitted project follows the same guidelines as Project 1 and includes the following sections:

  • Cover Page
  • Copy of signed consent form (signed name partially redacted)
  • Demographic Information (adequately disguised)
  • Background Information
  • Behavioral Observations
  • Rorschach Transcript (single-spaced with Response and Inquiry columns),
  • Rorschach Sequence of Scores form
  • Completed Structural Summary, Location Sheet, and Constellation Worksheet
  • Analysis of Contextual Factors (i.e., interactive influences between self and other)
  • Self-Critique

Labs/Teaching Assistant Sessions: Students are expected to attend a weekly Lab/TA Sessions, syllabi for these meetings will be provided by the Teaching Assistant. These sessions are provided to offer assistance primarily in the technical (scoring) and applied (administration) dimensions of testing and assessment. Two absences (or the equivalent in tardiness or early departures) and/or any failure to contact the TA or instructor about an absence will result in either course failure or permission to withdraw from the course.

Attendance & Participation: Full class attendance is required. If a student must miss a class or a portion of it, she or he must notify the instructor at the earliest possible time. Two absences (or the equivalent in tardiness or early departures) and/or any failure to contact the instructor about an absence will result in either course failure or permission to withdraw from the course. No exceptions will be granted.

As a significant portion of the course is reserved for discussion and interactive exercises, students are expected to participate actively and consistently in their learning through thoughtful questions and commentary. The instructor retains the right to adjust overall course grades based upon course participation.

Project Submission Requirements: Projects must be submitted to the instructor by the beginning of class time on the date the projects are due. Unless previously arranged or due to emergent circumstances, failure to submit a project by its deadline (i.e., the beginning of class on the dates assigned) results in the following deductions:

Project Not Submitted by Beginning of Class Time:10% deduction

Project Not Submitted by the End of Class Time:20% deduction

Project Not Submitted by 4:30 p.m. the next day:No Credit

Printer/computer problems, heavy traffic, health concerns of non-immediate family members, difficulty obtaining a volunteer, etc. are not considered “emergent” circumstances, and no “make-up” opportunities will be available under such circumstances. Students may be required to verify “emergency situations” in writing and with appropriate documentation. Projects may be delivered to the instructor by facsimile or by e-mail to meet established deadlines, but technological difficulties in doing so results in deductions as described above. The instructor retains the right to determine if a proposed “emergent circumstance” warrants a project extension.

**Selection of Volunteers:

In order to ensure ethical practice, anyone you select as a volunteer to be tested must be someone with whom you do not have a prior relationship. It is important to take precautions against testing someone whom you may have casual contact through a mutual acquaintance. Feedback may include clinical observations of the person tested. It is not appropriate for me to comment on the psychological adjustment of someone with whom you have an indirect relationship. Also, under no circumstances should you provide any feedback to your volunteer. This should be clearly stated before testing and the subject or the subject’s parent should provide informed consent for participation. If you do have questions about the suitability of any given volunteer, please feel free to speak with me. Also, please take necessary precautions to disguised the identity and protect the confidentiality of your volunteer.

Other Expectations:

1) We are covering a great deal of material in one semester and therefore attendance at all classes is expected. Any student who misses more than two classes will not receive a passing grade for the course or will be given permission to withdraw from the course. All absences or partial absences must be discussed with the instructor at the earliest possible time.

2) Students are expected to participate actively and consistently in their learning through thoughtful questions and commentary.

3) All assignments must be submitted to the instructor by the beginning of class time on the date the projects are due. Unless previously arranged or due to emergent circumstances, failure to submit a project by the beginning of class will receive a half a grade deduction. Any project not submitted by the end of the day on Thursday (4:30 p.m.) will receive no credit.

4) All assignments are to be done independently and without consultation with other class members. If you have questions about an assignment, research the matter carefully and then consult with either the instructor or the T.A.

5) Attendance at weekly TA sessions/Labs.

COURSE SCHEDULE & OUTLINE

Week / Topic / Reading / Assignment
1 –1/13/10 / Course Introduction & Overview with TA
2 –1/20/10 / History and Systems of Projective Measures
Rorschach Primer / Rabin, A. I. (1981). Projective Methods: A historical introduction. In A. I. Rabin (Ed.), Assessment with projective techniques (pp. 1-22). New York: Springer.
3 - 1/27/10 / The Dynamics of the Testing Situation
Review of Defense Mechanisms
Strengths, Limitation and Culture in Projective Assessment / Dana, R. H. (1993). Assessment I: An emic perspective. In Multicultural assessment perspectives for professional psychology (pp. 141-166). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
4 - 02/3/10 / Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) / Garb, H., Lilienfield, S., Wood, J., & Nezworski, M.T. (2002). Effective use of projective techniques in clinical practice: let the data help with selection and interpretation. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 33(5), 454-463.
Groth-Marnat, G. (1997). The Thematic Apperception Test. In Handbook of psychological assessment (3rd ed., pp. 458-498). New York: Wiley.
5 - 2/17/10 / Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) (Continued) / Barbopoulos, A., Fisharah, F., Clark, J., & Khatib, A. (2002). Comparison of Egyptian and Canadian children on a picture apperception test.Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8(4), 395-403.
Dana, R.H. (1998). Projective assessment of Latinos in the United States: current realities, problems and prospects. Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, 4(3), 165-184.
Hibbard, S., Tang, C.Y.P., Bolz, S., & Somerville, A. (2000). Differential validity of the Defense mechanism manual for the TAT between Asian Americans and Whites. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75(3), 351-372.
6 - 2/24/10 / Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) (Continued)
Children’s Apperception Test (CAT) / Haworth, M. R. (1986). Children’s Apperception Test. In A. I. Rabin (Ed.), Projective techniques for adolescents and children (pp. 37-72). New York: Springer.
Haworth, M. R. (1966). CAT studies with normal children. In The CAT: Facts about fantasy (pp. 62-88). New York: Grune & Stratton.
Palmer, J. (1983). Assessment of children from different cultures. In The psychological assessment of children (2nd ed., pp. 499-514). New York: Wiley. / Project 1 Due
7 - 3/3/10 / Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) (Continued)
Tell Me A Story (TEMAS) / Groth-Marnat, G. (1997). Projective drawings. In Handbook of psychological assessment (3rd ed., pp. 499-533). New York: Wiley.
Hammer, E. F. (1981). Projective drawings. In A. I. Rabin (Ed.), Assessment with projective techniques (pp. 151-186). New York: Springer.
Handler, L. & Habenicht, D. (1994). The kinetic family drawing technique: A review of the literature. Jounal of Personality Assessment, 62, 440-464.
8 - 3/10/10 / Projective Drawings
Sentence Completion Test / Smith, D. & Dumont, F. (1995). A cautionary study: Unwarranted interpretations of the Draw-A-Person test. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 298-303.
Vass, Z. (1998). The inner formal structure of the H-T-P drawings: An exploratory study. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54(5), 611-619.
Holaday, M., Smith, D.A., & Sherry, A. (2000). Sentence completion tests: A review of the literature and results of a survey of members of the society for personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74(3), 371-383.
Smith, D. & Dumont, F. (1995). A cautionary study: Unwarranted interpretations of the Draw A Person test. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 26, 298-303.
9 - 3/17/10 / Test Integration
Personality Functioning
Exner Clusters / Lah, M. I. (1989). Sentence completion tests. In C. S. Newmark (Ed.), Major psychological assessment instruments (pp. 133-163). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
10 - 3/24/10 / Rorschach Review, Administration, and Scoring / Exner, J. E. (2001). Procedures. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 2-23). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 3-39). New York: Wiley. / Project 2 Due
11 - 3/31/10 / Rorschach Scoring / Exner, J. E. (2001). Location and developmental quality. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 24-29). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). Determinants. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 30-46). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). Form quality. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 47-53). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). Contents and populars. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 54-58). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). Organizational activity. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 59-61). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). Special Scores. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 62-80). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 134-146). New York: Wiley
12 - 4/7/10 / The Exner Structural Summary / Exner, J. E. (2001). A strategy for scoring. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 81-88). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2001). The structural summary. In A Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (5th ed., pp. 88-101). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 147-155). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 161-185). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 217- 229). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 231-256). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 280-330). New York: Wiley / Project 3 Due No Later than 4/7/10
13 -4/14/10 / Exner Interpretation / Garb, H., Lilienfield, S., Wood, J., & Nezworski, M.T. (2001). Toward a resolution of the Rorschach controversy. Psychological Assessment, 13(4), 433-448.
Weiner, I, B. (2001). Advancing the science of psychological assessment: the Rorschach Inkblot Method as exemplar. Psychological Assessment, 13(4), 423-432. / Project 4 Due
14 - 4/21/10 / Exner Interpretation Guidelines (Continued)
Major Scores on the Rorschach / Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 335-362). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 364-394). New York: Wiley.
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 399-441). New York: Wiley
Exner, J. E. (2003). In The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Volume 1: Basic foundations and Principles of Interpretation (4th ed., pp. 445-485). New York: Wiley
Schafer, R. (1982). Thematic analysis. In Psychoanalytic interpretation in Rorschach testing (pp. 114-139). Boston: Allyn & Bacon
15 -4/31/10 / Finals Week – No Class / Project 5 Due

Teaching Assistant Labs & Study Sessions: