Emergency Remote Training in Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy: An Initial Assessment from Columbia

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic and the social distancing required to combat it have set in motion an experiment in psychoanalytic education of unprecedented scope. Following an abrupt shift from in-person study to remote classes, supervision, clinical work, and training analyses, the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research polled its psychotherapy and psychoanalysis trainees to assess their initial experience of remote training. Most candidates found the technical aspects of online learning easy and were satisfied with remote training overall. Across all programs, most trainees considered class length and reading load about right and felt their class participation was unaffected, though they found it harder to concentrate. Most found it no harder to start a training case, felt the shift to remote supervision had no negative effect, and were satisfied with seeing their training analyst remotely. Most trainees preferred in-person classes, clinical work, and training analyses to those offered remotely, yet in light of the health risks they said they were less likely to continue training in fall 2020 if in-person work resumed. Trainees suggested several modifications of teaching techniques to improve their participation and concentration in class. These findings’ implications for the debate regarding remote training in psychoanalysis are explored.