European Association for Transactional Analysis
EATA Training and Examinations Handbook

Section 8 – The CTA Written Examination

This section explains the purpose, structure, requirements and evaluation of the CTA Written Examination across the four fields of specialization.

Aspect Key points Who is involved
Purpose Demonstrate integration of core competences in the chosen field and ethical, theoretically based TA practice. Candidate, principal supervisor, evaluators.
Structure Four sections: A self‑portrayal (20%), B learning (10%), C case/project study (35%), D six theory questions (35%). Applies to counselling, educational, organizational and psychotherapy fields.
Formal requirements Anonymous, within word limit (24,000–26,500), double‑spaced, structured, with full references and bibliography. Candidate, Principal Supervisor, Language Coordinator.
Scoring & pass mark Sections scored separately, total 100%; pass normally at ≥65% and all four sections completed with ≥6 theory answers. Evaluators, Examination Coordinator, CoC/PTSC.
Evaluation process Supervisor pre‑check, 1–3 evaluators using a scoring scale, DEI and accessibility guidelines, built‑in appeal route. Principal supervisor, Language Coordinator, exam evaluators, PTSC/CoC.

Contents

8.1 Introduction and Overview

Important

As part of PTSC’s commitment to fostering inclusive and psychologically safe learning and assessment environments, we invite all those involved in training and examinations to give careful consideration to any accessibility or support needs—whether their own or those of the candidate. These needs may relate to neurodiversity, disability, mental or physical health, cultural or linguistic background, or other aspects of lived experience. To facilitate this process, the Expression of Accessibility Requirements Form (13.4.7) is available as a structured means of identifying and communicating any adjustments or support that may enhance participation and performance. This form can be completed or updated at any time and shared, as appropriate, with trainers, supervisors, examiners, or other relevant individuals. Engaging with this process actively supports equitable access to learning and assessment, and promotes dignity, respect, and understanding for all.

8.1.1 The purpose of the Written Examination

The purpose of the Written Examination is to demonstrate that the candidate has integrated the core competences of his/her/their chosen field of application and how he/she/they work effectively and ethically as a theoretically based Transactional Analyst.

8.1.2 Overview of the Written Examination

The Written Examination consists of four sections:
A. Self‑portrayal of the candidate and of his/her/their work as a Transactional Analyst.
B. Report on the learning experiences gained during TA training.
C. The client case or project study.
D. Theory and literature. The candidate is required to answer six questions on TA theory and practical application of it.

8.1.3 Field of specialization

The Written Examination must be within the candidate’s declared field of specialization. The Written Examination evaluator will decide if this is the case. If the evaluator is unsure about the field, he/she/they will refer the Written Examination back to the candidate’s Language Group Coordinator for a decision. In case of dispute, the Supervising Examiner will make the final decision.

8.1.4 Language and translation

The Written Examination can be written in any language, for which there are examiners available. There is no requirement to translate it for the Oral Examination.

8.1.5 Anonymity

The Written Examination must be anonymous. This is the candidate’s responsibility. There must be no indication in the text that might allow the candidate, Principal Supervisor or trainers to be identified. This requirement is to protect the candidate. If the candidate explicitly identifies his/her/their training institute or trainer in his/her/their written exam, the exam will automatically be returned to the candidate. The identity of a psychotherapy or counselling Case Study client must be disguised. Anonymity must be preserved in all fields. It is the responsibility of both candidate and Principal Supervisor to make sure that permission has been obtained to use the clinical or case material used for the written exam.

8.1.6 Total length

English and German language Written Examinations have a maximum word limit of 24,000; French and Italian language written examination have a maximum word limit of 26,500. Other language equivalents cannot exceed the maximum word limit of 26,000. Changes can be suggested by Language Coordinators and will be decided by the Professional Training Standards Committee (PTSC). The candidate, on sending the Language Coordinator his/her/their written examination, has to also send a signed statement of the number of words in their written exam.

Diagrams and the bibliography may be included in the Written Examination in addition to the word limit. In special cases the Language Group Coordinator may give permission also for an appendix to be included; such an appendix may only be, for example, clarification of a work context or project. It must not contain information that would normally be included in the exam itself and would form part of the formal evaluation.

8.1.7 Presentation

The Written Examination must be:

  • Word processed using font type: Arial or other accessible font, size 12.
  • A complete reference list of all concepts and authors cited in the exam must be included. A bibliography to indicate other reading and research that has informed the case study and other theories and approaches that have influenced the candidate may also be given separately.
  • Either the Harvard or APA style of referencing should be used.
  • Written double‑spaced throughout, the bibliography and any transcripts may be single‑spaced.
  • The word count has to be declared on the front page of the exam.
  • The field of the candidate has to be clearly identified on the front page.

Candidate must ensure that there is a consistency between the way he/she/they use and comments on TA theory, literature and the processes described throughout.

Each page should:

  • Have good margins.
  • Be numbered consecutively throughout the examination document.

8.1.8 Scoring for each section and final evaluation

All parts of the Written Examination must be answered. The sections are weighted as follows: A = 20%; B = 10%; C = 35% and D = 35%. An overall percentage score of 100% would indicate a faultless pass. The Written Examination will be deferred if the total score is less than 65% or if it does not meet the requirements set out in 8.6.6.

8.2 The Counselling Written Examination

Candidates need to refer to the core competences (see Section 2) on which the exam will be assessed, they also need to make sure to include evidence of them throughout the exam, as well as ensure that the presentation is coherent and has a clear structure.

The answers to the following questions should be as concise as possible.

8.2.1 Section A. Professional self‑portrayal

This part of the Written Examination carries 20% of the total marks.

The candidate is asked to describe the context of his/her/their working style and his/her/their identity as a Transactional Analyst Counsellor in his/her/their field of application.

  • Describe your profession, the context of your work (organisational structure, client population, client system etc.) and your identity as a Transactional Analyst using transactional analysis (TA) in the Counselling field of application.
  • Include the kind of issues, presenting problems and resources which make up the context of your practice and how this influences your work as a Transactional Analyst.

8.2.2 Section B. Candidate’s learning experience and personal development during TA training

This part of the Written Examination carries 10% of the total marks.

  • Describe your development during TA training and your reasons for choosing TA.
  • Reflect on important learning experiences which are significant for the development of your identity as a TA Counsellor.
  • State your position on ethical, professional and legal aspects, which are important for your work.
  • What challenging experiences have you had while learning/using TA?
  • How have these experiences influenced the development of your professional identity as a TA practitioner in your chosen field?

8.2.3 Section C. The Project/Case Study

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

The Project/Case Study is to be taken from your chosen field of application; it should be typical for your professional practice in this field. The Project/Case Study is to show the Counselling core competences in practical application and theoretical background.

The description of the process should clearly demonstrate your role/s and professional identity in TA Counselling.

Section C can be either:

  • A Project Study from Transactional Analyst’s area of professional work. It has to be a longitudinal or cross section study, including planning, implementation and evaluation, e.g. pastoral care in a hospital, counselling with individuals and groups in a social institution, management coaching in a company etc.
  • Or
    A Case Study, showing the counselling process of a specific client or client system covering a specific period of time.

Some practical hints:

  • Include only relevant data; include what is necessary to understand the specific professional competences you want to show in your Written Exam.
  • Conceptualise how and why you are effective and with which interventions you stimulate the problem solving or change in client/ client system.
  • Indicate the Project/Case Study time schedule.

The points below are a suggested structure for your Project/Case Study (for guidance only).

  1. Abstract
    Very short summary of Project/Case Study
  2. Context
    Description of the Counselling context: client, organizational and/or institutional background, any relevant aspects of the system, hierarchical aspects etc.
  3. Analysis of situation (Assessment)
    The presenting problem and strengths of client/client system and your definition of the problem, strengths and resources of the client/client system, first hypotheses, intuitions, reflections on your own strengths and limits as TA Counsellor, collection of additional data, analysis, verifying of the first hypothesis.
  4. Establishing Counselling relationship and contract/s
    The process of creating a trusting counselling relationship, its philosophical and theoretical basis, process, theory and candidate’s own thinking about contracting.
  5. Design of the Counselling treatment plan or planning strategy
    Considerations, methods and strategies, derived from above (2‑4) to design the Counselling interventions. Identification of long‑ and short‑term goals. Discussion of the considerations, methods and strategies by using TA. Other concepts and methods may also be included. Comment on basic ideas and values of importance for the designed Counselling process.
  6. Counselling process report
    Description of the co‑creative process of counselling by using relevant TA concepts: significant steps of realization of the designed counselling process, different stages, specific examples of effective measures and interventions, management of ineffective phases, changes in planning, contracting and realization, prevention, resource‑oriented solutions, personal development and the management of crisis.
  7. Evaluation and prognosis
    Quality assurance: criteria to measure change, process evaluation and completion of contracts.
    Prognosis: present state of counselling process, possible future aspects, further steps to desirable development.
    How do you evaluate the changes generated through your intervention?
  8. Concluding remarks
    Reflections on own personal and professional learning experiences, while working on this project or case.
  9. Bibliography

8.2.4 Section D. How candidate deals with theory and literature

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate your theoretical understanding of TA concepts and models. You are required to answer six questions from the list provided below.

Theoretical presentation means providing a definition and description of the general concept leading to an analysis and explanation of its use, and showing connections, where appropriate, to other TA concepts. It is also expected that examples illustrating specific concepts will be provided to extend your explanation. Candidates have the option to choose the clients they wish to discuss in their Section D. This can be the Section C case study client or any other client they have worked with.

Where necessary additional illustrative material can be used and must be taken from within the counselling field. All examples are to be set out briefly and concisely.

There are two ways in which you can present your responses to the six questions, all of which are designed to integrate coherently with the project/case study in Section C. The important point is to be clear at the outset of your study where and how the six theoretical questions will be answered. Here are the two options:

  1. The responses can be set out as a separate section.
  2. The responses can be set out separately within Section C as an extended commentary on a specific theme.

A combination of these is possible, for example, two responses provided as an extended commentary and four responses in a separate section. With regard to Option 2 it is important to alert the reader exactly where the response begins and ends in Section C.

Finally, it is important that there is coherence and consistency in your treatment of the theory questions, example material used and where appropriate, the Section C narrative.

The Questions

  1. Describe your personal style of transactional analysis counselling, comparing, contrasting and critiquing to the major approaches and those concepts you emphasize.
  2. Describe an aspect of recent developments (approximately the last 10‑ 15 years) in transactional analysis theory. How do you evaluate them and how have they influenced your thinking and practice.
  3. What do you see as the main aims of counselling in your professional practice? What transactional analysis concepts do you use to facilitate this?
  4. Describe the benefits of formulating an overall plan of the counselling process. What do you take into account when you are planning interventions?
  5. What TA concepts do you use to analyse the counselling context? How does this influence the way you work with different types of client/client systems?
  6. What TA concepts do you use to understand the origin of psychological problems? Show how this relates to your ideas on psychological well‑ being or ‘cure’?
  7. Describe how you understand the counselling relationship. Show how this relates to TA concepts, and how it influences the way you work?
  8. What model(s) or concepts do you use to understand intrapsychic process, and how does this influence the way you work?
  9. What model(s) or concepts do you use to understand interpersonal relationships and communication, and how does this influence the way you work?
  10. How do you use contracting to enhance the counselling process?
  11. What concepts do you use to work with couples, families, groups or teams with special requests and needs? How do these concepts influence the way you work?
  12. Choose a topic or issue in counselling you would like to deal with theoretically using TA concepts, and show, how do these concepts influence your work.
  13. Describe a research project you are aware of or have been involved in and discuss the implications for transactional analysis theory and/or practice.

8.3 Educational Written Examination

Candidates need to refer to the core competences (see Section 2) on which the exam will be assessed, they also need to make sure to include evidence of them throughout the exam, as well as ensure that the presentation is coherent and has a clear structure.

The answers to the following questions should be as concise as possible.

8.3.1 Section A. Professional Self‑portrayal.

This part of the Written Examination carries 20% of the total marks.

  1. Describe the context of your work and your identity as a Transactional Analyst Educator in your field of application including the following information:
    • What is your professional title and qualifications to undertake your work as an educator? Include any specialism you may have.
    • What is your job description?
    • Who are your colleagues?
    • What is your place within the organisation?
    • Who are the individuals and/or groups with whom you work? Indicate their particular characteristics and educational needs
  2. Describe the main focus of your professional practice and what contribution TA makes to your work.
  3. Comment on the professional, ethical and legal matters relevant to your profession.

8.3.2 Section B. Report and reflect on learning experiences gained during training and personal development.

This part of the Written Examination carries 10% of the total marks.

  1. Describe the importance of TA in your personal development and how it has influenced you professionally.
  2. When and why did you choose to undertake TA training, and with what purpose in mind?
  3. How has this impacted your career pathway, if at all?
  4. What challenging experiences have you had while learning/using TA?
  5. How have these experiences influenced the development of your professional identity as an educator and as a TA practitioner in your chosen field?

8.3.3 Section C. The Case/Project Study

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

Choose your case‑study/project to demonstrate

  • The main focus of your educational practice.
  • Your identity as an educational TA practitioner.
  • The work described in the case‑study should show the development of a project from first contact, through the contracting process, planning and implementation to completion and evaluation. Throughout, your overall analysis and ongoing analytical reflection should be clear to the reader.

Show the impact of your involvement including:

  • Your role with respect to all parties to the contract.
  • Effectiveness of interventions.
  • Learning – for yourself as well as for the participants.
  • Feedback and assessment of changes achieved.

Practical tips:

  • All information needs to be related to the work described.
  • Time schedule needs to be indicated.

NOTE ‑ in the education field, where contracts are often “multi‑cornered”, the term “client” can refer to various participants in a contract for example an education institution, a student, a group of learners etc., according to the context.

The points below are a suggested structure for your Project/Case Study (for guidance only).

  1. Abstract
    A short summary/overview of the project
  2. Context
    Describe the educational context or setting of the work – general data about the organization/institution/school/group, relevant background and history, social, cultural and demographic information, people involved in the work, numbers and roles.
  3. Needs Assessment
    Present both the client’s assessment and your own assessment of the needs in the situation. What were your initial proposals and ideas about possible interventions/input?
    – this may refer to a “problem” or to a need for learning/development or to a desired change (in culture, or in working practice of the institution or group/part within it).
    Include reflection on your own values, resources and ideas, and how they ‘fit’ with those of the participants in the project.
  4. Contract
    Describe the contract, agreements, aims and goals of the work. Refer to TA concepts related to contracting for example multiparty contracting, levels of contract.
  5. Planning and Design
    What factors did you take into account in your planning and design? What methods and strategies did you propose to use and why? Which TA concepts informed your thinking and practical strategies? Describe both those you used as an internal analytic framework for yourself and those you planned to use overtly with the participants.
  6. Implementation
    What happened? Describe the process of the work including its stages, effective and less effective strategies and measures used, changes you made as the work progressed, how you used feedback from participants. Show your critical reflection throughout.
  7. Evaluation
    What criteria did you use to evaluate change and/or development? How far was the contract fulfilled? Include feedback from client organization where appropriate and from the full range of participants.
    Describe any possible future developments.
    How do you evaluate the changes generated through your intervention?
  8. Conclusion
    Looking back, reflect on your own experience and learning throughout the project. What have you gained? And what are you taking forward? Discuss how your learning from this project will inform your work in future.

8.3.4 Section D. Questions on theory and literature

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate your theoretical understanding of TA concepts and models. You are required to answer six questions from the list provided below.

Theoretical presentation means providing a definition and description of the general concept leading to an analysis and explanation of its use, and showing connections, where appropriate, to other TA concepts.

It is also expected that examples illustrating specific concepts will be provided to extend your explanation.

Candidates have the option to choose the clients they wish to discuss in their Section D. This can be the Section C case study client or any other client they have worked with.

Where necessary additional illustrative material can be used and must be taken from within the educational field. All examples are to be set out briefly and concisely.

There are two ways in which you can present your responses to the six questions, all of which are designed to integrate coherently with the project study in Section C. The important point is to be clear at the outset of your study where and how the six theoretical questions will be answered. Here are the two options:

  1. The responses can be set out as a separate section.
  2. The responses can be set out separately within Section C as an extended commentary on a specific theme.

A combination of these is possible, for example two responses provided as an extended commentary and four responses in a separate section. With regard to Option 2 it is important to alert the reader exactly where the response begins and ends in Section C.

Finally, it is important that there is coherence and consistency in your treatment of the theory questions, example material used and where appropriate, the Section C narrative.

The Questions

  1. Describe your personal style of educational TA, referring, comparing, contrasting and critiquing two major approaches and the concepts you emphasize.
  2. Describe an aspect of recent development (approximately 10‑15 years) in TA theory. How do you evaluate it and how has it influenced your thinking and practice?
  3. What do you see as the main aims of education in your professional practice? What TA concepts do you use to promote these?
  4. Describe your overall plan for an educational project. What factors in the context might you take account of in this plan (resource, ethical issues)?
  5. What TA concepts do you use to assess learning needs? How does this influence the way you work in different contexts with participants to the contract and with others involved?
  6. What are the overall goals and values guiding you in your work? What relationship is there between these and ideas about cure in TA literature?
  7. Describe how you understand the teaching/learning relationship. Show how this relates to TA concepts and how it influences the way you work.
  8. What models or concepts do you use to understand intra‑psychic processes and how does this influence the way you work?
  9. What models or concepts do you use to understand interpersonal relationships and communication, and how does this influence the way you work?
  10. How do you use contracting to enhance the teaching/learning process?
  11. What concepts do you use to work with individuals or groups with special (educational) needs? How do these concepts influence the way you work?
  12. Choose a subject you would like to deal with theoretically. If the subject is not taken from TA show the relationship to TA concepts and ways of intervening.
  13. Describe a research project you are aware of or have been involved in. Discuss the implications for TA theory and/or practice.

8.4 The Organizational Written Examination

Candidates need to refer to the core competences (see Section 2) on which the exam will be assessed, they also need to make sure to include evidence of them throughout the exam, as well as ensure that the presentation is coherent and has a clear structure.

The answers to the following questions should be as concise as possible.

8.4.1 Section A. Professional self‑portrayal

This part of the Written Examination is worth 20% of the total marks

Describe the context of your work and your identity as a Transactional Analyst in the organizational field of application including the following information:

  • What is your professional title and qualifications to undertake your work? Include any specialism you may have.
  • What is your job description?
  • Where do you work, together with whom, and what is the organisational frame of reference?
  • Describe the population and the different “diagnostic” categories or other characteristic features of the clients you deal with.
  • Describe the main focus of your professional practice and what contribution TA makes to your work.
  • Comment on the professional, ethical and legal matters relevant to your profession.

8.4.2 Section B. Candidate’s learning experience and personal development during TA training

This part of the Written Examination carries 10% of the total marks.

Report and reflect on learning experiences gained during training:

  1. Describe the importance of TA in your personal development and how it has influenced you professionally.
  2. When and why did you choose to undertake TA training, and with what purpose in mind?
  3. How has this impacted your career pathway, if at all?
  4. What challenging experiences have you had while learning/using TA?
  5. How have these experiences influenced the development of your professional identity and as a TA practitioner in your chosen field?

8.4.3 Section C. The Case/Project Study

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

Preliminary remarks:

The case/project study is to be taken from the candidate’s main field of application; it should be typical of the field of application.

In the organizational field the client is the organization or organizational system (see sec 2)

A project is a Transactional Analyst’s area of work for which you present a short medium‑ or long‑term design regarding development, realization and evaluation.

The project also is to show practical realization and theoretical background.

Examples of possible projects can also be:

  • Work as a management consultant on organizational interventions or related to human resource development activities (e.g. equal opportunities, team building).
  • Work as an adviser on educational curricula or teaching methods applied within an organization.

It is important for the candidate to make sure that the presentation as a whole is coherent.

Indicate the project’s time schedule. Clearly show your own role, i.e. the relationship between your interventions and changes in the client/organizational system or resulting from them.

The points below are a suggested structure for your Project/Case Study (for guidance only).

  1. General statements and data of the client/organization
    a. Relevant data of the client (e.g. status, position regarding hierarchy, etc.).
    b. Refer to the client’s/organization’s history and other relevant background data.
  2. Context of the order you received
    a. Describe the institutional and organizational background of your work.
    b. Who gave the recommendation/order respectively?
    c. What was your and the client’s definition of the problem? Discuss both.
    d. Comment on your own basic ideas and values, referring to their importance when in contact with the client/organizational system.
  3. Contract and/or other agreements
    a. Describe the contracts and/or agreements with your client/organization and their origin.
    b. Take TA concepts with regard to contracts as a basis (e.g. administrative contract, work contract, three‑sided contract).
  4. Planning
    a. Describe the considerations, methods and strategies you employed. How were they derived from the above (1‑3.), and how did you define short and long‑term goals?
    b. Which TA concepts and methods do you include in your considerations regarding your method and strategy, and why?
    c. If, within the framework of this project, you are referring to relevant concepts other than TA concepts, discuss these.
    d. If there is a scheme, plan or diagram (from TA as well as from other approaches) to illustrate your considerations, it can be included in your essay.
  5. Application Process
    a. Explain and discuss how you put your plan into practice.
    b. What measures and interventions have had a positive influence on the client/ organizational system and made a further development/change possible? Give concrete examples.
    c. Comment on your own basic ideas and values which might have been important while in contact with the client(s).
    d. Summarize the process (e.g. different phases) and describe the corresponding changes (to illustrate this, you may use literal transcripts concerning interventions). When describing these processes, use appropriate TA concepts and pay attention to their coherence in connection with the ones used in the theoretical part (see below).
    e. To what extent has your plan been realized/achieved? Summarize significant steps and describe the criteria you use to determine positive changes / developments.
    f. How have short‑ and long‑term goals been achieved and/or contracts been completed?
    g. Were there any incidents or did you come across any difficulties while dealing with the client/system which made you change the original strategy?
  6. Prognosis
    a. Describe the present state of the project and possible future aspects.
    b. Describe further steps to be taken in order to bring about a desirable development.
    c. How do you evaluate the changes generated through your intervention?
  7. Concluding remarks
    Describe your own learning experience gained within the framework of this project. If you wish, you can include your personal experience while in contact with the client/organizational system.

8.4.4 Section D. Questions on theory and literature Guidelines

This part of the Written Examination carries 35% of the total marks.

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate your theoretical understanding of TA concepts and models. You are required to answer six questions from the list provided below.

Theoretical presentation means providing a definition and description of the general concept leading to an analysis and explanation of its use, and showing connections, where appropriate, to other TA concepts.

It is also expected that examples illustrating specific concepts will be provided to extend your explanation. Candidates have the option to choose the clients they wish to discuss in their Section D. This can be the Section C case study client or any other client they have worked with.

Where necessary additional illustrative material can be used and must be taken from within the organizational field. All examples are to be set out briefly and concisely.

There are two ways in which you can present your responses to the six questions, all of which are designed to integrate coherently with the project study in Section C. The important point is to be clear at the outset of your study where and how the six theoretical questions will be answered. Here are the two options:

  1. The responses can be set out as a separate section.
  2. The responses can be set out separately within Section C as an extended commentary on a specific theme.

A combination of these is possible, for example two responses provided as an extended commentary and four responses in a separate section. With regard to Option 2 it is important to alert the reader exactly where the response begins and ends in Section C.

Finally, it is important that there is coherence and consistency in your treatment of the theory questions, example material used and where appropriate, the Section C narrative.

The Questions

  1. Which concepts in transactional analysis literature do you use to describe an organization? In your answer pay attention to the core dynamics and processes you observe in organizations as well as to organizational change. Elaborate on your selection.
  2. Which concepts in transactional analysis literature do you use to describe interpersonal relationships and communication within organizations?
  3. How do you reflect on communication in organizations as manifestations of organizational processes?
  4. Describe how you reflect on the relationship between people working in organizations and other aspects of organizational life, such as customers, technical process, finance, and legal issues. How is transactional analysis useful for you in this regard?
  5. Describe the phenomena of repetitive behaviour in organizations and your use of concepts in transactional analysis literature in understanding them. Include in your answer the way you use those concepts to produce change or development.
  6. Which TA and other concepts do you use to Assess the current situation and the short and long‑term necessities. Design the direction of change and evaluate the outcomes of an organizational development or change process
  7. Describe a research project that you are involved in or know about. Discuss the implications for transactional analysis theory and/or practice.
  8. Describe concepts that you use to work with organizations from non‑ transactional analysis origin and how you relate them to concepts in transactional analysis literature.
  9. Which concepts in transactional analysis literature and non‑TA do you use to describe organizational culture?
  10. Which concepts from TA literature do you emphasize in your work? Describe these concepts and comment on your choice.
  11. Which concepts do you work with regarding contracts or other agreements between the client/system, the Transactional Analyst and any other parties? How do you apply these concepts in your practice?
  12. What are the principles, values and ethics guiding you in your work? What is the relationship between these and TA concepts about OK‑ness and autonomy?
  13. Which TA concepts do you use when assessing client/system or teams and how do you apply these in your work?

8.5 The Psychotherapy Written Examination

Candidates need to refer to the core competences (see Section 2) on which the exam will be assessed, they also need to make sure to include evidence of them throughout the exam, as well as ensure that the presentation is coherent and has a clear structure.

The answers to the following questions should be as concise as possible.

8.5.1 Section A. Professional self‑portrayal

This part of the written examination is worth 20% of the total marks.

  1. What is your professional title?
    • Describe the place where you work or your work setting.
    • What is your job description?
    • Who are your colleagues?
    • What is your place within the organization?
    • Who are your patients or clients?
    • Who refers them?
    • What different categories of diagnosis you work with?
  2. Describe the main focus of your professional practice and what contribution TA makes to your work.
  3. Describe your legal status and say how far you fulfil conditions for work as psychotherapist, as they are laid down in your country’s/state’s laws and statutes.
    • How do you protect yourself and your clients?
    • Describe the clients with whom you would refuse to work and say why
    • What arrangements do you have for referral of these clients to other professionals?
    • If you are not a medical doctor, what consultation arrangements do you have to provide medical evidence and back‑up?
    • What are the criteria by which you determine if such a medical consultation is necessary?

8.5.2 Section B. Candidate’s Learning experience gained during TA training and personal development

This part of the Written Examination is worth 10% of the total marks. Candidates may respond to the following questions in any order.

  1. When and why did you choose to undertake TA training, and with what purpose in mind?
  2. What challenging experiences have you had while learning/using TA? How have they impacted your personal development?
  3. Describe the importance of TA in your professional development and how it has influenced you professionally.
  4. How has this impacted your career pathway, if at all?
  5. How have these experiences influenced the development of your professional identity as a psychotherapist and as a TA practitioner in your chosen field?

8.5.3 Section C) The Client Case Study

This part of the Written Examination is worth 35% of the total marks.

You do not necessarily have to present the information on your client in the order given below, but it is important that you ensure that the case study is coherent.

Provide information under each heading only if it is relevant, e.g. give information on developmental history only if this is important in your case study.

In your description of the psychotherapy, it is of paramount importance for you to clearly show your process and your role as a psychotherapist. The description should concentrate not only on the client in the course of psychotherapy but on the relationship between you and the client and on your response to the client.

Show clearly how your interventions and the client’s process are related.

  1. Relevant personal details of the client, including:
    a. Age.
    b. Gender.
    c. Marital status.
    d. Current family members.
    e. Job status.
    f. Social relationships.
  2. Context of referral:
    a. Referral agency.
    b. Reason for referral.
  3. Working process:
    a. Did you work with this client in a group or family, or in individual psychotherapy?
    b. Why did you choose this way of working?
    c. At what frequency did you work together?
    d. How long did this work continue, in terms of time and of the number of sessions?
  4. At your initial meeting:
    a. What problems did the client present to you?
    b. What was the mental and physical condition of the client?
    c. What was his/her/their professional situation?
    d. What was your initial or assumed diagnosis?
  5. Give historical information about your client in the following areas:
    a. Family.
    b. Development.
    c. Medical.
    d. Sexual relationships.
    e. Significant relationships.
    f. Education.
    g. Work and employment.
  6. What was the initial agreement or contract between you and the client?
  7. Your diagnosis:
    a. Give a diagnosis based on transactional analysis, analysing the client’s present situation using two or three TA concepts.
    b. Give a diagnosis on the basis of a non‑TA system that is familiar to you, for example from the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or The International Classification of Diseases.
    c. Describe how you arrived at this diagnosis, and show how you made differential diagnoses to exclude other options.
  8. Define the presenting problem, making a clear distinction between your understanding and your client’s point of view.
  9. What was the final treatment contract between you and your client?
  10. Treatment plan:
    a. Describe your overall treatment plan, referring to your diagnosis of the client.
    b. What did you envisage to be the stages and final goal of your treatment?
  11. The psychotherapy process:
    Summarize the psychotherapy process, describing its separate stages using appropriate TA concepts to describe what is happening.
    Give examples of your interaction with the client, including literal transcripts, focusing in particular on your significant interventions and how the client responded.
    • Note any connections between your interaction and the problem you defined at the beginning.
    • State to what extent you consider the contract or contracts to have been completed and what criteria you use to assess this.
    • Describe difficulties you experienced with transference and counter transference phenomena in your relationship with the client.
    • Include a description of your use of supervision.
    • With reference to your client, briefly discuss the concept of cure.
    • Link your chosen interventions with your treatment plan and your ideas about cure.
    • Describe to what extent your treatment plan has been realized? If you changed your treatment plan during the course of the psychotherapy, say why.
  12. Prognosis:
    a. Describe the present state of the treatment process and say whether you are still working with this client.
    b. How do you evaluate the changes for your client?
    c. What is your prognosis?
  13. Concluding remarks:
    Describe your learning experience during your work with this client.

8.5.4 Section D) Questions on theory and literature

This part of the Written Examination is worth 35% of the total marks.

Guidelines

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate your theoretical understanding of TA concepts and models. You are required to answer six questions from the list provided below.

Theoretical presentation means providing a definition and description of the general concept leading to an analysis and explanation of its use, and showing connections, where appropriate, to other TA concepts. It is also expected that examples illustrating specific concepts will be provided to extend your explanation.

Candidates have the option to choose the clients they wish to discuss in their Section D. This can be the Section C case study client or any other client they have worked with. Where necessary additional illustrative material can be used and must be taken from within the psychotherapy field. All examples are to be set out briefly and concisely.

There are two ways in which you can present your responses to the six questions, all of which are designed to integrate coherently with the project study in Section C. The important point is to be clear at the outset of your study where and how the six theoretical questions will be answered. Here are the two options:

  1. The responses can be set out as a separate section.
  2. The responses can be set out separately within Section C as an extended commentary on a specific theme.

A combination of these is possible, for example two responses provided as an extended commentary and four responses in a separate section. Regarding Option 2 it is important to alert the reader exactly where the response begins and ends in Section C.

Finally, it is important that there is coherence and consistency in your treatment of the theory questions, example material used and where appropriate, the Section C narrative.

The Questions

  1. Describe your personal style of transactional analysis psychotherapy, referring, comparing, contrasting and critiquing to the major approaches and those concepts you emphasize.
  2. Describe an aspect of recent developments (within the last 10‑15 years) in transactional analysis theory. How do you evaluate it and how has it influenced your thinking and practice?
  3. What does psychotherapeutic change mean to you? What TA concepts do you use to facilitate this?
  4. Discuss the benefits of formulating an overall treatment plan of the psychotherapeutic process? What do you take into account when you are planning stages?
  5. What TA concepts do you use to diagnose or assess your clients, and how does this influence the way you work with different types of client’s presentation?
  6. What TA concepts do you use to understand the origin of psychological problems? Show how this relates to your ideas on psychological wellbeing or cure.
  7. Describe how you understand the psychotherapeutic relationship Show how this relates to TA concepts, and how it influences the way you work.
  8. What model(s) or concepts do you use to understand intrapsychic process, and how does this influence the way you work?
  9. What model(s) or concepts do you use to understand interpersonal relationships and communication and how does this influence the way you work?
  10. How do you use contracting to enhance the psychotherapeutic process?
  11. What concepts do you use to work with couples, families or groups and how do they inform the way you work?
  12. Choose a topic or issue in psychotherapy you would like to deal with theoretically using TA concepts and show how this influences your work.
  13. Describe a research project you are aware of or have been involved in and discuss the implications for transactional analysis theory and/or practice.

8.6 Evaluating and Scoring the Written Examination

8.6.1 Guidelines for Evaluators

All evaluators of written CTA exams have to attend a WEW before they will be given an exam for evaluation.

The main function of this section is to give written examination evaluators consistent criteria for use in evaluation. Please bear in mind the following recommendations based on previous experience.

The candidate has invested a lot of him/her/themself in this written examination. Respect this, no matter what the result may seem to you to be.

While framing your comments, bear in mind the question: “How would I feel if I were the candidate or the candidate’s principal supervisor?”

Your comments should provide an important guide to the candidate and to the oral examination board about specific areas of strength and weakness in the written exam.

The written examination evaluation should not include any diagnosis of the candidate.

Evaluation is an educational process not a psychotherapeutic one. The feedback has the aim of providing clear information to the candidate towards a developmental learning experience for him/her/them, together with the assessment.

The evaluator should avoid unqualified critical statements and unsubstantiated value judgments. Such words as “insufficient” or “adequate” do not carry enough information to give the candidate proper guidance to future progress instead write “the exam does not show how you have…”.

Address your remarks specifically to the criteria of the scoring scale based on the core competences.

The written examination evaluation should include positive strokes.

Be specific about your expectations if there is something that is unsatisfactory or if information is missing so that the candidate learns something useful.

Address the candidate directly in your comments making the evaluation a respectful and ‘I’m OK and you’re OK’ process.

8.6.2 Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Guidelines

PTSC is committed to inclusive assessment to ensure that all candidates have a fair chance to show what they know and how they think. Some people learn, write, or communicate in different ways. This might be because they are neurodivergent, have a disability or health condition, use English as a second or third language, or come from a different educational or cultural background.

As an evaluator, your role includes holding standards while also staying open to difference. Inclusive assessment means recognising that a candidate’s spelling, grammar, writing structure, or tone may differ from your expectations—but these differences do not necessarily indicate a lack of understanding. What matters most is the candidate’s ability to show:

  • Their thinking with a depth of understanding
  • Application of theory to their ideas and work as a Transactional Analyst in their chosen field.
  • Reflective learning with an ability to critique their own work.

8.6.3 Understanding the Effects of Neurodiversity and Other Accessibility Needs

Neurodiversity and other accessibility needs can affect individuals in various ways. Whether you are a candidate, trainer, supervisor or exam evaluator, you may notice:

  • Slower reading or writing speeds.
  • Non‑linear, visual, or holistic thinking styles.
  • Clear internal understanding that is not fully expressed in writing.
  • Difficulties with grammar, syntax, or academic conventions.
  • Challenges in organising thoughts in structured formats.
  • Struggles with interpreting implicit meanings or subtleties.
  • Technical or language errors that obscure strong ideas.

These are not signs of lesser intelligence or learning—they are often differences in processing, communication, or educational background.

8.6.4 Guidelines for Written Exam Evaluators

The aims of exam evaluation are to:

  • Evaluate fairly and consistently across candidates.
  • Focus on the content, understanding, and insight, rather than on language accuracy or presentation, unless those are being specifically assessed.
  • Focus on whether the core competencies, in the candidate’s field, have been met.
  • Avoid penalising for neurodivergent or language‑based differences.

Helpful Practices:

  • Read for meaning first: Look for the core message, key ideas, and signs of understanding.
  • Re‑read: A first read for general sense, and a second read for closer analysis, can help reduce unconscious bias.
  • Ask yourself:
    o Is this a lack of knowledge, or a different way of communicating?
    o Is the candidate showing insight, even if the structure or grammar is unconventional?
    o Am I allowing space for a different style of thinking or expression?
  • Make constructive comments: Use plain, supportive language.
  • Use inclusive language: Feedback should be clear and encouraging, especially where candidates have faced exclusion or misunderstanding in the past.
  • Check your interpretation: Talk to your supervisor or co‑evaluator if you feel unsure. A second opinion may highlight strengths you hadn’t seen.

8.6.5 Notification Process for Expression of Need and Accessibility

If a candidate has any specific accessibility requirement, they are encouraged to complete the Expression of Accessibility Requirements Form (13.4.7) and to send it to the language coordinator when submitting their exam.

The language coordinator will then inform the evaluator of this when sending the exam for evaluation. This is to help the evaluator(s) approach the candidate’s work with appropriate understanding and fairness.

If an exam evaluator has any specific learning or accessibility need, they are encouraged to complete the above mentioned form and send it to the language coordinator.

8.6.6 Evaluating and Assessing the Written Examination

The Scoring Scale is in Section 13.7.9. A separate numerical scale is provided for each of the four sections up to the total percentage for that section.

Section A is marked from 1 to 20.
Section B is marked from 1 to 10.
Sections C and D are marked from 1 to 35.

When you have completed marking the sections on the Scale, add the four marks together. The result will be the overall percentage mark for the examination as a whole.

If the score is 65% or more, the written examination will normally be graded as a pass.

However, the examiner will also take the following into consideration when deciding to pass or defer:

  • The candidate must have completed all four sections. If the candidate has not addressed one or more section or if fewer than six theory questions have been answered in Section D, then the exam will be returned to the candidate and marked as a ‘no exam’.
  • The four sections must be coherent with one another.
  • If any one of the criteria listed in the scoring scale is consistently of an unsatisfactory standard, this may give grounds for deferral.
  • Any examination marked without reference to the Scoring Scale will be returned by the Examination Coordinator for re‑marking.

8.6.7 Evaluation

Evaluators must refer to the core competences and to the oral exam scoring sheet when considering the aspects on the rating scale (13.7.9).

8.6.8 Evaluation and Marking procedures

All CTA exam documentation is listed at the end of the relevant section and in Section 13.

The identity of the written exam evaluator(s) and candidate has been a hot topic inside EATA and demonstrates that evaluators are a thinking, involved and ethically mindful group. To disclose or not disclose is considered with the same ethical attention, but from different positions by different evaluators and in different language groups.

PTSC and CoC have considered all the different positions and experimented with different possibilities in order to find the best solution. Important for our system are both equality and transparency and the present rules are aimed to honour both these values.

  1. Evaluation is initially carried out by the candidate’s own principal supervisor, in the form of a general appraisal of the written examination.
  2. If it is, in their opinion, of passing standard, the candidate should send it to the language coordinator together with the Submission of Written Examination Form giving the candidate’s contact details. Put no identifying material on the written examination. The Principal Supervisor’s Endorsement of CTA Written Examination form must be enclosed (see Section 13).
  3. The language coordinator keeps two lists of evaluators. Those who are willing to be named as evaluators and those who wish to mark anonymously. The language coordinator asks the candidate if he/she/they wish to know the identity of their evaluator(s) and is available to do the same (reveal his/her/their name at the end of the exam process.) The candidate indicates clearly Yes or No. If the candidate says Yes, then their name will be shared with the evaluator(s) at the end of the process, so the names of both parties is open and then it is possible to have some exchange of feedback at the end of the process.
  4. The language coordinator appoints an evaluator who fits with the request of the candidate and the wishes of the evaluator, named or anonymous, and sends the written examination to an evaluator together with the official Letter to the Evaluator of the CTA Written Examination. This will be a CTA, or preferably a PCTA TS, PTSTA, CTA TS or TSTA in the candidate’s field of specialization. At this point, the language coordinator will not identify the candidate or the evaluator to each other.
  5. The examiner using the scoring scale evaluates and marks the written examination. Before writing his/her/their evaluation he/she/they inform the language coordinator of his/her/their decision. Where the candidate has passed, the coordinator will instruct the examiner to proceed with the written examination evaluation. The written examination and the written examination evaluation are returned to the language coordinator.
  6. If it is a pass, the language coordinator returns the written examination and the written examination evaluation to the candidate together with an official letter. The candidate is sent feedback according to the nature of the contract. If anonymous, then all names stay confidential to the language coordinator and if named, then the evaluation will be signed and the evaluator made aware of the name of the candidate so an exchange may take place.
  7. If the examiner informs the language coordinator that he/she/they intend to defer the paper, the coordinator will instruct him/her/them not to write the written examination evaluation. The coordinator will automatically send the written examination to a second examiner together with the official Letter to the Evaluator of the CTA Written Examination. The second examiner is not told that the first examiner has deferred the written examination.
  8. The second examiner follows the procedure described above – he/she/they inform the language coordinator of his/her/their decision regarding the examination. At that stage, the language coordinator informs the examiner that he/she/they are the second examiner and asks the two examiners to confer.
    If the second examiner also defers the examination, it is deferred. If anonymous, then all names stay confidential to the language coordinator and if named, then the evaluation will be signed and the evaluator made aware of the name of the candidate so an exchange may take place.
    The language coordinator returns the written examination evaluation to the candidate together with an official letter.
  9. If an examination is deferred by the first examiner and passed by the second, the language coordinator will ask the two examiners in their discussions to come to a common decision, and to present a joint written examination evaluation. Taking part in this discussion is mandatory. Both names of the evaluators can be communicated to the candidate if they agree to this.
  10. If they come to an agreement and produce a joint written examination evaluation, this is sent to the candidate together with the official Letter to be sent with Evaluation of CTA Written Examination.
  11. If they cannot agree, a process facilitator will be appointed by the language coordinator to help the evaluators to find an agreement. The process facilitator will not read the written exam.
  12. If they cannot agree, the written examination goes to a third examiner together with the official Letter to the Evaluator of the CTA Written Examination. The decision of the third examiner is final.
  13. The written examination is marked by the third examiner in consultation with the two previous examiners and the written examination evaluation is sent to the language coordinator.
  14. The language coordinator returns the written examination evaluation to the candidate together with an official letter. Regarding anonymity, as above, the feedback to the candidate is sent according to the nature of the contract. If anonymous, then all names stay confidential to the language coordinator and if named, then the evaluation will be signed and the evaluator made aware of the name of the candidate so an exchange may take place.

When a written examination is deferred, it may be re‑written by the candidate and resubmitted. The language coordinator will accept it for further marking only when the candidate’s principal supervisor has re‑read the examination and signified in writing that they consider the re‑written version to be of passing standard.

Please limit your feedback to three pages maximum.

Evaluators must use the numerical scoring scale, and accompanying guidelines, provided by CoC (see para 8.6.6 above). Make sure your comments are congruent with scores given.

8.7 Appeals

An appeals procedure is implicitly built into this examination assessment procedure. However, in exceptional circumstances, a candidate may want to appeal the outcome or process. In this case he or she may use the Appeals Procedure in Section 9.10 and use form 13.9.1.