Clinical Psychology Rankings (Multiple Studies)

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
22,380
Reaction score
4,315
There is always a lot of talk about program "rankings". As people come to find out, there is no 'real' / objective way to truly rank programs, but there are a number of listings out there. I was hoping to get a discussion going about the various ways programs are ranked, how programs are evaluated, etc.

Here are some of the popular ones:

SocialPsychology.org Clinical Ranking (The original research can be found HERE, which is worth a read)

Many people cite US News clinical ranking.

Here is some more research worth reading: Scholarly Productivity in Clinical Psychology PhD Programs: A Normative Assessment of Publication Rates

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
A note about the rankings by pub. My school did pretty well according to this, but in reality the reason is because 2-3 of the professors are the ones who published so much that they pulled up ther school's overall rank. I guess this just shows again how important your advisor is vs the program.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Good point. There has yet to be a way to capture everything that is important in a program, but I'm glad people are at least attempting it.

-t

Was perusing this thread and figured I would update some of the information you posted earlier as some of the links are dead:

1. 2008 US News and World Report Clinical Psychology Rankings2. SocialPsychology.org Clinical Ranking (still active link)

3. Scholarly Productivity in Clinical Psychology PhD Programs: A Normative Assessment of Publication Rates4. Top Producers of Scholarly Publications in Clinical Psychology PhD Programs5. Clinical Psychology PhD Program Rankings: Evaluating Eminence on Faculty Publications and CitationsRelated articles (some discussed previously in this thread):

6. Research Productivity and Academic Lineage in Clinical Psychology: Who Is Training the Faculty to Do Research?
Note: You *may* need to get this one via an online journal, as I'm unsure if the link provided will work for all. See reference link for abstract.
7. Reputation Strength as a Determinant of Faculty Employment: A Test of the Step-Down Thesis Among Clinical Psychology Programs
Note: This one you will need to get via online journal resources. See reference link for abstract.
8. On the Origins of Clinical Psychology Faculty: Who Is Training the Trainers?Note: I have copies of all of these except for #8, which I was unable to access via online journals (but which is referenced in #3). I will add more if I find more. Feel free to pm me if you want copies of any of them (esp. #6 and 7 or if links stop working etc.).
 
Last edited:
Thanks!!

I am always wary of when people talk about "ranking", which is why I started this thread, but I am glad there is more information out there for people to evaluate. The publication data is particularly important for people who are leaning more on the academic side, but it can also be helpful to see what kind of activity each program has in that area.
 
I have a few qualms with accepting this notion of "prestige." These rankings of clinical programs seem completely arbitrary to me. Sure, I understand that some programs are better than others, but there are so many factors that go into determining what makes a good program, well, good. How do you accurately measure the overall strength of a program? How do you assess the quality of a program's clinical training? the quality of mentorship? the quality of coursework? How do you quantify the freedom in your research? How do you quantify support from faculty? and opporunities to collaborate? or opporunities to teach? What about considering the quality of internship placements? Frankly, I think the number of publications a program produces is an absurd barometer of a solid clinical program, even if you are exlusively interested in research and an academic career. The quality of a program is so complex and multi-dimensional that ultimately, it is pointless to rank programs like this.
 
I have a few qualms with accepting this notion of "prestige." These rankings of clinical programs seem completely arbitrary to me. Sure, I understand that some programs are better than others, but there are so many factors that go into determining what makes a good program, well, good. How do you accurately measure the overall strength of a program? How do you assess the quality of a program's clinical training? the quality of mentorship? the quality of coursework? How do you quantify the freedom in your research? How do you quantify support from faculty? and opporunities to collaborate? or opporunities to teach? What about considering the quality of internship placements? Frankly, I think the number of publications a program produces is an absurd barometer of a solid clinical program, even if you are exlusively interested in research and an academic career. The quality of a program is so complex and multi-dimensional that ultimately, it is pointless to rank programs like this.

Agree. In one of the previous threads I linked to (in the update post), they discussed this. Especially taking note of the fact that any of these rankings will be skewed toward research heavy institutions (thus disregarding clinical training). Granted, I think it would be helpful if there were more compiled outcome data out there for most programs, or, as others have suggested, information clustered by area of interest (depression, etc.). Any ranking will be inherently flawed, however, when it comes to this field. [My main reason for updating this thread was for those who seek this information; as lacking as it is, it was hard to find in one place].
 
For lack of a good way to quantify overall training, at least there are some data out there to consider....as long as you note the limitations. I'm glad some people are trying to quantify this information, though it probably will never result in a worthwhile "overall" ranking.

*edit*

I'm admittedly frustrated at the US News & World Report rankings because their study design is piss poor, though it is the most often cited ranking. What I like about the publication data research is that it at least tries to add some objectivity to the process. They did miss a chunk of faculty who work primarily out of medical centers (I'm thinking of neuropsych people in particular), and they also excluded Psy.D. faculty who may also have made some great contributions.
 
Last edited:
For lack of a good way to quantify overall training, at least there are some data out there to consider....as long as you note the limitations. I'm glad some people are trying to quantify this information, though it probably will never result in a worthwhile "overall" ranking.

Yeah, and I can't imagine trying to figure out where to apply to just based on these rankings (though it can help). Right now I have narrowed my choices down to two schools, so I started looking for as much objective data (on their Web sites and off) so that I could compare them (on top of more subjective things). I almost wish someone would just tell me where to go lol!
 
Yeah, and I can't imagine trying to figure out where to apply to just based on these rankings (though it can help). Right now I have narrowed my choices down to two schools, so I started looking for as much objective data (on their Web sites and off) so that I could compare them (on top of more subjective things). I almost wish someone would just tell me where to go lol!

Having just gone through this process, I would be happy and feel rather qualified to help steer you in the right direction for selecting schools. Have you looked at or considered purchasing the Insider's Guide to Clinical Programs? I think the new edition is coming out some time this year. Also if you want to PM me what you are looking for in a program, I think I can help you out :thumbup:
 
Having just gone through this process, I would be happy and feel rather qualified to help steer you in the right direction for selecting schools. Have you looked at or considered purchasing the Insider's Guide to Clinical Programs? I think the new edition is coming out some time this year. Also if you want to PM me what you are looking for in a program, I think I can help you out :thumbup:

Hey thanks. To clarify, I already did the application process and am deciding between two offers. Don't know if the Insider's Guide would help at this point. To be honest, I think I have a program I'm leaning to... I just want every possible thing to confirm it. lol. I may pm you though on the two programs to get your overall thoughts... decisions decisions.
 
On an aside, I am somewhat tickled that one of the linked studies was first-authored by a professor here in this department.

It is always neat to recognize names of people you know. When I started presenting at more niche conferences I frequently ran into people who's work I referenced, and it was great to talk with them about some of the particulars. A few months ago I came across a paper writing by a current supervisor, and I had no idea that she published in the particular area.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I think that one of the main (if only legit) point is that the person who's considering your CV for a job cares about "prestige". Wheather it's a little or a lot, better or worse, I think that almost everyone forms an impression based on the program. Not to say it's the most important factor.

Other than that I generally have to agree, especially when the ranking methodology is flawed and needs to be improved upon.


I have a few qualms with accepting this notion of "prestige." These rankings of clinical programs seem completely arbitrary to me. Sure, I understand that some programs are better than others, but there are so many factors that go into determining what makes a good program, well, good. How do you accurately measure the overall strength of a program? How do you assess the quality of a program's clinical training? the quality of mentorship? the quality of coursework? How do you quantify the freedom in your research? How do you quantify support from faculty? and opporunities to collaborate? or opporunities to teach? What about considering the quality of internship placements? Frankly, I think the number of publications a program produces is an absurd barometer of a solid clinical program, even if you are exlusively interested in research and an academic career. The quality of a program is so complex and multi-dimensional that ultimately, it is pointless to rank programs like this.
 
I think that one of the main (if only legit) point is that the person who's considering your CV for a job cares about "prestige". Wheather it's a little or a lot, better or worse, I think that almost everyone forms an impression based on the program. Not to say it's the most important factor.

Other than that I generally have to agree, especially when the ranking methodology is flawed and needs to be improved upon.

Generally the people reviewing the CVs will be knowledgable of the area, though "prestige" can often matter outside of our profession. It can really make a difference in "the real world", where careers are made because of who you went to school with for your MBA, J.D., etc. I think in School Psychology a person can really make a mark if they are aggressive in their research and push for opportunities.
 
Hello All,

I am new to this website, and decided to run a quick search on my school, Fielding Graduate University. Wow, what harsh criticisms from such a curious lot of students, no offense intended. I especially like reading the belabored point that Fielding is an "on-line program," in spite of the fact that it was created and approved by the APA long before the internet was used in universities. I do understand, however, that ignorance leads people to say some perculiar things.

Here is my story: I am enrolled in Fielding's Neuropsychology program which I beleive is the best in the U.S. Am I biased, well maybe. Am I qualified to make such an expert comment? I would say yes. You see, not only am I a student at Fielding, of which I am very proud by the way, but I am also a board certified neurologist. What's more, as a Fielding student, I am also the winner of a sizable NIH grant to conduct research in a designated area. Why did I pick Fielding?? Because it is, bar none, the best program for experienced and educated adults in the US and Canada.

Am I typical of the students at Fielding, you might ask? Yes, quite typical. Another colleague of mine happens to hold a PhD from UCLA in organizational psycholgoy. She decided on Fielding for its top-flight, APA approved, "clinical respecialization program." Additionally, my colleagues include published authors (popular and academic), film makers, Oxford Grads, medical doctors and the like. By the way, Fielding's model is adapted from Oxford University's tutorial mode.

Now, of course Fielding has students who do not make it to graduation. Fielding is the only school I know that has a course in Critical Thinking, as the first course students take in the program. Not only is it difficult, even for me, but if one fails the course, they are asked to leave Fielding. Moreover, the acceptance rate getting into Fielding, at least for my year, was less than 20 percent. Sure, some schools are lower. But typical "college kids" never make it in Fielding, nor would they succeed at Fielding. It's for real grown-ups who own companies and practices, who alreday work as therapists, or come with advanced degrees from the world's best colleges and universities.

So, why am I writing this. Because I think there are too many people that think of Fielding as "that on-line school." When looked at critically, though, Fielding requires the same of more residency hours as any other school. Moreover, we don't have to live on a campus to make sure we'll show up to class on time. You see, at Fielding, we can do our work, and wipe our noses.

Thanks for reading my post. I am sure it will result in the propagation of more fallacies. That's okay, I am here to defend what may be the best university in the world.

Sincerely,

Dr. R.J.
 
Hello All,

I am new to this website, and decided to run a quick search on my school, Fielding Graduate University. Wow, what harsh criticisms from such a curious lot of students, no offense intended. I especially like reading the belabored point that Fielding is an "on-line program," in spite of the fact that it was created and approved by the APA long before the internet was used in universities. I do understand, however, that ignorance leads people to say some perculiar things.

Here is my story: I am enrolled in Fielding's Neuropsychology program which I beleive is the best in the U.S. Am I biased, well maybe. Am I qualified to make such an expert comment? I would say yes. You see, not only am I a student at Fielding, of which I am very proud by the way, but I am also a board certified neurologist. What's more, as a Fielding student, I am also the winner of a sizable NIH grant to conduct research in a designated area. Why did I pick Fielding?? Because it is, bar none, the best program for experienced and educated adults in the US and Canada.

Am I typical of the students at Fielding, you might ask? Yes, quite typical. Another colleague of mine happens to hold a PhD from UCLA in organizational psycholgoy. She decided on Fielding for its top-flight, APA approved, "clinical respecialization program." Additionally, my colleagues include published authors (popular and academic), film makers, Oxford Grads, medical doctors and the like. By the way, Fielding's model is adapted from Oxford University's tutorial mode.

Now, of course Fielding has students who do not make it to graduation. Fielding is the only school I know that has a course in Critical Thinking, as the first course students take in the program. Not only is it difficult, even for me, but if one fails the course, they are asked to leave Fielding. Moreover, the acceptance rate getting into Fielding, at least for my year, was less than 20 percent. Sure, some schools are lower. But typical "college kids" never make it in Fielding, nor would they succeed at Fielding. It's for real grown-ups who own companies and practices, who alreday work as therapists, or come with advanced degrees from the world's best colleges and universities.

So, why am I writing this. Because I think there are too many people that think of Fielding as "that on-line school." When looked at critically, though, Fielding requires the same of more residency hours as any other school. Moreover, we don't have to live on a campus to make sure we'll show up to class on time. You see, at Fielding, we can do our work, and wipe our noses.

Thanks for reading my post. I am sure it will result in the propagation of more fallacies. That's okay, I am here to defend what may be the best university in the world.

Sincerely,

Dr. R.J.

It's very eyeopening to hear that an online education produces such high caliber of clinicians/researchers.
 
Hello All,

I am new to this website, and decided to run a quick search on my school, Fielding Graduate University. Wow, what harsh criticisms from such a curious lot of students, no offense intended. I especially like reading the belabored point that Fielding is an "on-line program," in spite of the fact that it was created and approved by the APA long before the internet was used in universities. I do understand, however, that ignorance leads people to say some perculiar things.

Here is my story: I am enrolled in Fielding's Neuropsychology program which I beleive is the best in the U.S. Am I biased, well maybe. Am I qualified to make such an expert comment? I would say yes. You see, not only am I a student at Fielding, of which I am very proud by the way, but I am also a board certified neurologist. What's more, as a Fielding student, I am also the winner of a sizable NIH grant to conduct research in a designated area. Why did I pick Fielding?? Because it is, bar none, the best program for experienced and educated adults in the US and Canada.

Am I typical of the students at Fielding, you might ask? Yes, quite typical. Another colleague of mine happens to hold a PhD from UCLA in organizational psycholgoy. She decided on Fielding for its top-flight, APA approved, "clinical respecialization program." Additionally, my colleagues include published authors (popular and academic), film makers, Oxford Grads, medical doctors and the like. By the way, Fielding's model is adapted from Oxford University's tutorial mode.

Now, of course Fielding has students who do not make it to graduation. Fielding is the only school I know that has a course in Critical Thinking, as the first course students take in the program. Not only is it difficult, even for me, but if one fails the course, they are asked to leave Fielding. Moreover, the acceptance rate getting into Fielding, at least for my year, was less than 20 percent. Sure, some schools are lower. But typical "college kids" never make it in Fielding, nor would they succeed at Fielding. It's for real grown-ups who own companies and practices, who alreday work as therapists, or come with advanced degrees from the world's best colleges and universities.

So, why am I writing this. Because I think there are too many people that think of Fielding as "that on-line school." When looked at critically, though, Fielding requires the same of more residency hours as any other school. Moreover, we don't have to live on a campus to make sure we'll show up to class on time. You see, at Fielding, we can do our work, and wipe our noses.

Thanks for reading my post. I am sure it will result in the propagation of more fallacies. That's okay, I am here to defend what may be the best university in the world.

Sincerely,

Dr. R.J.

Wow, another Fielding student on SDN! Knock me over with a feather! Welcome. I don't post much these days. I am too busy with my research projects, comps and beginning the dissertation process. Anything nontraditional is looked at with deep suspicion to say the least on this board so prepare by donning asbestos. I can't imagine what methodology would capture our unique quasi-European approach and rank it vis a vis a more traditional program. The posters here just don't get it. I remember discussing the British/Commonwealth model used at Oxford Cambridge the University of London on these boards and people just could not wrap their heads around the concept without adding the word "online." The concept of "online" sticks in some heads and just does not leave. One suspects disruption in the circuitry of the prefrontal cortex :) :) :) All kidding aside, its best to avoid flamewars here. BTW Where did you do your traditional doctorate at??
 
Last edited:
Good for you. Why do only a quarter of Fielding students get apa-approved internships? Why do only two-thirds get internships that are paid at all? Why is mean time to graduation over a *decade*?

http://www.fielding.edu/Media/Website Resources/pdf/ClinicalPsychology-outcome-data.pdf

It's good that some people have good outcomes, but (a) it doesn't appear to be modal and (b) there are larger field-related issues going on beyond individual outcomes.

Not sure what the mention of a Critical Thinking class is... such a class was mandatory in my undergrad education...
 
"best in the U.S.", "bar none, the best program", "my colleagues include published authors (popular and academic), film makers, Oxford Grads, medical doctors and the like." top-flight, APA approved, "clinical respecialization program." "own companies and practices, who alreday work as therapists, or come with advanced degrees from the world's best colleges and universities."

Whats that Russian word - oh yes, agitprop - give me a break ;)

Hello All,

I am new to this website, and decided to run a quick search on my school, Fielding Graduate University. Wow, what harsh criticisms from such a curious lot of students, no offense intended. I especially like reading the belabored point that Fielding is an "on-line program," in spite of the fact that it was created and approved by the APA long before the internet was used in universities. I do understand, however, that ignorance leads people to say some perculiar things.

Here is my story: I am enrolled in Fielding's Neuropsychology program which I beleive is the best in the U.S. Am I biased, well maybe. Am I qualified to make such an expert comment? I would say yes. You see, not only am I a student at Fielding, of which I am very proud by the way, but I am also a board certified neurologist. What's more, as a Fielding student, I am also the winner of a sizable NIH grant to conduct research in a designated area. Why did I pick Fielding?? Because it is, bar none, the best program for experienced and educated adults in the US and Canada.

Am I typical of the students at Fielding, you might ask? Yes, quite typical. Another colleague of mine happens to hold a PhD from UCLA in organizational psycholgoy. She decided on Fielding for its top-flight, APA approved, "clinical respecialization program." Additionally, my colleagues include published authors (popular and academic), film makers, Oxford Grads, medical doctors and the like. By the way, Fielding's model is adapted from Oxford University's tutorial mode.

Now, of course Fielding has students who do not make it to graduation. Fielding is the only school I know that has a course in Critical Thinking, as the first course students take in the program. Not only is it difficult, even for me, but if one fails the course, they are asked to leave Fielding. Moreover, the acceptance rate getting into Fielding, at least for my year, was less than 20 percent. Sure, some schools are lower. But typical "college kids" never make it in Fielding, nor would they succeed at Fielding. It's for real grown-ups who own companies and practices, who alreday work as therapists, or come with advanced degrees from the world's best colleges and universities.

So, why am I writing this. Because I think there are too many people that think of Fielding as "that on-line school." When looked at critically, though, Fielding requires the same of more residency hours as any other school. Moreover, we don't have to live on a campus to make sure we'll show up to class on time. You see, at Fielding, we can do our work, and wipe our noses.

Thanks for reading my post. I am sure it will result in the propagation of more fallacies. That's okay, I am here to defend what may be the best university in the world.

Sincerely,

Dr. R.J.
 
I'm not here to bash Fielding and am not entrenched in my ideas about the program. However, I would please like to add to JN's list of questions. Did 314 out of 419 students who enrolled in Fielding (02'-09') later withdraw from the program? Am I reading that data correctly? Why is that?

Cheers,
J9



Good for you. Why do only a quarter of Fielding students get apa-approved internships? Why do only two-thirds get internships that are paid at all? Why is mean time to graduation over a *decade*?

http://www.fielding.edu/Media/Website Resources/pdf/ClinicalPsychology-outcome-data.pdf

It's good that some people have good outcomes, but (a) it doesn't appear to be modal and (b) there are larger field-related issues going on beyond individual outcomes.

Not sure what the mention of a Critical Thinking class is... such a class was mandatory in my undergrad education...
 
Heh. Don't get out much, do you? I don't see how being a board certified neurologist would give you much insight into judging the quality of a neuropsych program. Caribbean DO alum?

Good to have pride in your program, though.


All those brilliant minds at the best university in the world and yet. . .

http://www.socialpsychology.org/clinrank1997.htm

If you've scrolled down a ways on the list and haven't run across Fielding, scroll from the bottom, it's quicker.


I'm thinking this is actually a troll post. As in, this is someone pretending to be a Fielding student in order to get people to bash the program.

not that I am disagreeing with you on anything, just thought you should know that a) Caribbean schools are MD programs and b) there are two Caribbean schools that have equal and sometimes higher Residency match rates than the "average" MD program in the US. The reason they achieve this is because they do clerkships in the states, i.e., you could do your surgical rotation at X school in the US and your OBGYN at Y school in the US.

Anyways I understand your criticism of this person just thought if you were gonna criticize and make remarks you should know about them first.

ps the other 4 or 5 Caribbean schools, usually located in the vacation areas, do far worse and tend to be far worse programs :)
 
Wow, another Fielding student on SDN! Knock me over with a feather! Welcome. I don't post much these days. I am too busy with my research projects, comps and beginning the dissertation process. Anything nontraditional is looked at with deep suspicion to say the least on this board so prepare by donning asbestos. I can't imagine what methodology would capture our unique quasi-European approach and rank it vis a vis a more traditional program. The posters here just don't get it. I remember discussing the British/Commonwealth model used at Oxford Cambridge the University of London on these boards and people just could not wrap their heads around the concept without adding the word "online." The concept of "online" sticks in some heads and just does not leave. One suspects disruption in the circuitry of the prefrontal cortex :) :) :) All kidding aside, its best to avoid flamewars here. BTW Where did you do your traditional doctorate at??

Hmmm word of advice, be careful quoting the British (technically UK system since all are a part of the same system governed by the BPA) system you might find some people that actually have experience with it.... would be happy to discuss perks vs downfalls of the system, just not on here.

ps. Fielding in NO way equates to any school in the UK, especially oxford, cambridge, UCL, etc... I quiver over the thought of such a suggestion.
 
I was aware that the caribbean schools are MD programs, not aware that any of them had a reasonable match rate (interesting). . . I was just jabbing him (with the DO comment).

I know I laughed and thought it was funny, I make fun of the Caribbean schools too no doubt, but then I read an AMA study and felt dumb because of the two schools that are worth a damn. I think SDN also had an article on these two schools too... something like "Truth about the Caribbean schools" or something

anyhoo cheers
 
Hmmm word of advice, be careful quoting the British (technically UK system since all are a part of the same system governed by the BPA) system you might find some people that actually have experience with it.... would be happy to discuss perks vs downfalls of the system, just not on here.

ps. Fielding in NO way equates to any school in the UK, especially oxford, cambridge, UCL, etc... I quiver over the thought of such a suggestion.


Well I think our moderator has squashed this.
 
I was recently asked by a friend, and I'm passing it on. Do you know of any website or other resources that ranks clinical/counseling programs, PhD or masters, based on admission criteria such as GRE, GPA, percentage accepted, etc?
 
I was recently asked by a friend, and I'm passing it on. Do you know of any website or other resources that ranks clinical/counseling programs, PhD or masters, based on admission criteria such as GRE, GPA, percentage accepted, etc?

I could be mistaken, but I believe the relatively-limited Princeton Review grad school rankings give those types of numbers heavy play in their scoring system.
 
I could be mistaken, but I believe the relatively-limited Princeton Review grad school rankings give those types of numbers heavy play in their scoring system.

Do you mean they rank programs based on admission criteria, like gpa and percent admitted? Where can I find this?
 
T4C, this really was a clever troll. Subjects and topics like these always produce derailments, you should know better amigo
 
Do you mean they rank programs based on admission criteria, like gpa and percent admitted? Where can I find this?

That is what I mean, yes. I haven't looked at a Princeton Review ranking book/list in a while, but from what I remember, they use a variety of admissions-type data (e.g., average undergraduate GPA, GRE scores, percent admitted) in their ranking forumlae, as well as various other program-related numbers (average class size, student:teacher ratio, average time to graduation, overall endowment amount, etc.).

As to where it can be found, a quick Google search turned up this link: http://www.princetonreview.com/schools/graduate/QuickSearchList.aspx?programId=393&loc=All.

I do remember that finding actual program rankings was tough. I also remember that even more so than with undergraduate rankings, graduate program rankings can be largely useless (at least of the sort that PR does), as there's little/no weight given to factors such as degree of "fit" between students and faculty, research training, publication data, depth/breadth of clinical experiences, etc.
 
That is what I mean, yes. I haven't looked at a Princeton Review ranking book/list in a while, but from what I remember, they use a variety of admissions-type data (e.g., average undergraduate GPA, GRE scores, percent admitted) in their ranking forumlae, as well as various other program-related numbers (average class size, student:teacher ratio, average time to graduation, overall endowment amount, etc.).

As to where it can be found, a quick Google search turned up this link: http://www.princetonreview.com/schools/graduate/QuickSearchList.aspx?programId=393&loc=All.

I do remember that finding actual program rankings was tough. I also remember that even more so than with undergraduate rankings, graduate program rankings can be largely useless (at least of the sort that PR does), as there's little/no weight given to factors such as degree of "fit" between students and faculty, research training, publication data, depth/breadth of clinical experiences, etc.

Thank you, I had seen that, but I suppose I was not clear in my post so let me try again. My friend who is starting his second year of undergrads in psychology is already looking at grad school admission criteria but has been unable to find ranking online that can be rearranged based solely on specific criteria (e.g. highest to lowest GPA, GRE, etc). I have looked for him but I have not found that either. I don't think it exists but I thought I'll give it a try.

p.s. btw, my friend is not me! :)
 
Thank you, I had seen that, but I suppose I was not clear in my post so let me try again. My friend who is starting his second year of undergrads in psychology is already looking at grad school admission criteria but has been unable to find ranking online that can be rearranged based solely on specific criteria (e.g. highest to lowest GPA, GRE, etc). I have looked for him but I have not found that either. I don't think it exists but I thought I'll give it a try.

p.s. btw, my friend is not me! :)

Ahh, understood. I'm not sure if a ranking site such as that exists, but it's possible that someone on these boards may have created an excel spreadsheet using data to programs to which they/other users applied. I haven't come across any such file myself, but that's not to say one doesn't exist.
 
Is there any rankings based on therapeutic training?
 
sorry posted in the wrong place
 
Top