I wanted to provide some insight while getting some thoughts. (For the sake of gosh, please do not let this turn into a PsyD vs PhD Discussion. [feel free to find that discussion in a million threads]):
I've been on two interviews (PsyD) with several scheduled in the near future (at PhD and PsyD). At my most recent PsyD interview/open house, I was surprised that there was no discussion of research beyond a dissertation. This meant no poster presentations, conferences, authorship, or professional organizations. I fully understand the PsyD model and the emphasis placed on training practitioners rather than researchers, but this was concerning. Whether a PsyD or PhD we have to be researchers in some regard or at least possess the competencies.
Also, I was surprised about the financial approaches taken during each interview (PsyD). Both discussed costs, but both minimized it in different ways; the first not really going into detail, and the other making it seem like psychologists make money pretty quickly. In my opinion, the latter was more concerning because it felt like they were selling the degree and the program (mind you this is a university based/affiliated program which most would say is a top ten PsyD program [not a FSPS]). I understand that at the end of the day these programs are businesses, but there's a fine line between attracting the best students and selling it to the misinformed. But that's just it, the disclosure was there, so I wonder what the thought process here. There were a lot of distraction tactics used throughout which was baffling.
At the end of the day, I felt weird although I had a great interview. I'm seriously considering withdrawing my apps to PsyD programs after this experience.
