APA-accredited programs under probation

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
A friend is looking at a Masters counseling program at UNC, whose school psych program is currently under probation. Should that really be much of a concern for my friend? When they asked me my gut response is that it isn't, but I thought I'd ask some of the wiser people on here.

Thoughts?

Members don't see this ad.
 
That would be a *HUGE* red flag for me. It takes a significant infraction/shortcoming for most acred. organizations to formally place a program on probation. I cannot speak to acred. outside of the APA (only does doctoral program acred), but his best bet is to call the program and ask specifically why it is on probation, and then call the acred. board and ask the status of the acred. I wouldn't chance it, but some would.
 
Speaking of APA-acred....I was just looking up a program's status and noticed the following #'s for the following APA-acred programs:

Alliant Ph.D. & Psy.D. programs
7 APA acred
1 on probabtion
? unacred

Argosy Ph.D. & Psy.D. programs
9 APA acred
1 on probation
? unacred

:eek:

Other Ph.D. & Psy.D. programs on probation:
Fielding Graduate University
Forest Institute of Prof Psych

Revoked, but appealing:
California Institute of Integrated Studies
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Question, My program will be under review for reaccreditation starting next semester and I was hoping to get some feedback from people who have gone through this. What will it be like, what to expect? I know that faculty was pretty stressed last semester when I interviewed there and they were preparing for the APA visit, but what kinds of things can I expect as this process takes place?
 
Question, My program will be under review for reaccreditation starting next semester and I was hoping to get some feedback from people who have gone through this. What will it be like, what to expect? I know that faculty was pretty stressed last semester when I interviewed there and they were preparing for the APA visit, but what kinds of things can I expect as this process takes place?

It has been several years now, but I can share my experience with it. Yes, our faculty were all nervous and stressed. Unfortunately, faculty stress is often made to be the problem of the students. All that was required of the students was a one-hour group meeting with all of the students (no faculty present) where the site visitors asked us about the program. The faculty told us explicitly, "Be careful what you say to them. If our program has problems with accreditation your degrees will be worthless!" (Nice, huh?)

I think our faculty's concern needs to be balanced. Sure, it would not be constructive to blast your program, but also don't feel pressured to lie about their sins.

The questions that they asked us were things like: What are student-faculty relationships like?* Do you feel prepared for practicum? What sorts of clients do you see? What has been your experience moving through the dissertation process?

*That one got an answer of "Fine." and a lot of uncomfortable movements and glances from the students. The site visitor said to us, "Come on. I am a clinician. I know that there is something going on here." We fessed up to having a few problematic faculty. Ah, grad school memories...

Best,
Dr. E
 
It has been several years now, but I can share my experience with it. Yes, our faculty were all nervous and stressed. Unfortunately, faculty stress is often made to be the problem of the students. All that was required of the students was a one-hour group meeting with all of the students (no faculty present) where the site visitors asked us about the program. The faculty told us explicitly, "Be careful what you say to them. If our program has problems with accreditation your degrees will be worthless!" (Nice, huh?)

I think our faculty's concern needs to be balanced. Sure, it would not be constructive to blast your program, but also don't feel pressured to lie about their sins.

The questions that they asked us were things like: What are student-faculty relationships like?* Do you feel prepared for practicum? What sorts of clients do you see? What has been your experience moving through the dissertation process?

*That one got an answer of "Fine." and a lot of uncomfortable movements and glances from the students. The site visitor said to us, "Come on. I am a clinician. I know that there is something going on here." We fessed up to having a few problematic faculty. Ah, grad school memories...

Best,
Dr. E

Same experience here. To the point where if there were any squeaky wheels, we weren't directly told to "lie" about it per se, just to "shut our mouths" because they didn't want to hear about it. After all, "your degrees will be worthless" (I swear this is practically word for word what we heard) if the program is placed on probation, loses accreditation, so on & so forth. So we should make it believable.
 
Same experience here. To the point where if there were any squeaky wheels, we weren't directly told to "lie" about it per se, just to "shut our mouths" because they didn't want to hear about it. After all, "your degrees will be worthless" (I swear this is practically word for word what we heard) if the program is placed on probation, loses accreditation, so on & so forth. So we should make it believable.

I could definitely see this happening, and it makes me feel very fortunate to have experienced the atmosphere we had in our program. There was of course the occasional professor member who had a reputation for making grad students cry (although I actually found each of these people to be pretty darn amusing), but when it came to our re-accred visit, the message we received from faculty was to be open and honest. This was likely owing to the fact that most students, even if they didn't like their advisors, at least generally respected them and felt they were receiving quality training.
 
I went through the program re-acred. process early on in my grad. training, though I was only partially aware of the implications at the time. We weren't told explicitly to only say good things, but I think we knew that it wouldn't be in our best interest to share anything that would be viewed as overtly negative. It was a very different experience than re-acred. for the internship site I attended. During the internship re-acred. we were encouraged by the internship steering committee to talk openly about our experiences....though I think we had the advantage of it being an excellent site, so our critiques were pretty minor. Looking back on both experiences, I wish I had said more about my program because there were some areas that could have been improved upon that probably were downplayed because of fear of getting dinged on the re-acred. There wasn't anything malignant, but that doesn't mean some changes wouldn't have benefited the training program/students.
 
We recently went through re-accred, and it was not a big deal. I think some faculty were mildly stressed about making sure the paperwork was done correctly, but other than a few students who took on (paid) hours to help with that process, it didn't really affect us.

We got a consistent message from the DCT that our program was not at all worried about losing accreditation, and that made a big difference, I think. We all have complaints about stuff, of course, but students are generally happy with the program, so I don't think anyone felt like they had to hide anything.
 
So I heard the CUNY City College program got accredited for the next 3 years. If a student starts in 2013, but the program doesn't get reaccredited after the 3 years, is the student still considered to be from an accredited program? Also, from the website it looks like CUNY has four clinical programs (clinical, neuropsychology, forensic, and clinical health)? Are they all accredited?
 
If a student starts in 2013, but the program doesn't get reaccredited after the 3 years, is the student still considered to be from an accredited program?

Nope.

Also, from the website it looks like CUNY has four clinical programs (clinical, neuropsychology, forensic, and clinical health)? Are they all accredited?

If they are legitimately 4 separate PhD programs, then nothing but clinical can be accredited. The only types of programs that APA accredits are clinical, counseling, school, and combined programs. If neuropsychology, forensic, and clinical health are all specialties within the clinical program, then they would be accredited.
 
Thank you, KillerDiller. I read more and it looks like these are four separate programs that are all clinical or specialty clinical. So the clinical is just clinical and there's also clinical-forensic, clinical-neuropsychology, and health psychology and "clinical science". Clinical is accredited for 3 years, the next two are in the process of getting accredited, and the last one is brand new and not accredited. I guess I will be safer focusing on other accredited programs that have longer than a 3 year guarantee. Thanks for the helpful guidance!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm considering applying to a large public University for Phd program in Clinical Psychology.
It's currently pending accreditation waiting for its first class to graduate.
This school has a top-ranked medical school and other accredited PhD programs.
Would it be risky to apply there? If accepted and the school becomes accredited a year or two down the road, would my degree be accredited?

Thank you.
 
I'm considering applying to a large public University for Phd program in Clinical Psychology.
It's currently pending accreditation waiting for its first class to graduate.
This school has a top-ranked medical school and other accredited PhD programs.
Would it be risky to apply there? If accepted and the school becomes accredited a year or two down the road, would my degree be accredited?

Thank you.

My understanding (although please double-check on the APA's website to be sure) is that if the program is accredited at the time your degree is conferred, then you're on record as having graduated from an accredited program. I also believe that if the accreditation is awarded after you've graduated, but the final site visit happened when you were enrolled, it still "counts" for you (i.e., accreditation is retroactive back to the date of the final site visit). Again, though, please double check me on that.

And yes, there's inherent risk (even if it's minimal) in applying to programs that aren't yet accredited. While a large public university with an associated top-ranked medical program seems like it'd be a safe bet, in the end, nothing is 100% certain unless accreditation has already been granted (and even then, it can of course be suspended or revoked).
 
Updated, as of 11/4/2012 (also updated the main post)

From the APA website:

Clinical


Alliant International University—Fresno and Sacramento** (PsyD)
(formerly listed as California School of Professional Psychology-Fresno; Alliant International University—Fresno)
Fresno, CA 93727
June 3, 1994
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2013
**Will be reviewed as two separate programs in 2013


Argosy University, San Francisco Bay Area (PsyD)
(formerly listed as Argosy University, San Francisco Bay Area Campus)
Department of Clinical Psychology
Alameda, CA 94501
May 6, 2003
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013


The City College of New York, City University of New York (PhD)
Department of Psychology
New York, NY 10031
Dec. 1, 1968
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2012

ETA: Cuny has this note on their website:

Accreditation
The program has just been informed that it has been fully reaccredited by the Commission on Accreditation of the American Psychological Association.

Fielding Graduate University (PhD)
(formerly listed as The Fielding Institute)
Department of Psychology
Santa Barbara, CA 93105
July 17, 1991
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2013

Forest Institute of Professional Psychology (PsyD)
Springfield, MO 65807
Oct. 14, 1994
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013

John F. Kennedy University (PsyD)
Graduate School of Professional Psychology
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
May 30, 2003
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring/Summer 2013


Counseling

Howard University (PhD)
School of Education
Washington, DC 20059
April 29, 2002
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled 2014

School

University of Kentucky (PhD)
Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology
Lexington, KY 40506-0017
Feb. 18, 1986
Accredited, on probation (Under appeal)
Next site visit scheduled 2014

University of Minnesota (PhD)
Department of Educational Psychology
College of Education and Human Development
Minneapolis, MN 55455
May 1, 1972
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled 2014

University of Missouri—Columbia (PhD)
Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology
Columbia, MO 65211
Feb. 5, 1999
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013

University of Northern Colorado (PhD)
School of Applied Psychology and Counselor Education
Greeley, CO 80639
June 25, 1981
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring/Summer 2013

Combined
None


Relatedly, the following programs have decided to withdraw applications for initial accreditation:
Antioch-Santa Barbara (Clinical PsyD)
Union Institute and University (Brattleboro, Vt. & Cincinnati, Ohio) (Clinical PsyD)
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised to see a number of university-based programs on there--Howard (Counseling Psych), and Minnesota, Kentucky, Missouri, and Northern Colorado for School Psych. I can't speak to Howard, but all of the school psych programs are pretty well-reputed, and three of the four are associated with major universities. I really wonder what's up there. Not surprisingly, the clinical list is all FSPS except for CUNY. From the looks of it, Forest lost their initial appeal, too.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious what U of Missouri-Columbia did to get on there (time to degree completion maybe?), as I have heard good things about their program.

None the university-based programs outside of CUNY (i.e., Howard, Kentucky, Missouri, Minnesota, or Northern Colorado) have any statement of explanation on their websites, which In find kind of baffling--given these programs' good reputations, I would have thought they would have something front and center about what the issues were and and what they are doing to address it. University of Rhode Island did that a couple of years ago when their school psych PhD program was on probation, and I thought it was an excellent move (they've since gotten off probation, btw)
 
The Program Director at CUNY is reporting that they are no longer on probation after their spring 2012 site visit (heard in person). And reflected on their website's home page.
 
The Program Director at CUNY is reporting that they are no longer on probation after their spring 2012 site visit (heard in person). And reflected on their website's home page.


Hmm... I wonder why APA hasn't updated their accreditation page yet, given the importance of accredition to applicants?
 
Updated, as of 11/4/2012 (also updated the main post)

From the APA website:

Clinical


Alliant International University—Fresno and Sacramento** (PsyD)
(formerly listed as California School of Professional Psychology-Fresno; Alliant International University—Fresno)
Fresno, CA 93727
June 3, 1994
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2013
**Will be reviewed as two separate programs in 2013


Argosy University, San Francisco Bay Area (PsyD)
(formerly listed as Argosy University, San Francisco Bay Area Campus)
Department of Clinical Psychology
Alameda, CA 94501
May 6, 2003
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013


The City College of New York, City University of New York (PhD)
Department of Psychology
New York, NY 10031
Dec. 1, 1968
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2012

ETA: Cuny has this note on their website:

Accreditation
The program has just been informed that it has been fully reaccredited by the Commission on Accreditation of the American Psychological Association.

Fielding Graduate University (PhD)
(formerly listed as The Fielding Institute)
Department of Psychology
Santa Barbara, CA 93105
July 17, 1991
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring 2013

Forest Institute of Professional Psychology (PsyD)
Springfield, MO 65807
Oct. 14, 1994
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013

John F. Kennedy University (PsyD)
Graduate School of Professional Psychology
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
May 30, 2003
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring/Summer 2013


Counseling

Howard University (PhD)
School of Education
Washington, DC 20059
April 29, 2002
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled 2014

School

University of Kentucky (PhD)
Department of Educational, School, and Counseling Psychology
Lexington, KY 40506-0017
Feb. 18, 1986
Accredited, on probation (Under appeal)
Next site visit scheduled 2014

University of Minnesota (PhD)
Department of Educational Psychology
College of Education and Human Development
Minneapolis, MN 55455
May 1, 1972
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled 2014

University of Missouri—Columbia (PhD)
Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology
Columbia, MO 65211
Feb. 5, 1999
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Fall 2013

University of Northern Colorado (PhD)
School of Applied Psychology and Counselor Education
Greeley, CO 80639
June 25, 1981
Accredited, on probation
Next site visit scheduled Spring/Summer 2013

Combined
None


Relatedly, the following programs have decided to withdraw applications for initial accreditation:
Antioch-Santa Barbara (Clinical PsyD)
Union Institute and University (Brattleboro, Vt. & Cincinnati, Ohio) (Clinical PsyD)

I am completely unsurprised Howard's counseling program is on probation. I've heard a lot of criticisms about the program from their students. They have very few, if any (I can't remember which), full-time faculty. They also have to take a number of their courses in the psychology dept (they are housed in education) because their program does not have the faculty to teach it.

Also, Howard's clinical program is in shambles too. I really don't understand how Howard still has an accredited clinical program. It's terrible all around for these 2 programs at Howard programs.
 
I am completely unsurprised Howard's counseling program is on probation. I've heard a lot of criticisms about the program from their students. They have very few, if any (I can't remember which), full-time faculty. They also have to take a number of their courses in the psychology dept (they are housed in education) because their program does not have the faculty to teach it.

Also, Howard's clinical program is in shambles too. I really don't understand how Howard still has an accredited clinical program. It's terrible all around for these 2 programs at Howard programs.

If that's the case, wow, and I feel bad for the students there. I wonder if they can address issues that systemic in the time frame that APA provides,..
 
Last edited:
I'm curious what U of Missouri-Columbia did to get on there (time to degree completion maybe?), as I have heard good things about their program.

I don't know about their counseling program but I "loved" their clinical program on paper and in person (via interview). However, one of my mentors strongly encouraged me to reconsider for multiple reasons (granted, I don't know if I would have listened to him either if my POI had not decided to up & have a stroke in the middle of class that year). Not sure if there were comparable issues across depts or not.
 
If you were to choose between applying to a program that has just lost its probation status ( like CUNY's City College) to one that has applied for APA accreditation and is awaiting outcome ( like CUNY's John Jay clinical-Forensic program) which one would you opt for?

Thanks for your input,
Compassionate!
 
I have yet to see a "speciality" focused program attain APA-acred status, so I'd be very hesitant to say John Jay-Forensic. The biggest knock on those programs tend to be that they are too focused, and I believe APA has said as much. JJ has a good reputation as a clinical program, but I wouldn't recommend any speciality program because they put the cart before the horse.
 
Therapist 4 change: I hear you! But doesn't JJ have these facts ( about generalist vs. specialty training)?
Why would they apply for accreditation if they knew they did not stand a chance?? ( Yes anyone CAN apply but they must know the odds, don't you think?)

I find it interesting that JJ's mean year to completion is between 5 and 6 years while City College's is 9 ( yikes! )
But City is accredited and JJ is not....

Would the APA accreditation or lack of make a huge difference in applying to academic positions?

Thanks,
Compassionate1
 
Therapist 4 change: I hear you! But doesn't JJ have these facts ( about generalist vs. specialty training)?
Why would they apply for accreditation if they knew they did not stand a chance?? ( Yes anyone CAN apply but they must know the odds, don't you think?)

I find it interesting that JJ's mean year to completion is between 5 and 6 years while City College's is 9 ( yikes! )
But City is accredited and JJ is not....

Would the APA accreditation or lack of make a huge difference in applying to academic positions?

Thanks,
Compassionate1

Yes, at this point you need to come from an APA approved school and internship site to be competitive for academic jobs. My guess is that in the future top R1 universities will also accept people from clinical science approved programs but we still have a long way to go for that.
 
Would the APA accreditation or lack of make a huge difference in applying to academic positions?

YES.

Unless you work in a strictly non-clinical appointment and/or capacity, APA-acred. will most likely be the requirement. The same should hold true for forensic work, though there may be exceptions out there. If you plan on doing forensic work (involving working within the court system), you'll want APA-acred. everything and ideally have an ABPP in your speciality area.
 
YES.

Unless you work in a strictly non-clinical appointment and/or capacity, APA-acred. will most likely be the requirement. The same should hold true for forensic work, though there may be exceptions out there. If you plan on doing forensic work (involving working within the court system), you'll want APA-acred. everything and ideally have an ABPP in your speciality area.
Really, lack of APA accreditation would be seen as a negative for many non-clinical appointments as well. I can't think of any new faculty members I know of that did not come from accredited programs.
 
I have yet to see a "speciality" focused program attain APA-acred status, so I'd be very hesitant to say John Jay-Forensic. The biggest knock on those programs tend to be that they are too focused, and I believe APA has said as much. JJ has a good reputation as a clinical program, but I wouldn't recommend any speciality program because they put the cart before the horse.

Hi again,

Then are there any forensic programs which are APA- acred? And how did they manage to do that? ( since forensic is a specialty)

Perhaps even more importantly: Are there any APA-acred forensic programs in NY? Because if there are not, or there is only one, then wouldn't that mean that forensic jobs would have to be open to graduates from non-accredited programs as well? ( supply and demand)

Thanks,
Compassionate1
 
Because being in the process of applying for accreditation looks a lot better than having given up completely on receiving it.

Interesting point.... Does that mean, though, that they are intentionally misleading applicants to believe that they are making an effort in that direction when they know all along that it is futile??

Or could it perhaps be attributed to potential addition of Police Psychology to APA -acred programs and they are hoping to qualify for it that way?

If anyone has more info on suggested change re adding Police Psychology to existing approved programs, I would appreciate if you let me know.

Thanks,
Compassionate1
 
The job market isn't local these days so supply & demand probably won't work like that. I imagine many places in NYC get applicants with stellar forensic backgrounds from all around the US and would have little reason to accept someone from an uanccredited program just because they want to stay nearby when they have someone with better credentials who would be happy to move there. This is actually exactly why so many PsyDs in Cali seem to be struggling right now...the good jobs aren't necessarily going to the folks who trained there.

Of course, networking can overcome some disadvantages, but I imagine an unaccredited program is too significant for many places to overlook.
 
The job market isn't local these days so supply & demand probably won't work like that. I imagine many places in NYC get applicants with stellar forensic backgrounds from all around the US and would have little reason to accept someone from an uanccredited program just because they want to stay nearby when they have someone with better credentials who would be happy to move there. This is actually exactly why so many PsyDs in Cali seem to be struggling right now...the good jobs aren't necessarily going to the folks who trained there.

Of course, networking can overcome some disadvantages, but I imagine an unaccredited program is too significant for many places to overlook.

This makes sense. Thanks.
 
The job market isn't local these days so supply & demand probably won't work like that. I imagine many places in NYC get applicants with stellar forensic backgrounds from all around the US and would have little reason to accept someone from an uanccredited program just because they want to stay nearby when they have someone with better credentials who would be happy to move there. This is actually exactly why so many PsyDs in Cali seem to be struggling right now...the good jobs aren't necessarily going to the folks who trained there.

Of course, networking can overcome some disadvantages, but I imagine an unaccredited program is too significant for many places to overlook.

In addition to the excellent take Ollie provided above, keep in mind that currently, the accepted method of attaining expertise in any subfield of clinical psych is to first gain solid training in general clinical psychology principles. While some specialty exposure/training can occur while in grad school (as often happens), this shouldn't come at the expense of other key generalist components. Rather, much of the higher-level and in-depth work is now being pushed off into internship and post-doc.

This is why the APA isn't accrediting highly-specialized tracks that forego what they (and the field as a whole) have decided to be essential aspects of clinical psychology education.
 
In addition to the excellent take Ollie provided above, keep in mind that currently, the accepted method of attaining expertise in any subfield of clinical psych is to first gain solid training in general clinical psychology principles. While some specialty exposure/training can occur while in grad school (as often happens), this shouldn't come at the expense of other key generalist components. Rather, much of the higher-level and in-depth work is now being pushed off into internship and post-doc.

This is why the APA isn't accrediting highly-specialized tracks that forego what they (and the field as a whole) have decided to be essential aspects of clinical psychology education.

AA: Understood. Yet, if you check on JJ's site, they state that their emphasis is first clinical ( general) and only then on the forensic specialty. But I think that what you are saying is ( please correct me if I am wrong) that it is not really possible to accomplish both within the scope of the program itself.

Compassionate1
 
I think a foundation can be established during school, but most areas of specialization require more raw hours of practice and study, as classes are at best a jumping off point for meaningful learning.

N=1....I didn't know what I didn't know until my internship mentor blew my mind w. how he broke down a score summary sheet. He tied in imaging and other clinical data that i didn't fully appreciate at that time. Now those things come much more naturally, but back then I just didn't view the data like that. Stimulus Bound I guess. ;)
 
Interesting point.... Does that mean, though, that they are intentionally misleading applicants to believe that they are making an effort in that direction when they know all along that it is futile??

I don't know much about John Jay at all. I just know that, currently, APA only accredits clinical, counseling, school, and combined programs. So, I'm not sure how that fact is compatible with John Jay's description of actively seeking accreditation. They can be actively seeking it all they want, I suppose--still not going to make a difference unless a large shift occurs on one side of the equation or the other.
 
The job market isn't local these days so supply & demand probably won't work like that. I imagine many places in NYC get applicants with stellar forensic backgrounds from all around the US and would have little reason to accept someone from an uanccredited program....

Jobs that have a search committee will definitely recruit nationally, though even regional and more "local" positions in more popular cities will draw from across the country. I looked at very specific types of positions, so I can't comment on the general job market.

Of course, networking can overcome some disadvantages, but I imagine an unaccredited program is too significant for many places to overlook.

Acred. status is probably the first cut if there are more than a handful of applicants because there is no incentive for the place to "take the risk". Licensure is generally cumbersome with all of the right paperwork, but going for "equivalency" is just an added hurdle.

Networking helps get an application moved up in a pile, or it could even get you on the shirt list, but everything else probably has to be there to move forward. This is why I'm a broken record on here about only applying to APA-acred programs and internships. I'm sure there are good programs and sites that aren't, but the above consequences really make that path problematic, at best.
 
I think a foundation can be established during school, but most areas of specialization require more raw hours of practice and study, as classes are at best a jumping off point for meaningful learning.

N=1....I didn't know what I didn't know until my internship mentor blew my mind w. how he broke down a score summary sheet. He tied in imaging and other clinical data that i didn't fully appreciate at that time. Now those things come much more naturally, but back then I just didn't view the data like that. Stimulus Bound I guess. ;)

+1, although my own eye-opening experiences have come on postdoc, where the sheer amount of knowledge my supervisors possess in and of itself is staggering, let alone the ways they then apply it all to individual clinical cases.

I also agree that laying the foundation for specialty knowledge can certainly occur in grad school, and I'd argue that this probably ends up happening in more cases than not (e.g., if someone knows they want to go neuropsych while in grad school, it'd almost be silly not to get neuropsych clinical and research experience while there). However, what I see happening more and more frequently is that students (understandably) are wanting to hone in on this specialty practice before they've had a chance to learn a whole lot about other areas of clinical psychology. It then falls onto their supervisors and programs to reign them back in and, if need be, force them into the necessary breadth of training. In a highly-focused, track-mentality program, I don't know that this reigning in would happen as much as it should.
 
+1, although my own eye-opening experiences have come on postdoc, where the sheer amount of knowledge my supervisors possess in and of itself is staggering, let alone the ways they then apply it all to individual clinical cases.

I also agree that laying the foundation for specialty knowledge can certainly occur in grad school, and I'd argue that this probably ends up happening in more cases than not (e.g., if someone knows they want to go neuropsych while in grad school, it'd almost be silly not to get neuropsych clinical and research experience while there). However, what I see happening more and more frequently is that students (understandably) are wanting to hone in on this specialty practice before they've had a chance to learn a whole lot about other areas of clinical psychology. It then falls onto their supervisors and programs to reign them back in and, if need be, force them into the necessary breadth of training. In a highly-focused, track-mentality program, I don't know that this reigning in would happen as much as it should.

What can I say, ( both to you and Therapist 4 Change): You certainly rest your case! Although, my situation is different. I am in a non-clinical / non accredited program already. Why? to make a long story short, my circumstances did not allow for earlier schooling ( as a young woman in my country of origin, I was actually prohibited from pursuing higher education altogether. Immigrated to the States and started anew. My English is largely self-taught. Took GREs 20 years out of high school). I applied to the program where I am at because my mentor is affiliated with it and she is an eminent researcher. We work well together. I do have other, shorter, MA degrees and am in the process of clocking my 3000 hours as a MHC. So a clinical - forensic program with solid training, albeit not accredited, is probably better than my current program and would also lead to licensing. ( which would probably be superior to LMHC license) Plus, is may be possible for me to keep working with my mentor if I go there. But now that I have read everything you all said, I am experiencing cognitive dissonance all over again...
 
..my mentor is affiliated with it and she is an eminent researcher. We work well together. I do have other, shorter, MA degrees and am in the process of clocking my 3000 hours as a MHC. So a clinical - forensic program with solid training, albeit not accredited, is probably better than my current program and would also lead to licensing. ( which would probably be superior to LMHC license) Plus, is may be possible for me to keep working with my mentor if I go there. But now that I have read everything you all said, I am experiencing cognitive dissonance all over again...

Do you want to be a clinician, researcher, mix of the two, other? You'll want to check around locally (or wherever you plan on living longterm) about the opportunities available for each path. My perspective of forensic work is a work in progress, so definitely don't take my word as gospel. Doing a search within the clinical forum for "forensic" should pop up some related threads.
 
Do you want to be a clinician, researcher, mix of the two, other? You'll want to check around locally (or wherever you plan on living longterm) about the opportunities available for each path. My perspective of forensic work is a work in progress, so definitely don't take my word as gospel. Doing a search within the clinical forum for "forensic" should pop up some related threads.

A combination of two would be nice ( although, currently, I have more clinical experience than research). Plus, I have been teaching college courses for a number of years now and am considered a strong instructor, so this is a possibility too. I do appreciate your candidness and did search for forensic threads on the forum and will continue to do so in the next few days in an effort to obtain as much pertinent information as I can. It is a difficult decision as some of the factors are unknown / hard to predict ( programs' status in a couple of years as well as job market. Impact of DSM V etc.).

Compassionate1
 
Top