MLA - Psychology at Harvard University

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

theilluminati

New Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

First post! - I am interested in a master's program in psychology (specifically clinical psych in hopes of eventually getting my doctorate) and was wondering if you guys had thoughts on the ALM in Clinical Psych at Harvard's Extension School.

Thanks!
TI

Members don't see this ad.
 
Has anyone has experience with the MLA Psychology program at Harvard Extension school. Would this be a viable degree as far as job searching? The degree costs a fair amount and any type of masters does not allow you to be a licensed psychologist but I know of several other positions.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The actual degree is not in psychology but in "Extension Studies" with a concentration in psychology. I wouldn't expect it to help you with Ph.D. applications or clinical jobs. What kinds of positions are you looking for?
 
I was thinking it could help so,done get into a Psych program who has an MA in the counseling Feild.
 
I was thinking it could help so,done get into a Psych program who has an MA in the counseling Feild.

It wouldn't help you more than the counseling degree you already have. The ALM degree that Harvard offers is very different from an M.A. in psychology. There's really no prestige in a degree from the extension school if you're looking for Ivy cachet.

You might want to post in the psychology forum if you're looking for admissions help. Those guys have been there.

Edit: Where did my sig go?!
 
Last edited:
I'll add a few comments since I'm currently at HES doing an ALM in Psych (general right now, possibly switching to clinical).

First, in re to the comment about no prestige from any extension school: this poster may or may not have any experience with extension schools. Ask anyone around Harvard Yard and they will tell you the ALM is very well respected... as a degree. In psychology, it may be harder to get a relevant opinion.

I was in a master program that I did not like and had applied to law school when I decided to up and move from Texas to Boston to take advantage of the program. At 2k per class it is right at the same cost I was paying for a state school. The resources available to students create a situation unlike any other (opinion, of course).

As for getting into doctorate programs: (in general and not taking into account what degrees you already have). Harvard Medical has accepted HES students for those wishing to do an MD and get licensed as a Psychiatrist. The GSAS has accepted students who wish to do a PhD. And (applicable to my reason for selecting HES), Harvard Law has welcomed HES graduates. That seems indicative of HES's program being very admirable to graduate schools. I have also talked to other ALBs and ALMs who have been accepted to other graduate psych programs (all clinical except one).

As for rigor: the classes are open enrollment, the degree is not. You have to take three courses (for psych two of them are pre-selected) and make above a certain GPA to apply for formal admission. You only get so many chances to take some of them, or you're out. The seminar is grad-level writing in the field of psychology and anthropology. I believe all professors that teach this seminar are from Harvard Medical School. The class weeds out those who can't do Harvard-level writing. To even get in the seminar you also have to take a placement test - which includes a small literature review - and pass.

As for what the degree is for: Harvard now offers two options. The ALM that focuses on general psychology (you can choose from a lot of classes) or the ALM in Clinical Psychology (as one poster mentioned, the ALM is TECHNICALLY (on paper) in Extension Studies... but the focus (all forty hours) is in psychology. I guess you could say that the statistics class isn't psychologically focused LOL... In general I think the degree is very similar to the MA I was in, minus the foreign language component. I would also say from my experience that the thesis is "puffed up" to be much harder. Remember, your advisor is a Harvard Professor.
I have met some people who plan to just stop at the masters level and do counseling (in their state, where the ALM is sufficient). Others have plans of the PhD or PsyD. Then you have those with interests in doing an ALM and MBA and doing organizational consulting, or me, with interests in a JD/PhD. I think the program is diverse enough that you can take what is applicable to your goal... Another alumnus is teaching at Carnegie Mellon and others are at less-prestigious state schools.

So in close, the poster who said it probably wouldn't help with clinical jobs, may be right, but I know students who are doing the clinical focus and disagree with his/her comment, so I'd have to personally disagree as well. I think it would very much help... And to the poster who said it is different than an MA - my experience suggests that it is not that different (but some), and that the degree has no prestige, this person is clearly not a student/faculty/alum of Harvard. I have yet to hear any student or faculty suggest (or even come close to hinting) that the degree is not prestigious. I do agree that being admitted to the program is much much MUCH easier. But there is a reason such a small percentage (in the 5% range) actually complete the degree, Harvard professors expect Harvard results. I do not believe that Harvard offers any easy rides. But this door is certainly much easier to get into (just be ready for the ride when you're in... the Medical School professors are very tough).

Hopefully this has shed some light, if you have specific questions feel free to PM me... I can provide more details about the HU campus, resources, admission, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The OP has one post... 2+ years ago. I suspect that he won't see your response. ;)
 
And to the poster who said it is different than an MA - my experience suggests that it is not that different (but some), and that the degree has no prestige, this person is clearly not a student/faculty/alum of Harvard. I have yet to hear any student or faculty suggest (or even come close to hinting) that the degree is not prestigious. I do agree that being admitted to the program is much much MUCH easier. But there is a reason such a small percentage (in the 5% range) actually complete the degree, Harvard professors expect Harvard results. I do not believe that Harvard offers any easy rides. But this door is certainly much easier to get into (just be ready for the ride when you're in... the Medical School professors are very tough).
Re: the bolded part of the quote, I have heard many people suggest just that about the Harvard Extension School. Students and faculty at the Extension School, no. People from other institutions (or other programs at Harvard), yes.

When employers hire applicants with degrees from a top-tier colleges, they aren't just looking for the quality of education that these degrees represent. They're also looking for the caliber of student who gets admitted to a highly-selective program in the first place. That's where much of the prestige attached to schools like Harvard comes from. I'm not suggesting that the ALM isn't worth the money, or that it isn't a good-quality program. I'm suggesting that no one is kidding themselves about extension students being in the same bracket as other Harvard students, either on the job market or anywhere else.

If anyone in this thread is looking for master's programs in psychology, check your state regulations carefully. Many (most?) states won't allow you to practice with just an M.A. in psychology, and I'm not sure what states consider an MLA/ALM sufficient.

Edit: Apparently the ALM program at the Extension School allows you to take distance education courses. There's another thread in this forum about distance clinical education, so I won't go into this in depth, but I would be wary of getting any sort of clinical education online.
 
Last edited:
It's always good to hear other's perceptions of the ALM or ALB... and we HESers should never entirely discount them. We all are entitled to our opinions...

Re: the bolded part of the quote, I have heard many people suggest just that about the Harvard Extension School. Students and faculty at the Extension School, no. People from other institutions (or other programs at Harvard), yes.

This would simply be a difference in experience. I know many Harvard Alumni and have never heard anything negative about HES, quite the contrary actually. For the record, faculty at the extension school are usually faculty of the HC or GSAS or HLS or HBS, etc. Readers should take my words and the words of the above poster as simply our own personal experience. Do your own research and inquire with those in the field and the grad programs you have an interest in. I am in Harvard Yard daily, and in the library a few times a week. I often ask what other Harvard School students think about HES when I see an opportunity to inquire. Again, just different responses I guess. Mine are coming directly from Widener students and those I visit with around the Yard. I am curious to what school you are from? Is it Harvard Medical I assume? You really hear negative things about the extension students?

When employers hire applicants with degrees from a top-tier colleges, they aren't just looking for the quality of education that these degrees represent. They're also looking for the caliber of student who gets admitted to a highly-selective program in the first place. That's where much of the prestige attached to schools like Harvard comes from. I'm not suggesting that the ALM isn't worth the money, or that it isn't a good-quality program. I'm suggesting that no one is kidding themselves about extension students being in the same bracket as other Harvard students, either on the job market or anywhere else.

Absolutely we agree on this. Admission requirements are worlds easier, but also not "easy" as it's too often "easy" to suggest... especially for those that are A. not at HES and B. Not affiliated with Harvard in any way at all. (I assume that you are).

Extension students are all too often reminded that their level of accomplishment is not on par with Harvard College... most of us disagree, but still realize this stems simply from the difference in application process competitiveness. We hear the same rhetoric: "I'm not saying it isn't a good degree, worth the cost, but you KNOW it isn't like all the other Harvies, right?" LOL... When that line comes from non-Harvard affiliates, it's very annoying.

The degree's prestige depends on many factors, including who you're talking to, specifically what they do know (and most don't) of the admission process, of course rigor, and how the candidate presents himself - including the honesty of taking coursework at HES. Bottom line: Yes, the degree is prestigious; No, the degree is not as prestigeous as Harvard College or Harvard Law, etc. if you're looking for those clearing cut-throat admissions.

One point on this: Earning this degree can be a stepping stone in proving your worthiness to Harvard so that you CAN then apply to the higher-standard admission schools (this is my reason for attending HES: to increase the chances of admittance to the Law School... and of course its a hellofa great deal. A quick google search shows many alumni who have gone from an ALB or ALM to a Harvard MD, JD, PhD (less of these), M.Ed., M.Div... it REALLY comes down to what a student wishes for HES to accomplish within their academic career goals. Passing off your degree as one from the College or GSAS is certainly unacceptable.


If anyone in this thread is looking for master's programs in psychology, check your state regulations carefully. Many (most?) states won't allow you to practice with just an M.A. in psychology, and I'm not sure what states consider an MLA/ALM sufficient.

I don't know any state that won't allow you to practice with a masters level clinical degree. Each student should absolutely do their own research and not rely on forums of any kind. State codes are easy to find online for just about every state. The board can direct you to relevant code. Every state that I have looked at (only about ten or so) offer a master-level license usually termed "Psychological Associate" (texas) or something of that nature where the clinician practices under the [limited] supervision of a fully licensed psychologist or psychiatrist. For those states that I looked at, the clinical ALM will satisfy this requirement. More importantly, it gets you clinical and research experience which looks good on Clinical PhD applications... forget the fact that Harvard Medical School professors teach the courses and the level of education is is a notch above most. (opinion of course)

Edit: Apparently the ALM program at the Extension School allows you to take distance education courses. There's another thread in this forum about distance clinical education, so I won't go into this in depth, but I would be wary of getting any sort of clinical education online.

1. The ALM in General Psychology is hybrid and not intended for those with a clinical interest, but you can also do the entire thing in person if you like and make it "feel" more clinical-ish. You can't, however, do even that one all online. 2. The ALM in Clinical Psychology (harder to gain admission to) is clinical in nature, and requires residency. I strongly encourage those considering a degree in psychology from the extension school to come to Cambridge. The academic culture is like no other that I've experienced. Even for those with a purely academic intent, do the General Psych program in person. The resources Harvard offers are crazy awesome.

I think the sum of the above posters' comments and mine are this (even though said from a different perspective):

An ALB or ALM from Harvard is prestigious and is a huge accomplishment.

It is in my mind, a greater accomplishment than most U.S. Universities.

Those who complete the degree will be an alumnus of Harvard and most do join the local Harvard Clubs.

An ALB or ALM DOES NOT include the prestige associated with earning competitive admittance into the College or Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.

You should not let the above fact deter you from earning an excellent degree at the country's top University. (remember, there is an admissions process even at HES)

If you want to appeal to employers looking for the elite grads or simply want the puffery that comes with the other schools, then apply to those schools instead, or come to Harvard, complete an ALM, write a top-notch thesis, and GET TO KNOW professors from those schools, and then apply to them. OR - simply be proud of your ALB or ALM and educate your interviewer.



I simply don't want those considering an ALM or ALB to be turned off because they keep hearing, "Yea, it's Harvard, BUUUUTTTT..."

Consider those things, yes.

But do not be put off because of them.

Know your competition in the job market and be ready to stand by whatever degree you have from whichever establishment you received it.
 
I largely agree with your post. I haven't heard anything particularly negative about HES students, and it does seem like a good program. Just a couple of things:
I don't know any state that won't allow you to practice with a masters level clinical degree.
There are states that don't have master's-level psychology licensure, yes. There are also states that don't have a master's-level license in psychology but allow you under some circumstances to be licensed as an MFT or LPC. I'm not quite sure that an ALM is always treated the same way as an M.A. for licensing purposes. Harvard says this:
...graduates [will] not be eligible for psychology licensure in the commonwealth based on an A.L.M. degree
I'm not sure whether Massachusetts might allow licensure in counseling or MFT with an ALM or M.A., but it's worth researching if you're planning on staying in the state.
1. The ALM in General Psychology is hybrid and not intended for those with a clinical interest, but you can also do the entire thing in person if you like and make it "feel" more clinical-ish. You can't, however, do even that one all online. 2. The ALM in Clinical Psychology (harder to gain admission to) is clinical in nature, and requires residency.

I don't want to derail this thread, but getting any clinical education online seems weird to me. We can discuss this in the distance education thread if you're interested.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I largely agree with your post. I haven't heard anything particularly negative about HES students, and it does seem like a good program. Just a couple of things:

There are states that don't have master's-level psychology licensure, yes. There are also states that don't have a master's-level license in psychology but allow you under some circumstances to be licensed as an MFT or LPC. I'm not quite sure that an ALM is always treated the same way as an M.A. for licensing purposes. Harvard says this:
I'm not sure whether Massachusetts might allow licensure in counseling or MFT with an ALM or M.A., but it's worth researching if you're planning on staying in the state.

I don't want to derail this thread, but getting any clinical education online seems weird to me. We can discuss this in the distance education thread if you're interested.

Good to know about MA... I hadn't looked since I plan to return to Texas. (It's in my blood I just can't stay away). I'm sure the ALM will probably satisfy the LPC requirement for most states, but like you, I have no idea. Readers certainly need to do all the leg work regarding licensure before embarking on any program.

As for online components, like I said: the clinical program is not composed of online coursework. Residence is a strict requirement. Also this new clinical focus is new. I have a friend who got an ALB and an ALM in Psychology back in the 70's and there was no clinical option. The online program (general psychology) does not have a clinical component. Those who wish to do an ALM in Clinical Psychology must come to Harvard U.

Not to further the de-railment (lol) but I have mixed feelings about online coursework in any practical field (psychology, law, architecture, etc.), but I say play it safe: don't do programs like these online. That's why I'm in Cambridge and not Dallas. :)

Qwerk, thanks for good input.
 
any type of masters does not allow you to be a licensed psychologist

Qwerk sort of alluded to this, but that's not true everywhere you go.

In a few states and provinces there are licensed masters-level psychologists. Kansas in the US and Alberta in Canada both have masters-level psychologists, but I know there are other places (those are just the two that I remember).

This would matter if you planned to work in a state or province where there are masters-level psychologists.
 
It is probably better stated that with very few exceptions...licensure as a psychologist requires completion of a doctoral program. While there are a couple of states that have non-doctoral levels provisions, the scope and practice of psychology is different for them. The bottom line is a person can be a therapist and come from a variety of training backgrounds, but being a psychologist (how it is meant and understood by the vast majority of people) requires draining at the doctoral level.
 
Most of the time, in most places.

I think the states that have master's-level psychology licenses that are different from LPC/MFT usually call them "psychological associates" or something along those lines.
 
I think the states that have master's-level psychology licenses that are different from LPC/MFT usually call them "psychological associates" or something along those lines.

In Kansas they're called "masters level psychologists" and in Alberta they're called "psychologists." I'm not disagreeing with any of you, just pointing out that the rule of "psychologists have a PhD" is not lockstep. :p
 
I think the sum of the discussion here is how IMPERATIVE it is for students to know their licensing options before they select any program. Fortunately, there may be something you can always fall back on (LPC and LMFT come to mind quickly for my state) but really it's each student's job to know what she or he can or can't do with the degree they seek. ...The Harvard ALM (trying to tie back into the original discussion) is no exception.

Just an interesting thing here: Texas has a small movement of Psychological Associates - licensed only at the Masters Degree level - that have no intension of pursing further graduate study. It's an interesting group of folks who I've talked to a couple of times over the last few years. They advocate for rights as Master-Level Associates. I'm not familiar enough with the movement to comment on being for/against it, but the fact that it exists (and probably does in other states too) is related to this thread. But even at the master's level, it's still important to know what your degree allows you to do or bars you from doing.

Here is their website for anyone who wants to take a gander:

Texas Association of Psychological Associates
http://www.txapa.net
 
In Kansas they're called "masters level psychologists" and in Alberta they're called "psychologists." I'm not disagreeing with any of you, just pointing out that the rule of "psychologists have a PhD" is not lockstep. :p

Weird. I didn't know that. Kind of makes me wish they'd standardize it. Most people expect someone using the title to have a Ph.D. (I did until a second ago.) It's a little like those states that allow people to use the title "social worker" without social work credentials or licensure. The public doesn't know the difference.
 
Weird. I didn't know that. Kind of makes me wish they'd standardize it. Most people expect someone using the title to have a Ph.D. (I did until a second ago.) It's a little like those states that allow people to use the title "social worker" without social work credentials or licensure. The public doesn't know the difference.

Across the pond, all that is required to be a "psychologist" is a college degree in psychology. LOL - crazy right?
 
Last edited:
Weird. I didn't know that. Kind of makes me wish they'd standardize it. Most people expect someone using the title to have a Ph.D. (I did until a second ago.) It's a little like those states that allow people to use the title "social worker" without social work credentials or licensure. The public doesn't know the difference.

That's a very good point -- most professionals (I don't know about people in general) DO expect psychologists to all have a PhD. But they don't, necessarily, depending on where you live, practice, and/or went to school. Curiously, Canada has more jurisdictions than the US where masters-level licensed clinicians are given the title "psychologist," even though they have fewer jurisdictions overall.

And if a psychologist with a Masters degree moves to a province where only PhD-level folks can be called "psychologists," there's an act of government (the Mutual Recognition Act) which says they get to keep their title so you have people in Ontario with their Masters practicing as "psychologist" (because they earned their degree/license in a province which recognizes masters psychologist) and people with their masters practicing as a "psychological associate" (because they earned their degree/license in Ontario). This is in addition to some of the psychologists in Ontario having their PhDs.

Edit: Here is a neat table that shows which provinces have psychologists without a PhD: http://www.cpa.ca/education/accreditation/PTlicensingrequirements/

And in Florida, there are LCSWs who are MEds (not MSWs). There aren't a lot of them, and they may have been grandfathered in (I haven't been able to tell) but they do exist. In those cases you have a licensed clinical social worker who does not have a degree in social work (unless their Bachelors was in SW).

Credentialing across the disciplines and across states and provinces really fascinates me because there are SO MANY loopholes and exceptions and different ways of doing things.

I fancied the idea of creating a website that listed all the different degrees, credentials, licenses, and levels of licensure across all states and provinces, but I didn't want to go insane. :p
 
Last edited:
You can't assume someone's degree, licensing, etc. unless you ask them.

I recently accepted a position as a "social worker" in the social services dept at the local hospital. This is the title. I do not have a degree or license in social services/social work, but I will be expected to sign off as a social services worker on all paperwork. There are apparently licensed psychologists in the same position. They're still expected to identify themselves as social service workers to patients.
 
That's actually a not-uncommon loophole. "Social service(s) worker" (which is unregulated) instead of "Social Worker" (which is regulated).

The LCSWs in Florida are identified in title and license as Licensed Clinical Social Workers (regulated) even though they may or may not have a degree in Social Work.
 
That's actually a not-uncommon loophole. "Social service(s) worker" (which is unregulated) instead of "Social Worker" (which is regulated).

The LCSWs in Florida are identified in title and license as Licensed Clinical Social Workers (regulated) even though they may or may not have a degree in Social Work.

My official title (as hired in job description) is technically "social worker," but I sign paperwork as "social services worker." It's still odd to me.

I presumed it had to do with loopholes, but it still seems quirky.
 
All of these "loopholes" are why psychologists (as a profession) need to push for a 100% protected title and scope of practice. It is confusing to the public and also to other healthcare professionals. There needs to be ONE standard for psychologists, as this piecemeal approach is causing far more confusion than should be allowed.
 
All of these "loopholes" are why psychologists (as a profession) need to push for a 100% protected title and scope of practice. It is confusing to the public and also to other healthcare professionals. There needs to be ONE standard for psychologists, as this piecemeal approach is causing far more confusion than should be allowed.

Do you propose a federal (or international) regulation, then?

I could easily imagine a bunch of state boards (of social work, MFT, or what have you) objecting vehemently to federal, one-size-fits-all regulation in the US. I don't know how it would work in Canada or the UK, though...
 
Do you propose a federal (or international) regulation, then?

I could easily imagine a bunch of state boards (of social work, MFT, or what have you) objecting vehemently to federal, one-size-fits-all regulation in the US. I don't know how it would work in Canada or the UK, though...

I would want it to be national, as international wouldn't be enforceable (in a meaningful way). Why would the state boards of OTHER professions care how psychologists govern themselves? I can see the psych associates and non-doctoral school psychologists probably taking exception to it, but they both "have a dog in the fight".
 
What I meant was that in those states and provinces that currently have psychologists without PhDs, there would be resistance to a national board which would then change them in title and scope of practice. That resistance would be issue-specific.

On a broader level, you also have to consider the politics of ceding licensure to be a federal issue. Even groups of PhD-level psychologists could easily oppose this for a whole bunch of reasons. I can imagine a PhD psychologist group in Montana (for example) disagreeing strongly with some issue in regards to scope of practice or licensure as compared to a group of PhD psychologists in Florida.

That's just the nature of politics between places which are thousands of miles apart and work in different communities and different settings.

I'm curious now, though--have there been any similar federal-level regulatory or licensure boards on the federal level for other professions?
 
What I meant was that in those states and provinces that currently have psychologists without PhDs, there would be resistance to a national board which would then change them in title and scope of practice. That resistance would be issue-specific.

On a broader level, you also have to consider the politics of ceding licensure to be a federal issue. Even groups of PhD-level psychologists could easily oppose this for a whole bunch of reasons. I can imagine a PhD psychologist group in Montana (for example) disagreeing strongly with some issue in regards to scope of practice or licensure as compared to a group of PhD psychologists in Florida.

That's just the nature of politics between places which are thousands of miles apart and work in different communities and different settings.

I'm curious now, though--have there been any similar federal-level regulatory or licensure boards on the federal level for other professions?

I think all of that is still state regulated. What is fluid among states are government jobs (government attorneys have to go to ABA, government psychologists have to go to APA, etc.)... but states can still be free to regulate what they require for state licensure. For example, California doesn't require lawyers to attend ABA law schools. Some other states still allow for "reading the law" ... which means a law degree is never even obtained. I think the APA, AMA, and ABA are among the most powerful professional bodies... And they have yet to get uniform regulation among states.

I'd also be interested to know if there are federally regulated professions... that states have lost the power to regulate to the feds.



EDIT: I just thought of this... Airline Pilots "practice" in so many states, that might explain why they are regulated by the FAA. But even in that case states are still free to regulate light aircrafts and ultralights I think. But that's the closet profession I can think of with federal regs.
 
The NASW hasn't been able to get uniform regulations for/with social workers, either, but I don't get the impression they would really want to...

As it is now, there are 50 different sets of regulations. Most are roughly similar, but some states do their own thing (for example, California refuses reciprocity with basically the entire country).

In regards to Social Work in particular, some of the folks in this discussion might find this interesting: http://www.socwel.ku.edu/jimk/810handouts/LicensureReprocity.pdf (It mentions the situation with California.)
 
Well, this conversation has veered off into an interesting (to me, at least) area. :p
 
Well, this conversation has veered off into an interesting (to me, at least) area. :p

Ditto... not to mention the info about Harvard and HES will certainly be of use to others who may consider it as an option. ...even if not to OP. I am curious what OP decided to do a couple of years ago though LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Maybe Sunny and George are still lurking around... they had second-ed and third-ed the question. LOL

Suny was actually an entirely different thread to which George responded. That thread was combined to the OP's thread (as you had responded to both).

In other words: There were two different threads with the same topic (see the first two posts in this thread), you responded to both, and then they were combined to the current "there can be only one" thread. :thumbup:
 
The NASW hasn't been able to get uniform regulations for/with social workers, either, but I don't get the impression they would really want to...

The NASW does believe that people with social work degrees should be the only ones using the title. Although they've pushed through legislation in several states, there's no federal law, as with most professional titles.

Title protection especially makes sense in social work. Most of the people giving the profession a bad name aren't actual social workers in the degree/licensure sense. (The lady in The Sims that takes your kids away only has a high school education. They don't really have a college in Pleasantview.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
(The lady in The Sims that takes your kids away only has a high school education. They don't really have a college in Pleasantview.)

I don't know whether to chortle or grimace at that. My take on my former social work peers is that many were just itching to start yankin' babies away from Mom and Dad (or mindlessly enforcing any bureaucratic policy on the books for that matter).
 
(The lady in The Sims that takes your kids away only has a high school education. They don't really have a college in Pleasantview.)

They do if you have the University expansion pack!
 
They do if you have the University expansion pack!

I'm waiting for it to come out for Sims 3. I really wish they had a social work career track. I'm tired of being a ghost hunter.
 
Bumping this thread because it's been cited in another, and to speak to this:

I'm sure the ALM will probably satisfy the LPC requirement for most states, but like you, I have no idea. Readers certainly need to do all the leg work regarding licensure before embarking on any program.

I do not think the ALM would satisfy "the LPC requirement for most states." Several things about it that would specifically rule it out in many states: It's not a titled program in counseling (in the degree subject or concentration). It's not CACREP or CORE accredited. It doesn't closely follow the typical coursework and, especially, practicum requirements for a master's in professional counseling. All these taken together would probably rule it out in most states – possibly in all states, and the rules get tighter with time.

A HES ALM psychology graduate might be able to get some advanced standing towards a counseling program most of which would be completed elsewhere. This would be determined on a school-by-school and course-by-course basis.
 
Top