About the ads

Occupy the imbalance!

Discussion in 'Psychology [Psy.D. / Ph.D.]' started by MCParent, Jan 10, 2012.

  1. SDN is a nonprofit organization. Services are made possible through the generous support of SDN members and sponsors. Thank you.
  1. Markp

    Markp Clinical Psychologist

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,266
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 5+ Year Member

    SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)
    Not really, this view has been supported in the literature. It's clear that reducing the number of less desirable applicants for internship would reduce the overall demand which would relieve much of the stress on the system. There are several programs that are contributing to the problem and are generating future clinicians at a pace that the available internship resources cannot handle.

    The problem is two fold.

    1. Generating applicants that are not competitive for internship.
    2. Generating applicants in excess of what can be supported by the available resources for continued training.

    In both cases, schools that generate high numbers of less desirable applicants to internships are responsible for this problem. It would be less clear if these clinician assembly lines were producing highly competitive candidates in vast numbers, but they are not. Certainly, I am not maligning individuals who attend these programs, because I have met very talented graduates from every program, but we have to look at the overall outcomes from these programs and not just the exceptional individual who may happen to shine when graduating from one of these 15 programs. If these 15 programs alone did not graduate students there would be several hundred less applicants fighting over the same number of slots. Stating that this is not a significant part of the problem is rubbish. Are there other problems, yes, of course there are, but this is the low hanging fruit on the tree.

    Clearly these 15 programs (as well as all programs) have a responsibility to do the following:

    1. Ensure they are generating competitive applicants.
    2. Ensure that accredited internship opportunities exist for their applicants.

    M
  2. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    You asked above how an internship being non-APA/non-APPIC mandated that it was low quality, so I'll respond to that point first before addressing this one. I never said that if an internship is non-APA then it's guaranteed to be low quality; I simply said that by circumventing the limited standards we do have (and the fact that they're limited is evident by there being APA internships that, as you mentioned, may not offer stellar training either), you're limiting the field by preventing the application of a national standard, and are participating in an internship for which there's limited ability to vouch for its standards.

    As for the post above, it's obvious that the current system is churning out too many graduates for the training (and particularly infrastructure) system to handle. The option, then, is to address the problem on the front end (e.g., accept fewer students) or the back end (e.g., create more internships). Problem is, if you go with the latter option, there's nothing to suggest that the programs currently with large cohorts that are also producing a disproportionate number of individuals who don't match to internships won't just accept more students. The objective data we have indicate that a handful of programs are producing these applicants; why would we ignore than data, and instead just assume that all programs offer equally-adequate training?
  3. KillerDiller

    KillerDiller

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,544
    Status:
    Post Doc
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Simple. One can say these things because these schools are consistently churning out students who fail to meet the discipline's post-training standards. You could claim that the APA/APPIC internships are biased against these FSPSs (thus contributing to their low match rates), but you can't claim that the EPPP is biased against them. The outcome data supports the notion that these schools are either 1) admitting individuals who are unlikely from the start to be able to meet training standards 2) not providing the necessary preparation and assistance to students to meet those standards, or some combination of the above.

    Agreed. If a particular traditional university program has a poor match rate or EPPP pass rate, then they should reform their program. FSPSs may look like they are the target because they tend to have the worst outcomes, but I doubt anyone on here would defend a traditional program with the same stats simply because it is a traditional program.

    Just because something is quasi-experimental in design does not mean it isn't factual or empirical. Yes, there are preexisting differences between FSPSs and traditional schools. Something about how they are different is leading to poor professional outcomes for FSPS students. To act like FSPSs produce just as desirable modal outcomes as traditional programs is willful ignorance at this point.
  4. roubs

    roubs Ph.D. Student

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    People attending / working for / profiting from the FSPS will always dig in their heels on this issue because the lower quality of these programs reflects poorly on their own life choices. It's in APA's own interest to strongarm them because the large # of poor quality graduates are contributing to wage deflation. These schools are just cashing in on the federal student loan gravy train/bubble and taking advantage of the fact that a lot of post-BA/BS students are realizing their liberal arts degrees qualify them to work at Starbucks.
  5. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    The reason for students seeking out educational opportunities in PsyD programs is due to the high quality of clinical psychology training in these programs. The EPPP is a poor indicator of clinical psychology training and is not an accurate outcome to measure the quality of a clinical psychology program. The EPPP needs to be adapted or changed to reflect what it purports to measure. Clinical Psychologist have already passed comprehensive exams during their training in their doctoral program, so why is it necessary to have another exam five years later over this subject matter?

    Clinical Psychologists numbers are basically a minority in the Mental Health field as there are many more LPC, LCSW, and LMFT that will see clients for $60 to $100 per hours. This is the reason for wage reductions not PsyD clinical psychologists. I know some clinical psychologist who will not accept Medicaid/Medicare clients or insurance and are completely self-pay at a rate between $180 to $200 per hour. They may only have ten clients whereas a LPC will charge $75.00 per hour and have 30 clients and they both have basically the same income. Maybe the psychologists should reduce their rate to $100 per hour and attract more clients but many psychologists will not see a client at this rate but refer them to a LPC or actually share an office with an LPC. Some psychologists have five LPC's working for them at a lower rate, so maybe psychologists are at some blame for the wage deflation. Some psychologists may only work two or three days a week but hire LPC to work five days a week for them.
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2012
  6. erg923

    erg923 Psychologist-Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,462
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Um, why is this paragraph even here? What does it add to your point? How does it refute the point made by Roubs?

    You can say your program's Psy.D. training is "top notch" till the cows come home, but the evidence (based on your posts) suggests that your training program has NOT provided you with the ability to effectively argue scientifically, nor how to evaluate evidence appropriately. I think these are valuable skills for a clinical psychologist to have. So does most of the world. You, apparently, do not. Further, even the one of two posts you have made here about clinical issues have largely been disagreed with. So, I think we can safely make the argument that you don't appear to be very well trained in clinical application either.
  7. KillerDiller

    KillerDiller

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,544
    Status:
    Post Doc
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Because students attend unaccredited programs and unaccredited internships and thus there is no way of knowing whether their training has met even the bare minimum standards of the field. Qualifying exams are set by the schools, thus there is no clear way of knowing how one qualifying exam may compare to another.

    "It's not a good measure" is not an adequate explanation of why students from a particular brand of school routinely have difficulty passing the EPPP. It is one of the only objective measures these programs have allowed to remain in place; they subvert all other attempts at standardization and accreditation.
  8. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    This. Objective (or at least as objective as possible) measures of professional competency, administered post-graduation, are the norm in a variety of mental health and healthcare-related fields. I (and apparently many others) am of the opinion that psychology should be held to this same standard, particularly because (as KillerDiller mentioned) we're so horrible at deciding on and enforcing an adequate unified national training standard at all levels of training.
  9. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354

    Actually this paragraph is relevant because LPC, LCSW, and LMFT outnumber both PhD/PsyD clinical psychologist by ten to one. They are basically garnering the market share in the mental health business and laughing all the way to the bank. Many psychologists have priced themselves out of the competitive market due to their ego inflation and they have a much smaller market share. The psychologists who are surviving in this economy have reduced their rate and are accepting Medicaid/Medicare and third party insurance. A good number of psychologists are practicing part-time at a high rate but teaching adjunct at many of these professional schools to fullfill their income and survival needs. If you take away the professional schools, many of the faculty in these programs who have PhD degrees from APA accredited programs with APA accredited internship will be without jobs or forced to work with the indigent population to survive in a market heavily loaded with master's level licensed therapist.
  10. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    Personally, I don't find the argument of "FSPS are good for the field because they provide employment for psychologists" to be a particularly valid rationale for supporting the existence of such programs. But that's just me, others might disagree.
  11. paramour

    paramour

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,979
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Oh, the horror! :scared:

    There are people who actually want to work with those indigent folks. I don't think there's much need to force anyone.
  12. paramour

    paramour

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,979
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Personally, I find that most of the people I know who practice part-time and teach/adjunct at FSPS programs are from FSPS programs. So this must mean that those individuals are the ones who need more help finding employment--not the PhD graduates? --> Based on my purely anecdotal evidence of the handful of folks I know (hey, it seems to be going around... :p).
  13. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    18,886
    Location:
    My Island of Denial
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    I think he is tilting at windmills, but...

    [​IMG]
    It is time to bring this out again, since you continue to make these sweeping opinions and parade them around as facts....

    While they typically win on "bang for your buck" since they can get out and earning much quicker than a psychologist, their billing rates and salaries are generally much less. Where is your data to support this?

    There is downward pressure from insurance companies, which is a far different mechanism. The market share (within the pool of clinicians who accept insurance) has changed because there are more providers with less training willing to work for less. Lower reimbursement rates = more people leaving the insurance market.

    Taken right from the APA Legislation & Advocacy page:

    This has been a big topic on various list servs, and it appears more and more providers are LEAVING Medicare and 3rd party insurers because they cannot afford to accept such poor rates.

    FSPS pay less than traditional university programs. Anyone who has spent 30 seconds exploring adjunct positions knows this to be fact.I'm sure someone who has looked recently can comment further.

    Many faculty WANT to work with indigent populations. As for market correction....it will eventually RAISE salaries and INCREASE competition. This is macroeconomics 101.
  14. Pragma

    Pragma

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,441
    Location:
    Quarth
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    +1 :eek:
  15. roubs

    roubs Ph.D. Student

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,084
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    So let me get this correct.

    EPPP is a bad indicator of training.
    APA/APPIC internship standards are a bad indicator of training.
    What each individual school decides comps should be is a way better indicator of training.

    :laugh::laugh::laugh:
  16. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    Passing the EPPP in no way ensures having quality clinical skills.
    Non APA/APPIC internships may be as good or better standards than APA/APPIC internships. A number of facilities continue to have interns but do not participate in APA/APPIC anymore. Does this now mean they suddenly became low quality since they withdrew or discontinued participating in the Match?

    Comprehensive exams over general psychology should meet the requirement for passing the EPPP. Why is there even a need for a separate tests once you have completed your doctoral degree? Passing the EPPP in no way correlates with being a competent clinical psychologists.:idea:
  17. Pragma

    Pragma

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,441
    Location:
    Quarth
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Passing the EPPP is a legal requirement to practice as a clinical psychologist. You can have mad skillz as a clinician, but won't be a clinical psychologist without being able to pass the test. :sleep:
  18. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    Because if not all schools training individuals to be clinical psychologists can even be counted on to adhere to/abide by/live up to what semblance of a national training standard we have, how can they be trusted to adequately and objectively assess their students? The only option would be to have a nationally-certified/agreed-upon comp exam, which would be the exact same thing as the EPPP. Again, national post-graduate licensing exams are the norm in healthcare and mental health as a whole; why should psychology be any different.

    As for internships, as I mentioned before: an internship being non-APA doesn't ensure that it's low-quality, but you do have to ask why the internship isn't yet accredited. There are obviously a variety of reasons, but ultimately the end result is that essentially no one other than the program itself can vouch for the quality of the training. And that's obviously not an objective or scientific way of assessing a program's quality.
  19. psyman

    psyman

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Many internships are not APA because of the time and money involved in jumping through the hoops to gain accreditation. I wish we could take the money involved in that process and pay it to the interns instead of paying fees to the stupid APA.

    And look, I come from one of the PsyD schools that cost too much and admit too many students and even I disagree with most everything 4410 writes. He's just trying to justify his own situation and choices. Everyone else can see that but him. Most of the reason I check this board these days is to read erg's responses to him. :)
  20. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    Trust me, I completely understand about not having APA accred at the internship level owing to prohibitive costs (monetarily and administratively), and I'd definitely be all for APA streamlining the process. Unfortunately, it's the best we've got at the moment; my statement was just that without accreditation, it's much harder to ascertain and ensure the quality of training provided by the program. Again, not saying that all non-APA sites provide poor training, as I know this obviously isn't the case.
  21. Markp

    Markp Clinical Psychologist

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,266
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    So let me get this right, students are passing up funded university programs to attend high quality clinical training at free standing professional programs?

    Anyone believing that would need to examine the deleterious effects of their crack habit. Students are choosing these programs when they cannot gain admission to funded programs. Nearly no one wants to spend $100,000 or more on an education they could obtain for a greatly reduced cost at a more prestigious university with funding.

    Do you have any empirical support for this hypothesis? I somehow doubt it.

    Graham, J. M. and Kim, Y.-H. (2011), Predictors of doctoral student success in professional psychology: characteristics of students, programs, and universities. J. Clin. Psychol., 67: 340–354. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20767

    I'll let you read and evaluate the research for yourself.

    So the answer is for psychologists to lower their fees? That sounds like autistic thinking.

    Psychologists need to highlight the differences between psychologists and other allied mental health professionals.

    Clinical psychologists bring something unique to the table just as Ph.D. trained psychologists bring a unique and valuable perspective to the table, a perspective that is different from our Psy.D. brethren who have their own unique and valuable training.

    As much as many might like to equate a Ph.D. to a Psy.D., it's simply not possible, the training is different. Not better, not worse, but different. In general, many free standing professional programs attract a student population with lower level of overall educational success making it even more difficult to compare outcomes of the two training models side by side.
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2012
  22. erg923

    erg923 Psychologist-Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,462
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    I don't think 4410 reads anything that is to science-y...
  23. PsyDLICSW

    PsyDLICSW

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Messages:
    177
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    I don't mean to change the subject here, but I was reading the American Psychologist monitor for May and I saw the candidates for APA president. I would like to know which candidate is the best candidate for addressing the imbalance. One candidate talked about the imbalance but I do not agree with his solution (APA should make more internships and he does not support requiring and encouraging APA accredited internships with the given imbalance). What do you think? Who is going to address this imbalance in the most productive way? I think that as students and APA student affiliates, we should think about this.
  24. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Thanks for changing the subject away from 4410's ridiculousness. Pretty sure that person is not a real grad student anyway.

    Are those candidate statements online?

    I can make a request to each of the candidates to address the issues brought up in the petition and give their response. I think there's some ridiculous bureaucracy around what the candidates can and cannot say, but I can put it out there.
  25. PsyDLICSW

    PsyDLICSW

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Messages:
    177
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member

    I got the hard copy of the monitor yesterday and they ususally send me an e-mail later with an electronic copy. I can PM it to you as soon as I get it.
  26. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    The APPIC Match statistics do not reflect changes in internship sites as of April 25, 2012 or other updates in accredited internships every year. A number of graduate programs and internship sites were recently approved and the students who completed their program or internships at these sites are now considered APA accredited programs and internships retroactively one to two years based on the application date of their self study. My guess is this has affected 100 to 200 students and interns from the last two-three years and now my internship beginning this year is an APA approved internship. I am from a FSPS PsyD clinical psychology program and my guess is that a good number of the other interns who are now considered completing an APA accredited internship or beginning one of these recently approved internships this year are from these program who were recently approved, a good number are from PsyD programs. At my internship site alone this reflect 12 interns from the last two years (four from 10, four from 11 and now four from 12). One of the School Psychology programs that recently was APA approved goes back one year and they normally graduate 10-15 students per year so this could affect up to 30 students.

    Additionally the graduate programs that were recently APA approved with retroactive dates based on their application for self and site study is not reflected accurately in the APPIC statistics as now there are probably 100 to 200 more students from the past three years who may claim that they graduated from an APA accredited internship. Therefore, due to these changes the APPIC Match statistics are a flawed method of determining program quality as it is not a static statistic but a dynamic statistic that need to be monitored ongoing rather than just at the end of the Match. Furthermore, the APPIC post match process is still ongoing with some APA accredited sites still looking for interns.
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  27. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    I could be wrong, but I believe (per: http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/about/program-choice.aspx?item=8) that the accreditation is only "retroactive" to/becomes effective on the last date of the CoA's site visit, not on the date of application.

    And no, the APPIC 10-year stats don't include updated data, this is very true. Then again, 100-200 students over a three-year period (if that's an accurate approximation of the true number of now-accredited site graduates), spread out across all doctoral programs and internship sites, might not make a substantive difference. Also, many of the numbers quoted here and elsewhere on SDN are based on data from individual schools' websites in addition to the APPIC data.
  28. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    It is based on the date of the application which is the site study application. Somehow the self study is the beginning phase of the process before making the site study. Sometimes the application for the site study goes back two and almost three years, if their are revisions requested by the accreditation review team. If there are ten program and normally based on what I can tell there are at least ten or more being considered for application of APA accreditation/approval it could range to be several hundred or mores students/interns affected. This is also the case for internship sites applying for APA accreditation/approval. The internship I applied to was not APA accredited when I applied and when I matched on February 24th, 2012, but now they are APA accredited/approved dating back several years. Those interns from 2010 and the 2011 interns who will complete in the next three months now have completed or will complete an APA accredited internship. Furthermore, I am now accepted to an APA accredited/approved internship so the data for this recent class or the APPIC Match statistics is or should be updated to reflect these changes as now there are four interns from my site who should now be counted as having been selected to APA accredited/approved internship site. All four of the interns at my site are from non APA accredited programs so if you look at 10-15 sites becoming accredited on a yearly basis and it is after the APPIC final match statistics, the number of interns now at an APA accredited internship site from non accredited program may substantially affect the statistics.
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  29. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    18,886
    Location:
    My Island of Denial
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    [​IMG]
  30. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    18,886
    Location:
    My Island of Denial
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    [​IMG]
  31. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    The programs in the application process are all listed on the APA accreditation website that is posted by AA. Most recent updates were on April 25, 2012 and this is when some ten programs or more were either approved retroactively back to the site study date for either their psychology program, predoctoral internship or postdoctoral internship program. Based on each site students or interns now from APA accredited programs it could range in the 100-200 or more range and this basically makes the APPIC Match data flawed or erroneous to some extent. Basically the studies by the University of Florida and the study quoted earlier in this thread have used flawed data to draw conclusions about clinical psychology training program using EPPP scores and using Match rate with APA or non APA accredited programs. Using EPPP data is flawed due to it being common for doctoral level trained psychologists having up to three times to take and pass the test. Some psychologists pass on the first attempt but some do not pass until the third attempt. Basically, these studies are confounded due to these variables and should in no way be utilized by APA to make any decisions about psychology training and internship programs or rather the quality of training programs.
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  32. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    I'm almost 100% certain that the retro date is the second day of the site visit. I don't remember offhand where that info is in the CoA regs.

    Anyway, 4410, is your contention that that drop seriously makes a difference to the bucket?
  33. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    Due to APA accreditation programs internships changing on either a quarter basis or when the accreditation committee meets the data may be flawed. Some programs were just updated on April 25 and some of the approvals are retroactive one to two years. If you are using data to try to make justification of programs qualification it would seem necessary to have accurate data or your study is meaningless and may be interpreted based on bias or agenda or lying with statistics. Many sites will not accept applications form some types of programs so basically this could be a reason for lower match rate regardless of the quality of the program. It is a stretch to imply that programs are poor quality due to not having high match rate with APA accredited internship programs.

    In my specific case, I have now matched with an APA accredited internship as well as three other students going to this site. We are all from non APA accredited programs so we have matched with an APA accredited internship based on the recent update on April 25, 2012 CoA accredited programs. The two intern classes before us now can count this site as an APA accredited site on their CV and all future job applications. If you have ten or more similar incidents for graduate programs or internships becoming accredited, the numbers of students could be substantial when looking at the "Big Picture!" and the imbalance may not actually be due to what your are purporting it to be caused by---14 or 15 some FSPS programs. Most of the students in FSPS find internships but not many APA accredited internships since normally APA accredited internships only accept students from APA accredited programs. Basically the data is flawed and any statistical significance based on annotated or archival types of data should not be used in evaluation of quality of clinical psychology programs, especially when the data is contantly changing based on programs being in the process of being reviewe or initial accreditation.

    It is ridiculous to imply that a FSPS program is low quality due to students having substantial amounts of loans or being unfunded and somehow then generalizing that it must be poor quality due to lower EPPP pass rate when most States allow up to three times to pass the EPPP and many pass the exam by the third administration.
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
  34. erg923

    erg923 Psychologist-Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,462
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    No. They can not. It is NOT retroactive to previous intern classes. If unaccredited when you go through (and no site visit the year you are there), you have completed a non-accredited internship. Period. We have been over this before. Do not perpetuate this myth to future student/applicants.

    PS: Do not respond with a "that guy I knew that one time." I do not care.
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2012
  35. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Your logical flaw: Yes, possible. However, EPPP scores support weaker training outcomes as well.

    No, they can't.

    THINK about the argument you're making. If this were the case the same programs would not consistently demonstrate weak outcomes. And, the change woud impact people across programs, not just FSPS.

    That's just silly. The data are not flawed.

    Again, really THINK about your arguments. Yes, you can take the EPPP multiple times. So, weak schools produce people who are consistently taking it multiple times. If a small school had the same number of failures and re-takes, they would have the same % pass/fails rates.

    Honestly man, READ the existing research and generate some opinions based on actual fact, rather than deciding what you feel like you want to believe and then making up "facts" to support your preexisting conclusion.

    Sigh.
  36. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    I believe erg's correct here, yep. Per the link I posted above, the APA site itself indicates that only those individuals enrolled in the program when the site visit occurs are retroactively affected (and obviously anyone who enrolls there afterward), and the effective date becomes the final date of that site visit.
  37. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    It is retroactive back to the site visit application date and in some situations this is two years or more since the revisions or changes may take some time. It is based on if you are enrolled in the graduate program or completing an internship at the time of the site application and it is retroactive to that date.
  38. erg923

    erg923 Psychologist-Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,462
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    face palm...
  39. 4410

    4410

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    354
    Did you read the two letters where one psychologist indicates the need to unite training and internship attitudes for training of PsyD/PhD degree psychologists rather than dividing or claiming that there is a shortage of internships due to FSPS and PsyD schools. He indicates that the 2011 Match Statistics reveal only a 10% difference between PhD and PsyD trained psychologists and this is a small difference.

    In 1987 there was a surplus of internships but in 1994 only seven years later there was a shortage of internship sites. Here we are almost 18 years later.

    The second letter was from a psychologist who used to be the Training Director of a major medical facility in New York City that had clinical psychology internships. In the 90's when the shortage of internships was beginning she endorsed changes of the system with APA. It seems that there are labor laws or legal mandates restricting APA from labor/wage types of activities. APA accredits clinical psycholgy training programs including predoctoral and postdoctoral internships but it has no legal authorization to mandate increasing internship sites or restricting graduate school admission. Her solution is not to place blame on APA but on the individual graduate programs and they should be required to have in place internship sites for all of the students they admit into their program every year. She believes APA needs to mandate or require the individual graduate program to have dedicated internship sites for each of their students.

    Their are four male candidates and one female candidate running for APA president this year. The female candidate wrote briefly about the imbalance of APA accredited internship sites. This is her brief statement:

    "The ongoing crisis in our psychology educational system has resulted in a serious imbalance between the number of graduate students seeking internships and the availability of accedited positions. In addition, with our country's economic difficulties, the job market for early career psychologists is challenging. We must take bold steps toward collaboratively addressing these crises and establishing solutions and recommendations for model and novel internships and jobs."

    One of the candidates has a PsyD degree from a professional school. His focus is on stereotypes of PsyD psychologists being scapegoated unfairly by the profession as not being competent, and in the future there will be a need for more psychologists. He indicates that APA membership is decreasing every year and less than half of all psychologists are now members of APA. APA needs to change so many of these former member will again become members of APA so the organization may be a political force representing all psychologists, not just PhD degree psychologists. If I could vote I wonder who you might believe I might endorse?
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2012
  40. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    What's a "10% difference" supposed to mean? 10% in what? Sounds like a number either made up or misunderstood.

    The idea that facts are scapegoating is so stupid it doesn't deserve a reply. The myopic, vain, and irresponsible ignoring of the facts by apa governance is one of the biggest contributors to the imbalance.
  41. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Incidentally, I find it laughably ignorant when my work is called scapegoating or fingerpointing. Keilin and Rudolfa did degree type difference research, which is less specific than what I did and would better fit that bill, but the same is never levelled against them. I assume its because I'm a student.
  42. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    The petition has been submitted to the APA, CPA, and multiple boards and committees within APA.

    :D
  43. psychgirl77

    psychgirl77

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    249
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    Awesome! Thanks for making that happen. It was sad to see nothing happen with the original petition.
  44. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Even with 1/3 the signatures and no actual submission, it was seen.

    And, for sure. :) I want a better future for all students in psych, and for the profession. I'll follow it as far as I need to.
  45. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,321
    Status:
    Psychologist
    Psychologist SDN 2+ Year Member
    :thumbup:

    Thanks for all the hard work.
  46. cara susanna

    cara susanna Predoctoral Intern

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,526
    Location:
    Midwest
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    Yay! Let's hope for some results.
  47. thewesternsky

    thewesternsky

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Messages:
    694
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 7+ Year Member
    Awesome! Thanks for your hard work with the petition and other initiatives.
  48. neuronic

    neuronic

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    174
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Not sure how many others have seen this, but the APA has responded to the internship imbalance petition.

    "The APA Board of Directors has received the petition related to the internship imbalance that you emailed to several APA staff, governance members and groups on May 1st. This message serves as an initial response from all the APA groups from which you requested a reply.

    We would like you to know that APA shares your concerns about the imbalance and is troubled by the impact it is having on students and the profession. In reviewing the requests in the petition, it appears that the majority are requests that relate to program accreditation. Since the APA Commission on Accreditation (APA-CoA) is responsible for formulating accreditation policy that is informed by the field, we are referring your petition to APA-CoA for response.

    We would also like to make sure that you are aware that the APA-CoA currently has a proposed revision to an implementing regulation that addresses one of your requests. The proposed revision is currently out for public comment and we encourage you to comment. You can find the proposed revision to the implementing regulation on thresholds for internship placement at:
    http://apaoutside.apa.org/AccredSurvey/Public/ProjectMenu.asp?t=080003&ProjectID=31.

    Because APA shares your concerns, it has been involved - and will continue to be involved in a
    number of efforts to mitigate the imbalance. APA continues to advocate annually for the Graduate Psychology Education Program (GPE), which provides nearly $3 million for training in professional psychology. Moreover, the US Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) has recently announced an additional $5 million to be awarded to expand internship training in areas of national need. Our efforts to address the imbalance, as you note, are coordinated with those undertaken by the Council of Chairs of Training Councils, a group partially supported by APA. We will also be reviewing new proposed initiatives at our upcoming June meeting of the Board of Directors."
  49. MCParent

    MCParent SDN Bronze Donor Bronze Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    698
    Status:
    Psychologist
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Thanks for posting! A pdf is on the Occupy FB group.
  50. futureapppsy2

    futureapppsy2 Ed Psych PhD student Moderator Gold Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,258
    Status:
    Psychology Student
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    Here is the text of the resolution You can leave comments at this link: http://apaoutside.apa.org/AccredSurvey/Public/ProjectMenu.asp?t=172836&ProjectID=31

    Last edited: Jun 4, 2012

Share This Page


About the ads