PsyD Programs

[psychogurl]

Does anyone know of some good PsyD programs? I know the PsyD is relatively new to the field of psych and hasn't gained WW acceptance, but I'm interested...since all I want to do is practice!!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psychapp]

I would look at PsyD programs that are affiliated with well-known universities (such as Rutgers???), rather than looking at PsyD's at professional schools (Argosy??). These tend to be a little more respected within the field of psychology (I'm not just saying this to start a riot, I am repeating what I have heard from several well-known psychologists) and I think give you more of a well-rounded education (such as incorporating some research training). Even though you only want to do practice, it is important to understand the research process and how it influences (and is influenced by) practice.

 

[psychogurl]

I would look at PsyD programs that are affiliated with well-known universities (such as Rutgers???), rather than looking at PsyD's at professional schools (Argosy??). These tend to be a little more respected within the field of psychology (I'm not just saying this to start a riot, I am repeating what I have heard from several well-known psychologists) and I think give you more of a well-rounded education (such as incorporating some research training). Even though you only want to do practice, it is important to understand the research process and how it influences (and is influenced by) practice.

Thanks Psych...

...yea, I looked at Argosy website and it looked kind of suspect to me. I'm currently studying Community and Clinical Psych at a master's level. This is my first semester and I've been thinking about applying to PsyD programs before I graduate. It really doesn't make sense to complete a 60-credit program when only 30 credits will be transferable (not even with some programs). But I decided to do a MA program because I don't have a strong background in psychology. My undergrad major was Public Health and my GPA just barely made the 3.0 mark at a 2.83. I took some post-bac psych classes, which I did very well in earning a 3.67 for the three classes I took. My GRE scores are good: 600/620, 5 (AWS). And I've been in the mental health field for over two years now as a Case Manager and Counselor. So it gives me a little experience and background in clincal psych...but I don't feel it's enough to apply to a doctoral-level program yet. Maybe it's my lack of confidence. Got any advice....I'm also going to talk with some professors for some sound advice.

 

[EL CAPeeeTAN]

Thanks Psych...

...yea, I looked at Argosy website and it looked kind of suspect to me. I'm currently studying Community and Clinical Psych at a master's level. This is my first semester and I've been thinking about applying to PsyD programs before I graduate.

I have researched PsyD vs PhD and the different programs for a couple of years. I even applied and was accpted to a couple of the less regarded PsyD programs. Basically I would agree that you should look at PsyD programs affiliated with universities, like: Rutgers, George Washington University, Pepperdine, Midewestern University (newer program in Illinois at a well respected university/medschool), University of Denver, etc. If you go to the APA webpage http://www.psycinfo.com/gradstudy/ you can research all of the different doctoral programs. It costs like $20.00 for 3 month access. The PsyD degree is an excellent option but I think that it is important which program you go to. With you GRE scores, master's degree, life experience you should be able to get into one of these better programs. There are also PhD programs with more of a clinical practice emphasis. I applied this year to couple PsyD programs and a few PhD programs. Good luck with you studies.

 

[SaraL124]

I seriously considered PsyD program for a long time before I settled on applying for the PhD. A lot of feedback that I got suggested that within the field, PsyDs are generally looked upon as the same level as a master's degree that just took 5 years to complete. I'm not saying this to be inflamatory, but just to give you the same warning I was given. For me in the end, the research aspect was what changed my tune, but I would look into salaries and job opportunities for PsyDs before you definitely commit yourself down that route. You might find that you can do the type of practice that you're interested in with an MA in counseling psychology or something similar.

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Does anyone know of some good PsyD programs? I know the PsyD is relatively new to the field of psych and hasn't gained WW acceptance, but I'm interested...since all I want to do is practice!!!

Personally, I applied and was accepted to a PsyD program as oppose to PhD because I was most interested in practice not research. Although, I resepect PhD and the influence that they have on the practice of psychology, I do not believe that one is more superior to the other, I just belief that they provide different services to the patient/client.

A comment was made regarding PsyD’s being equivalent to masters’ level clinicians in counseling this is false and unsubstantiated. However, psychologists, at times, are viewed by employers as equivalent to social workers. The social worker equivalence to psychologists is not an argument by employers only towards psyds or phds but to psychologist in general. Comments of phd superiority are made by PhDs who are biased and are not welling to accept the bright evolvement of psychology. If you look at legitimate websites such as www.APA.org or National psychologist, you would see that the pay is the same and the preference by employers for psyds or phds are mostly non-existing unless your applying for employment with a publicly funded academic position, which is something that you have expressed you have no interest in.

Psychogur, I think that you should consider what you want to do as a psychologists, research or clinical work applying psychotherapy, assessments and evaluations, etc.

States that are incorporating prescription rights for psychologists are not excluding PsyDs from prescribing, this should inform you that low regards towards PsyD is not existing in the field in general by legislators or Mental health professionals but it maybe only held by a few PhD psychologists who maybe biased.

In regards to research in psychology, in my program (PsyD) I am currently gaining more than I care to get of research classes such as numerous stat classes, test construction, dissertation etc.

Try to gain some information and advise from PsyD as much as you did from the PhDs so that you gain better-rounded information.

You will see that there are two sides to the story. Keep in mind that most people that have provided you with pro-PhD advice are mostly PhDs or PhD students.

Good luck on your endeavors.

 

[Sanman]

well, I certainly agree with the general sentiment here that you should try and stay away from the professional schools as a general rule. However, PsyD programs are highly variable, even more so than PhD programs as far as their quality. I have looked at a number of PsyD programs and haqve even applied to one. However, it is more like a clinically biased PhD than a PsyD program. Their are some good programs out there, but they are dwarfed by the profressional schools. I'd also tell you to be aware of some of the university based psyd programs, because they are also weak. Make sure to check out internship match stats, funding percentages, etc. In your case, I would keep all types of programs in your view and see which would give you the most credit for your masters

 

[edieb]

Although my Ph.D. program is probably is inferior to Psy.D. programs, I know internship sites look negatively on Psy.D.s Most on APPIC say they prefer Ph.D.s while Psy.D.s are "acceptable."

 

[50960]

Here in Ca things are much different. I know many folks who have a PhD in transpersonal psych and the like who have never taken a stats or methodology course or written a dissertation utilizing data analysis. Some of the best programs are PsyD, university affiliated or not. Some Psy.D programs are not so good, but the same schools have bad PhD programs as well. We all have to pass the same exams at the same rate so any blanket statement about one being better is silly. You PhD folks with your advanced research training should know better than to make blanket statements about a populaton (PsyD schools) with having only a very small sample or single case worth of data.

 

[50960]

As a post-doc you are most proud of your training (good school, good internship etc..). As a seasoned psychologist you have learned so much more than any program ever taught you regardless of your specialty, that the only people who really care where you got your degree are the people back at your university. It is about quality of output, not quality of initial input. I agree with some of your points, but I have to say I see the whole thing as mental masturbation (PsyD, PhD), and you probably will too when you get a few years under your own belt. This sounds condescending, and I am not meaning it to.
I have a PhD in Dev Psych from the University of London; hardcore research/science model focus. I also have a private school Psy.D in clinical psych so I know both extremes. Regardless of which degree I used to get licensed I would still be the same psychologist in practice. As a neuropsych you will be practicing not professing, and the difference between the two roles is the primary difference seen in our field.

 

[psychogurl]

I started a forum frenzy!

 

[winnie]

I started a forum frenzy!

You sure did...You only have to mention the word "PsyD" around here and the chest thumping begins. Sit back and enjoy the show.

Two PsyD programs I recommend you look into are Indiana State and Indiana U. of PA. Both have an excellent track record in terms of internships, well regarded by professionals (even--gasp--those with PhDs), good funding, good research training. I've also heard positive things about Xavier in Cincinatti (by a PhD-trained clinician who works with a lot of their graduates) but I've never researched it.

Good luck to you with whatever degree you decide to pursue.

 

[50960]

Yes that is true, but alot of those PsyD folks are trust-fund babies who will never have to pay for it anyhow. In my neck of the woods rich college grads go to expensive PsyD programs because 1) they are APA accredited and 2) the applicants are not a minority (no other option). As a white man I could never have gotten in to Stanford or Berkeley with a 4.0.

 

[winnie]

As a white man I could never have gotten in to Stanford or Berkeley with a 4.0.

Oh pleeeeze...well, you keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Hmm. Having watched people I know go through Psy.D. programs, I have wondered where the "doctorate" part of the training is. I do understand the idea of it being an inflated Masters program. I've observed Psy.D. programs where they have a two year curriculum of basic courswork, a third year off-site externship (meaning you go work for next to nothing letting someone other than the program train you and pay the school thousands of dollars for the honor), and a one year internship. Included in that four year training is one research project (a masters thesis), which may be retrospective or not even involve any data, and an expanded case conceptualization that had to be defended in a thesis like fashion (nice idea). Having paid for my wife to go through such a program, I've never more felt like I was paying for a piece of paper. Two years of their four year training was off-site!!! My wife had to pay them 16,000 dollars to do her year externship and 6,000 dollars to go on internship. That's a nightmare. In contrast, my Ph.D. program had four years of coursework, required a masters thesis, theoretical paper (prelim), and dissertation, and we had to do an externship, but it was in the summer and did not interfere with coursework. It also was one credit hour not 16, or whatever the Psy.D. program charged for it. Oh, and then we had to do an internship. Also, they paid me to go through the progam, I didn't pay them a dime.

I also don't like the depth of training in specialty areas in my experience of Psy.D. programs. Because of the lack of research focus, lack of emphasis on understanding mechanism, generally inferior students, and generally inferior faculty, the training content feels very surfacey. I consulted at a Psy.D. program neuropsychology training service. The students applied for internships claiming years of neuropsychology practica experience. The nature of that experience was giving a battery of neuropsychological tests, reporting the data to a neurologist in a group meeting, and then letting the neurologist do all of the interpretation. A monkey could probably be trained to do that much.

Be that as it may, the last poster is correct in that there is little to no pay difference between Psy.D.s and Ph.D.s. on average. The big difference financially is paying for school. Psy.D. programs are far more expensive and offer little in the way of financial support. So, while the salaries may essentially be identical, the economics of a Ph.D. are better. Also, relative to economics and jobs, it depends on what you want to do. Publically funded academics is not the only marketplace advantage for Ph.D.s. Further, relative to the social worker comparison, that's only true for talk therapists, and businesses have a financial stake in seeing it that way. Personally, I agree for the most part. You don't need a doctorate to do talk therapy. As professional schools and Psy.D. programs proliferate, applied psychology becomes more and more like social work, both in prestige and pay. I think APA has made a grievous error in their liberal accreditation policies. Holding the field to certain standards of training is not a bad thing, yet all APA seems to care about is injecting multiculturalism into the mix, fine but lacking. Psy.D. programs and professional schools may eventually ursurp the traditional method of training to become a psychologist, if for nothing else than faster reproduction.

I am not sure what you are talking about because my PsyD APA accredited program does not offer the PsyD coursework in less than 3 years per APA accreditation requirement. Those 3 years consist of 141 credits. I have to complete a dissertation and pass the qualification exams both written and oral before applying to the one-year full time internship after which I will apply for a 2-year (full time) post doctorate in neuropsychology.

You referred to psychologists with specializations in neuropsychology as individuals who:

“Give a battery of neuropsychological tests, reporting the data to a neurologist in a group meeting, and then letting the neurologist do all of the interpretation. A monkey could probably be trained to do that much.” (Of course, this is an oversimplification)

Are you referring to PsyDs and PhDs? You get me a monkey that can administer and interpret neuropsychological tests and I will make you a rich man.

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Yes that is true, but alot of those PsyD folks are trust-fund babies who will never have to pay for it anyhow. In my neck of the woods rich college grads go to expensive PsyD programs because 1) they are APA accredited and 2) the applicants are not a minority (no other option). As a white man I could never have gotten in to Stanford or Berkeley with a 4.0.

Sorry doc but I must disagree with you on that point. I am neither a trust fund baby nor a white man and I am working towards my PsyD. The tuition is expensive but I am confident of my ability of making money as a psychologist and I see the potential of psychology field evolvement.

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Although my Ph.D. program is probably is inferior to Psy.D. programs, I know internship sites look negatively on Psy.D.s Most on APPIC say they prefer Ph.D.s while Psy.D.s are "acceptable."

Hey Edieb, how are you?

Regarding preferences by internship sites towards PhDs that maybe the case for internship sites that are research oriented. Also, keep in mind that PhDs have been around longer then Psyds therefore some preference towards PhDs will be observed.

 

[winnie]

The diversity game is rampant in psychology.

Yeah, when it comes down to it I don't really care much for that diversity business either. I liked it better when only white guys got edumacated.

 

[50960]

Psydrx.. I was referring to the situation in Ca. Did not mean to offend. I know many hard working PsyD students who are paying for it themselves. In this part of Ca there are many rich folks and I see alot of their kids making it into programs that they have not earned through hard work and honest aptitude. I am not a fan of affirmative action as it plays out in Ca, but I am also not a fan of keeping everyone but those who know the right people out of good programs. There are problems with the system, and until we can feel free to speak openly in this field they will remain.

cheers

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Psydrx.. I was referring to the situation in Ca. Did not mean to offend. I know many hard working PsyD students who are paying for it themselves. In this part of Ca there are many rich folks and I see alot of their kids making it into programs that they have not earned through hard work and honest aptitude. I am not a fan of affirmative action as it plays out in Ca, but I am also not a fan of keeping everyone but those who know the right people out of good programs. There are problems with the system, and until we can feel free to speak openly in this field they will remain.

cheers

Thanks for the clarification and I do see your point. No offense taken.

 

[PsyDRxPnow]

Yes, and the program I was describing considers their curriculum to include three years of coursework, as does APA. It's a bit of a farce in my opinion. I am aware that many PsyD programs require a dissertation and a masters thesis. I wonder though, given cost disparities, why go to a PsyD program that requires this? It seems like the model is not fully consistent with PsyD. Relative to doing neuropsychology with a Psy.D./professional school degree, my opinion is that, due to the costs associated with the programs, the schools are pushing students into neuropsych and pediatrics, as it is the only hope those students have of ever getting out of debt.


No, I described a group of PsyD neuropsychology students that I felt were being taught 1) only to administer neuropsychological tests (this is easy, and requires little to no expertise) and 2) to defer completely to a neurologist in interpreting neuropsychological test data. That's not neuropsychology, but it passes for it nowadays. It's crap.

Not everyone is interested in working on a research project for years and not everyone wants to spend excessive years in a PhD program specially when all they want to do is the clinical aspects of clinical psychology. PsyD programs have higher acceptance rate because they do not stress the research as intensively as PhD. I don’t think that PsyD programs are less challenging in their coursework but perhaps only in acceptance requirement. These days you have a better chance of gaining acceptance into medical school than into a public PhD program.

Since I was accepted into my program one year ago, 9 students have been kicked out of the program for various reasons including, poor performance. Perhaps they accept more but not everyone makes it.

In regards to PsyD schools pushing students into Neuro and Peds, I was never pushed into any field. There are 4 concentrations to choose from and I chose Neuro because of my interest in the brain and its behavior. Now, if that happens to have more money than that is just icing on the cake. There is nothing wrong with wanting to make money to pay off your dept and to compensate for the many years that I attended higher education instead of settling for substandard education and position in life.

Students who are performing the way you describe in neuropsych should not be practicing as such. They should take pride in their job and duties and try to excel in it. However, this argument can be used for both PsyD neuropsych students and PhD neuropsych students. Additionally, if they are tough only to administer neuropsych exams in school does not necessarily indicate that they will use this simplistic level of practice in the real world. Its important to be cognizant of the fact that school does not prepares you for everything and anything, they only provide you with the basics to have minimal level of knowledge and from their you as a practitioner must add to it.

 

[edieb]

Your PhD program must have been great, but I don't think that many clinical PhD programs give their students a neuroscience background. I did an off year in neuropsychology (I'm clinical PhD) and I basically worked at a testing mill for that period of time. I would administer a psychoed. battery and then sit in at a practicum where we paid about five minutes to each case. The professor would show us that the verbal STM score on the WMS was lower than the visual STM score on the WMS, etc. We hardly ever went into anatomy, much less neuroscience All this and I am in a state where psychologists are prescribing-- you would think our program would be avant-garde.

What I am saying is that PhD programs are of variable quality as are PsyD programs. It sounds like you got lucky and went to a good PhD program and I was unfortunate to go a bad PhD prgram. There are good PsyD programs that are probably better than bad Ph.D. programs, etc. We can't make blanket statements that PhDs are better than PsyDs, etc.

Perhaps, perhaps not. In my anecdotal observation of a PsyD program in action and PsyD practica students at two medical centers I've worked at, the content of neuroscience/neuropsychology training is lacking. If the classes are graded on a bell curve and you are competing against less competitive students (on average), won't the classes be less challenging? Further, if the professors at Psy.D. programs are less prolific than professors at Ph.D. programs, will the content of their courses be as challenging? Also, relative to content, I think experimental neuroscience is a good way to learn about how the brain works; you generally don't get this at PsyD programs. As to the latter statement, there is some truth to that, but things have gotten easier with the spread of alternative programs (e.g., PsyD and professional schools).



True




OK, but there is an economic reality to the situation. Nearly every PsyD student I know wants to go into neuropsychology. I think there is a huge financial motivation for this (not everyone). I'm curious to see what happens in the next ten years or so with neuropsychology financially and conceptually with the glut of PsyD and professional school students invading the field.



I think these student had pride in their jobs. Their instruction was the problem. The model of what neuropsychology is presented to them was flawed. I actually heard an instructor from their program make the statement, "If we can't give an MMPI, what is the point in doing a neuropsych?" Idiot. Neuropsychology is becoming a facile discussion of executive functions, verbal memory, visual memory, attention, and visuospatial ability. In my opinion, the "neuro" is being ripped out of neuropsychology because people spend more time learning how to give stupid little tests than learning brain anatomy, brain physiology, brain-behavior relationships, and how to interpret neuropsychological tests within the context of these factors. I think too much emphasis has been placed on psychometrics at the expense of behavioral neuropsychology. A doctorate program is not supposed to provide the basics, it is supposed to delve in depth into complicated material. In any case, I think the basics are being ignored. I know many "neuropsychology" students that wouldn't know Brodmann's map if it hit them over the head, don't know how to diagnose or differentiate a motor neglect from an attentional neglect, and can't localize a brain lesion beyond left, right, frontal, not-frontal.


Btw, good post!

 

[winnie]

Well, that's not really the point now is it? You can't be that stupid

Sorry, I guess your alarmist tone must have scared the sense out of me. Diversity game...rampant...psychology. I had visions of gangs of international students camped out in the APA offices, smoking opium and playing mahjong.

Seriously, I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that the issue is all about "fairness." It just seems like a very short-sighted kind of fairness to me. And the lightness with which you (and many others) treat the benefits of a diverse student and professional body is kinda depressing.

Anyway, carry on.

 

[Pterion]

Unprovoked rant follows:

I earned my PsyD in 2000. Since then I have worked with and seen many graduates from both PsyD programs and PhD programs. My (anecdotal) experience unfortunately mirrors Paendrag's sentiments. I am not ashamed of my degree - it provided me the training I wanted. I did not want to be a "scientist practitioner". Even though I have entered medical school, I don't regret this choice.

However, the following are true:

1. Larger class sizes
2. Non-scientist professors
3. Not a scientist-practitioner approach
4. Little chance of neuroscience exposure

Earlier sentiments about economics ring true: in retrospect it was not a sound financial decision. And the politics of psychology in my state suggest no immediate change to psychologist's earning potential - especially PsyD's. For my part, I feel better trained to inflict psychotherapy than many (not all) of my PhD counterparts. But there were significant gaps in my training that I had to ameliorate on my own....

It never ceases to amaze me how many psychologists rage against the resistance of MD's to prescription privileges, but don't know the psychometric basis of the MMPI, think a cranial nerve is a tract in the cortex, can't articulate the anatomical basis of Freudian transference yet adhere desperately to the "cognitive" model but don't know the basis of neuronal plasticity. I presented a neuroanatomical/neuroscience based review of Beck and Freud, only to be told by some of the (PsyD) audience that I was clearly advocating a reductionist view of people, that neuroscience was not useful for psychotherapy. Inspires confidence, n'est pas?

Steps off soapbox.

 

[edieb]

I don't know how you found the time and/or energy to ameliorate the gaps in your training. They keep us so busy doing busywork (i.e., writing reports from a template, clerical work, "phone screenings) that I barely have time to sleep. If I did try and ameliorate the gaps in my training, I would fall behind on my busy work and get into trouble with my major professor. I really feel like my program is more about making the professors $$ than my getting training...

Unprovoked rant follows:

I earned my PsyD in 2000. Since then I have worked with and seen many graduates from both PsyD programs and PhD programs. My (anecdotal) experience unfortunately mirrors Paendrag's sentiments. I am not ashamed of my degree - it provided me the training I wanted. I did not want to be a "scientist practitioner". Even though I have entered medical school, I don't regret this choice.

However, the following are true:


Earlier sentiments about economics ring true: in retrospect it was not a sound financial decision. And the politics of psychology in my state suggest no immediate change to psychologist's earning potential - especially PsyD's. For my part, I feel better trained to inflict psychotherapy than many (not all) of my PhD counterparts. But there were significant gaps in my training that I had to ameliorate on my own....

It never ceases to amaze me how many psychologists rage against the resistance of MD's to prescription privileges, but don't know the psychometric basis of the MMPI, think a cranial nerve is a tract in the cortex, can't articulate the anatomical basis of Freudian transference yet adhere desperately to the "cognitive" model but don't know the basis of neuronal plasticity. I presented a neuroanatomical/neuroscience based review of Beck and Freud, only to be told by some of the (PsyD) audience that I was clearly advocating a reductionist view of people, that neuroscience was not useful for psychotherapy. Inspires confidence, n'est pas?

Steps off soapbox.

 

[50960]

Exactly!! Paendrag, well put! I put it this way, " 2 wrongs do not make a right".

 

[winnie]

It would be nice if it were that simple...but it ain't. Of course no-one is arguing for diversity--actually, I prefer the term "difference"--just for the sake of having people with different skin colors around. But there are some connections between "diversity of thought of opinion" and diversity of experience and diversity of cultural background, no? How would making it harder for minorities to go to school increase diversity of thought or intellectual honesty? AA is not perfect, but nobody (including me) has come up with a better way of ensuring the deep divisions already existing do not become even more entrenched. I too would like people to take a more critical approach to race and difference. I agree that the superficial "ten-easy-steps-to-cultural-awareness" APA approach isn't working (as you guys are testament to, if you don't mind me saying). The tendency to automatically fall back on platitudes and the extreme resistence to examining what it means to be white is what I find truly depressing.

Oh well, carry on some more...

 

[winnie]

Uh...what witch hunt are you referring to?

And why do you act all wounded?

 

[Pterion]

There's some great stuff out there on this. Karl Pribram wrote a neat article on the neuropsychology of Sigmund Freud.

I'm a big fan of Antonio D'Amasio. Anything by him is insightful, accessible and non-partisan. Joe LeDoux has some great bench research that he grudgingly connects to Freudian constructs. Vilyanur Ramachandran also presents some startling cerebral/brainstem functional connections to "psychodynamic" theory. Great reads if you're interested in the science that underlies psychotherapy.

 

[psych_hlc]

Does anyone know of some good PsyD programs? I know the PsyD is relatively new to the field of psych and hasn't gained WW acceptance, but I'm interested...since all I want to do is practice!!!

Hi psychogurl. Another option, if the PsyD hasn't won you over, is to go for a more clinically-oriented PhD. I have a friend who is at the PhD program at City University of New York at City College, where she is getting quality research training. However, clinical training is emphasized much more strongly, and the vast majority of students pursue careers as practitioners, unlike more balanced or research-oriented programs. Hope this helps!

 

[Sanman]

Hey,
As far as the debt burden aspect of this thread goes, I thought that this article would be of interest:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb99/debt.html

 

[psychogurl]

Hi psychogurl. Another option, if the PsyD hasn't won you over, is to go for a more clinically-oriented PhD. I have a friend who is at the PhD program at City University of New York at City College, where she is getting quality research training. However, clinical training is emphasized much more strongly, and the vast majority of students pursue careers as practitioners, unlike more balanced or research-oriented programs. Hope this helps!

Thanks for your reply. At least I can see someone is staying on track. Sheesh...this forum have gotten way off subject. I'm very much settled on obtaining my PsyD. I'm not too much concerned with the cost of a PsyD since I have no current loans or undergraduate loans to pay back. I rather go with a program that is clinical-oriented than research-oriented. I have no interest in research, although it is almost impossible to practice without having done some research. Saying that, I will definitely check out the school you've mentioned.

 

[psychogurl]

Hey,
As far as the debt burden aspect of this thread goes, I thought that this article would be of interest:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb99/debt.html

Ummm, maybe I'll stick with my MA since I'll probably end up earning the same salary as a PhD/PsyD. That is unbelievable. I remember when I went to an open house last year at PCOM, the director of the clinical psych PhD program told us (attendees) that we should not expect to make no more than 40's as starting salary. That is why I strongly suggest to ppl that this better be something you love, because when you're doing something you love, it's like you're not working at all...and all that debt really won't mean a thing except another ole bill.

 

[Pterion]

Ummm, maybe I'll stick with my MA since I'll probably end up earning the same salary as a PhD/PsyD. That is unbelievable.

Believe it. And keep in mind that Psychology as an organization has gone to great lengths to demonstrate empirically that outcomes from lesser trained MA's are comparable to the more thoroughly trained Ph/PsyD's. In the words of an APA officer "We're the only profession who circles their wagons and then fires inward".

I remember when I went to an open house last year at PCOM, the director of the clinical psych PhD program told us (attendees) that we should not expect to make no more than 40's as starting salary. That is why I strongly suggest to ppl that this better be something you love, because when you're doing something you love, it's like you're not working at all...and all that debt really won't mean a thing except another ole bill.

Yeah, I remember when I believed that crap, too. It's not enough to love what you do. You have to love what you do MORE than you love having a house, vacation options and college accounts for your children. My student loan payment (on an income-contigent plan) was almost twice my mortgage. After you factor in a lack of organizational advancement opportunities, a saturated private practice market and MA's and MSW's offering cut-rate services your love for the job had better exceed your capacity for reason.

Apparently I need a vacation

 

[Sanman]

Well I'm with you guys there. It isn't enough to love what you are doing if you are struggling to survive. Last semester, I was pulling ~65-70 hour weeks every week between school and work, sometimes more. I enjoyed everything that I was doing, but that doesn't mean I was completely content working that hard and being poor. It certainly beats doing something you hate for long hours, but there are always going to be options of doing something you like for a decent number of hours.

 

[Psicologia]

I started a forum frenzy!

Yeesh. I just found this site, registered, and had a couple of my more pressing questions...not answered. I've researched a couple of PsyD programs, and a couple of PhDs, and here I am still quandaried as a senior undergraduate trying to decide between PsyD and PhD; on the one hand, many programs for PsyD are shorter than PhD--on the other hand, I don't want to be sneered at (or risk drastically lower pay) by going for a PsyD if they're not considered quite as meritorious as PhDs. I'm also a nontraditional student (31 and aging daily) and I'm getting antsy for some reality-based training. My field of specialty is offender psychology and recidivism reduction, and there just ain't that many forensic psych graduate programs out there tailored for this. NY has a new one, but that's a looong move for me.

We had a talk by one of our faculty members about grad school--what to do, what never to do under any circumstances, when to apply, how many to apply to--and she put the fear of God into all of us. At the end of the presentation, the whole audience had pretty much decided that no one in that room was ever getting into grad school. But she did...! It sounded like a nightmare. Hopefully hers was an isolated and unique experience, but I'm not holding much breath...

 

[50960]

They are all crazy...don't worry. Shoot for the PhD, and if you fail go for the Psy.D. Either way you will get the same license and then your learning will really begin!!

 

[50960]

More important than the PsyD/PhD quabbles is the fact that neither (as a rule) include an acceptable level of general medical training, and this is a mistake. Most graduating docs in psychology have taken 1 course in psychopharm, and one in biopsych (or the like) on the average. I really feel APA should get off the ridiculous bandwagons they are on, and push for at least 1 year of doc programs to be science and clinical medicine at a minimum. If programs dropped all the PC mandated coursework, made it manditory with 5 yrs of license as a CEU, and added the medical component the field would be in a much better place.

 

[psychogurl]

Do anyone know anything about Widener University PsyD program? Or heard anything about it?

 

[Sanman]

Looked into it a bit, seems like a nice proogram. It is expensive though. there is some funding and they seem to be decent compared to the professional schools.