Research with Counseling PhD (CACREP)

[shrinkgirl15]

I've searched previous threads, and couldn't find any that spoke specifically about the questions I have. I'm in an M.A. clinical mental health counseling program right now (CACREP accredited). I'm trying to decide if I should go on to do the CACREP PhD in counseling or the APA PhD in counseling psychology.

I'd like to ultimately be able to split my time between practice and research/academia. With a CACREP PhD, are my options for research limited in any way? Also, what is the income difference between the two for a research position (either via academia or anywhere else)?

Thanks for any insight!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[eremitestar]

I think it depends on how much time you want to spend doing research vs. practice. If you want to do a significant amount of practice, then counseling psych might be the way to go because that degree allows for licensure as a psychologist. People with PhDs in counseling, on the other hand, continue to practice under master's-level counseling licenses. It is my understanding that counseling PhDs focus on preparing students to enter academia and training positions, so it could certainly be a good option if that's your goal. That said, a PhD in counseling psych would also qualify you for positions in research/academia. I guess it comes down to what you envision your ratio of practice and research/academia to be. If you want to primarily be a university faculty member with a private practice on the side, then I would say either path could get you there. If you see yourself practicing more or less full-time and teaching as an adjunct, then I'd recommend going the counseling psych route so that you can practice as a psychologist.

 

[eremitestar]

Also, the type of practice you want to do may make a difference as well. Some clinical jobs require the psychologist license.

 

[SoCloseYetSoFarAway]

Exactly what @eremitestar said. CACREP accredits PhD in Counseling Education and Supervision programs that are geared toward an academic career without a path for licensure at the doctoral level.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Exactly what @eremitestar said. CACREP accredits PhD in Counseling Education and Supervision programs that are geared toward an academic career without a path for licensure at the doctoral level.

Although that's true about licensure, I think a lot of peoe who get counseling doctorates do it to into clinical admin positions, not research or academia.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I vote for the path to be a psychologist because we rock! Seriously though, I think that a counseling psychology degree with path to licensure as a psychologist provides the most options and I think that our training and skill set is second to none.

 

[shrinkgirl15]

Thanks, everyone! What you've all said makes a lot of sense.

 

[mkberry85]

There are many if's, just some points.

I know MANY researchers with doctorates in CES, but most are educators and then administration.

In terms of practice, what will you be doing? Doing a counseling psychology will open more doors, only because you will have two licenses, not just because you will be a psychologist.

A lot of people mistakenly believe that a psychologist is better than that of a counselor, typically because they believe just because they have a doctorate they know more, and that they believe psychology training is "better." This is totally inaccurate.

If you think you will ever want to teach counseling, you will have to do a doctorate in CES, as CACREP requires this, and many states are moving towards requiring graduation from CACREP schools as a requirement for licensing, so I see all schools (besides pastoral/Christian "counseling" programs) to start seeking CACREP accreditation.

Personally, I did not want a doctorate in CES, just because it would not provide me with any significant difference from my masters. I did chose to complete my doctorate in clinical psychology, only because my career goals lie in forensics, and even though counselors are as competent as psychologists (and in some cases, more so), the psychologist still has an edge over assessment, and courts, for the most part, still prefer psychologist testimony.