Rutgers vs. PGSP-Stanford vs. Florida Tech vs. Adler

[ctinamo]

Okay, so I have been accepted to my top choices which are:
1) Florida Tech
2) PGSP-Stanford
3) Rutgers - call 3/6/12 from faculty (Dr. Nancy BF)
4) Adler (being considered for the diversity assistantship = 50% off tuition)

I do not know where I really want to go. All programs have pros and cons. I wrote off Adler because of the REALLY low APA match rates (45%), seemed really bureaucratic, and HUGE cohort BUT then they go and offer me an interview for this assistantship (I am one of the top ten choices. Then after a 30 min interview they will choose the final 2) making my decision even harder. I also have a 3yr relationship to a man that I would like to marry one day that I am trying not to think about in making my decision but it is hard not to.

Any advice on these programs or anyone who has been in the same situation of having to do the Grad School vs. Boyfriend choice?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Your list should be:

1. Rutgers (Partial to good funding. APA match rate: 76%-95%)
................
................
................
5. FIT (Some funding, still costly. APA match rate: 86%-90%)
9. PGSP (Ridiculously expensive, training can vary on where you train and with whom. APA match rate: 47%-76%)

 

[cara susanna]

I would probably choose Rutgers

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Unless you have some really important personal reasons then you should not be considering anything but Rutgers. By reputation alone this school is head and shoulders above the rest.

Plus:

All students receive full financial support (a Fellowship, Teaching Assistantship, or Research Assistantship) that covers all tuition and provides an annual stipend ($19,000 in 2006-2007). All students are guaranteed support for five years provided they are in good academic standing. T

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Okay, so I have been accepted to my top choices which are:
1) Florida Tech
2) PGSP-Stanford
3) Rutgers - call 3/6/12 from faculty (Dr. Nancy BF)
4) Adler (being considered for the diversity assistantship = 50% off tuition)

I do not know where I really want to go. All programs have pros and cons. I wrote off Adler because of the REALLY low APA match rates (45%), seemed really bureaucratic, and HUGE cohort BUT then they go and offer me an interview for this assistantship (I am one of the top ten choices. Then after a 30 min interview they will choose the final 2) making my decision even harder. I also have a 3yr relationship to a man that I would like to marry one day that I am trying not to think about in making my decision but it is hard not to.

Any advice on these programs or anyone who has been in the same situation of having to do the Grad School vs. Boyfriend choice?

Of those programs, I know Rutgers has a very solid reputation, to the point that I would consider taking that offer for no other reason. I've worked with someone from FIT who was a very solid clinician, and their APA internship match rates support the idea that the program is at least decent. PGSP-Stanford's APA rates have gotten better and are now at the national average, which is encouraging (as is the fact that none of their students went for half-time internships). Based on that information, Adler just seems to be in a different league, which isn't helped by your initial reservations about the program.

So my personal rankings would be Rutgers, FIT, PGSP, Adler

As for the boyfriend vs. school situation, that one's going to have to be entirely up to you and your individual values. I haven't yet been in a relationship for which I would've jeopardized my education/training, but that probably says more about me than it does my former significant others or grad school experiences.

 

[PavlovWolf]

I second the support that other replies have given Rutgers. It's a very good deal.

I do know someone who attended PGSP-Stanford, had excellent things to say about it, and seems to be an outstanding psychologist. Up to you.

 

[Zen Master]

Okay, so I have been accepted to my top choices which are:
1) Florida Tech
2) PGSP-Stanford
3) Rutgers - call 3/6/12 from faculty (Dr. Nancy BF)
4) Adler (being considered for the diversity assistantship = 50% off tuition)

I do not know where I really want to go. All programs have pros and cons. I wrote off Adler because of the REALLY low APA match rates (45%), seemed really bureaucratic, and HUGE cohort BUT then they go and offer me an interview for this assistantship (I am one of the top ten choices. Then after a 30 min interview they will choose the final 2) making my decision even harder. I also have a 3yr relationship to a man that I would like to marry one day that I am trying not to think about in making my decision but it is hard not to.

Any advice on these programs or anyone who has been in the same situation of having to do the Grad School vs. Boyfriend choice?

As someone who will be moving across the country to attend PGSP-Stanford and has a wonderful partner who can't relocate for at least another year, I think I know how you feel. I agree with the other posters that Rutgers seems like the most sensible choice in light of the funding support. For what it's worth, I have a fact and an opinion to share:

1) I interviewed at PGSP-Stanford on match day (2/24/12), and the training director announced that morning that the program had matched at 93%.

2) On the contrary, I think it makes sense to actively think about your boyfriend in making this decision. I certainly did. I'd also like to think that this is not an either/or choice, though I'm realistic that the odds are not in favor of the relationship thriving long-distance. In the end, I think Harriet Lerner ("The Dance of Intimacy") makes a point worth repeating here: "Focusing on a relationship at the expense of one's own goals and life plan overloads that relationship." I think that is right, but the specific calculus will be different for everyone.

 

[docma]

If Rutgers offers funding, it has the best established reputation and you will have access to some great training.

 

[PsychPhDone]

Okay, so I have been accepted to my top choices which are:
1) Florida Tech
2) PGSP-Stanford
3) Rutgers - call 3/6/12 from faculty (Dr. Nancy BF)
4) Adler (being considered for the diversity assistantship = 50% off tuition)

I do not know where I really want to go. All programs have pros and cons. I wrote off Adler because of the REALLY low APA match rates (45%), seemed really bureaucratic, and HUGE cohort BUT then they go and offer me an interview for this assistantship (I am one of the top ten choices. Then after a 30 min interview they will choose the final 2) making my decision even harder. I also have a 3yr relationship to a man that I would like to marry one day that I am trying not to think about in making my decision but it is hard not to.

Any advice on these programs or anyone who has been in the same situation of having to do the Grad School vs. Boyfriend choice?

Another vote for Rutgers.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

1) I interviewed at PGSP-Stanford on match day (2/24/12), and the training director announced that morning that the program had matched at 93%.

93% APA match rate or APA/APPIC rate?

 

[g0708]

Rutgers looks like it has a pretty good funding situation and has the best reputation out of all of the programs you listed. I would NOT go with Adler, especially if you were able to secure an offer at a school such as Rutgers. If you like the people at Rutgers, have the opportunity to do work in an area you're interested in, and felt comfortable at the interview, I would definitely say don't think twice and go for it. What are the types of things that you viewed as cons at Rutgers or other schools? Keep in mind that the cons you mentioned at Adler are HUGE cons. A big cohort means less individual attention at a time in your career when this is essential.

On the boy issue. If you say that it is a serious relationship in which marriage has been discussed... then please take the time to discuss this situation with him. See whether he's willing to move now, or in the next year or so. Also, weigh your priorities. Is your educational future important to you and your boyfriend, or do you feel as though you could settle for a lesser program, just so that you can be closer to him. For me personally (and this may not apply to many people)--if the person I'm with is not supportive of me and of the relationship because of distance, then I would prefer not to be with that person. (Don't get me wrong, I made my choice of schools to apply to with him in mind as well!)

Good luck!

 

[Romy7126]

I am a student in the PGSP (now called PAU) PhD program, not the PsyD program through the PAU/Stanford collaboration. If you have other options, I would chose it. That 93% match rate is a bit inflated.

 

[Zen Master]

I am a student in the PGSP (now called PAU) PhD program, not the PsyD program through the PAU/Stanford collaboration. If you have other options, I would chose it. That 93% match rate is a bit inflated.

I am in the process of double-checking the figure I was quoted. In the meantime, could you clarify any other reasons why you are discouraging people from attending the program?

 

[CaliPsych]

I am in the process of double-checking the figure I was quoted. In the meantime, could you clarify any other reasons why you are discouraging people from attending the program?

First of all, congratulations on your acceptance to so many programs! I am sure this is a difficult decision but you have a lot of great options to choose from.

I am a third year student in the PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium. I have been extremely happy with the program so far, and I feel that I have received excellent clinical training. I didn't apply to the other programs you were admitted to, but I know that Rutgers in particular enjoys a strong reputation. I think the reputation of the Consortium is also very strong, and it is continuing to get stronger because we are a new program and we have more and more graduates entering the workforce.

I am not sure where the PAU Ph.D. student is getting their information from. Our match rates are absolutely not inflated. We have excellent match rates, and many people from our program have matched at elite internships across the country. Several of these internships had never taken a Psy.D. prior to accepting someone from our program. I have attached a chart to this post that outlines our match rate for the last several years. I hope this clears up any confusion.

I have posted on previous threads about my experience in the program, and I'm happy to answer additional questions either on this thread or via PM. Please feel free to contact me if you are looking for additional information about training, finances, match rate, etc. Best of luck with your decision process!

 

[4410]

One of our faculty received her clinical psychology doctorate at Florida Tech University. The program requires full-time study and she indicated that they take 15 hours per semester in a lock-step cohort model where you take the same classes with your cohort. Practicums begin first semester and you finish your course work in three years and do your internship your fourth year. She did an internship at a major medical center with focus on eating disorders somewhere in the NorthEast that was associated with Columbia University Medical Center. She passed her EPPP and was already licensed in her middle twenties. Although it was very intense education she was happy to make it through in four years and to move on towards licensure.

I know Rutgers University may be a great program but I would rather live in Florida where the cost of living is lower and weather is much better. California has good weather but the cost of living is high. I would go for warm weather versus cold weather, so Florida and California would be States I would rather live in than Illinois and New Jersey.

 

[O Gurl]

Another vote for Rutgers. >$100K in debt is not sensible for a PsyD or PhD. Also, the reputation of Rutgers may prove invaluable.

 

[Romy7126]

Very briefly, the cost is the biggest reason. I also feel there is very little in administrative support at the school which may not seem like a big deal to an outsider but when you are trying to apply for financial aid for the $40k tuition and you can't get an answer for weeks, it becomes probelmatic.

Regarding internships, my biggest complaint is the fact that the school will decide if you are eligible to apply for APPIC the summer before applications start. While the match rate on paper may look high and may be high, keep in mind not all students are allowed to apply for APPIC internships at all thus reducing the amount of students who don't match.

It does largely depend on the practicum sites you get, the advisor you chose and so forth but that is my opinion. I've been at PGSP for many years now and have seen it get larger and larger with little improvement to anything other than the size of the builiding we are in.

I'm not here to argue with anyone. Just stating my opinion, which was requested.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

One of our faculty received her clinical psychology doctorate at Florida Tech University. The program requires full-time study and she indicated that they take 15 hours per semester in a lock-step cohort model where you take the same classes with your cohort. Practicums begin first semester and you finish your course work in three years and do your internship your fourth year. She did an internship at a major medical center with focus on eating disorders somewhere in the NorthEast that was associated with Columbia University Medical Center. She passed her EPPP and was already licensed in her middle twenties. Although it was very intense education she was happy to make it through in four years and to move on towards licensure.

I know Rutgers University may be a great program but I would rather live in Florida where the cost of living is lower and weather is much better. California has good weather but the cost of living is high. I would go for warm weather versus cold weather, so Florida and California would be States I would rather live in than Illinois and New Jersey.

I'd imagine that nearly any doctoral program is going to require full-time study; if it doesn't, I'd be significantly wary of the quality of its training. FIT's current degree requirements can be found here: http://www.fit.edu/programs/grad/psy_d_clinical_psychology

It doesn't look like they require a master's thesis, and the final step is referred to as a "doctoral research project" rather than dissertation, which might cause some concern. It appears they do currently require at least four full-time years in the program in addition to internship, though (unless they're counting the internship year itself in there). Plus, I have no idea what the cost of attendance there would look like compared to Rutgers, but if FIT isn't offering any type of financial aid, I can almost guarantee cost of living will be outweighed. Plus, I'm not sure how much more expensive NJ is than Orlando, FL. The weather's definitely better, to be sure, but I personally wouldn't let weather sway me from potentially saving $100k and capitalizing on Rutger's strong reputation.

 

[KillerDiller]

I am in the process of double-checking the figure I was quoted. In the meantime, could you clarify any other reasons why you are discouraging people from attending the program?

Maybe the APA match rate was 93% this year, but if so, it was a bit of an anomaly. Their website lists the APA match rates as being between 45% - 76% over the last five cycles. Not horrible, but fairly consistently below the national average.

Most likely the 93% is the APPIC match rate.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Maybe the APA match rate was 93% this year, but if so, it was a bit of an anomaly. Their website lists the APA match rates as being between 45% - 76% over the last five cycles. Not horrible, but fairly consistently below the national average.

Most likely the 93% is the APPIC match rate.

Yeah, I'd guess the 93% is the APPIC rate. To the program's credit, as I mentioned above, they've steadily increased their APA numbers over the past few years, to the point that they're now right around the national average (~75%). And also to their credit, they appear to eschew non-accredited/half-time and CAPIC spots in favor of APA and APPIC despite being located in California.

That all being said, I still think (as has been mentioned many times) Rutger's is the best option.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Maybe the APA match rate was 93% this year, but if so, it was a bit of an anomaly. Their website lists the APA match rates as being between 45% - 76% over the last five cycles. Not horrible, but fairly consistently below the national average.

Most likely the 93% is the APPIC match rate.

According to information at the link provided above, for the most recent match (a few weeks ago), their overall match rate was 93% (26/28 applicants), with 82% (23/28) matching at an APA/CPA approved site, 11% (3/28) matching at an APPIC site, and 7% (2/28) not matching. Even without knowing the quality or the sites or the rank number of the sites, these numbers are relatively impressive (though the fact that 28 students applied in the same year is a little concerning).

 

[aequitasveritas]

According to information at the link provided above, for the most recent match (a few weeks ago), their overall match rate was 93% (26/28 applicants), with 82% (23/28) matching at an APA/CPA approved site, 11% (3/28) matching at an APPIC site, and 7% (2/28) not matching. Even without knowing the quality or the sites or the rank number of the sites, these numbers are relatively impressive (though the fact that 28 students applied in the same year is a little concerning).

I believe they have a quasi-captive VA site in Palo Alto, which may account for the match rate.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

According to information at the link provided above, for the most recent match (a few weeks ago), their overall match rate was 93% (26/28 applicants), with 82% (23/28) matching at an APA/CPA approved site, 11% (3/28) matching at an APPIC site, and 7% (2/28) not matching. Even without knowing the quality or the sites or the rank number of the sites, these numbers are relatively impressive (though the fact that 28 students applied in the same year is a little concerning).

Agreed, and that's what would worry me (especially if what an earlier poster mentioned is true, and this relatively large number only reflects the individuals who were approved to apply rather than all of the students in the cohort/who were ready to apply for internship).

 

[MCParent]

Yeah, I'd guess the 93% is the APPIC rate. To the program's credit, as I mentioned above, they've steadily increased their APA numbers over the past few years, to the point that they're now right around the national average (~75%). And also to their credit, they appear to eschew non-accredited/half-time and CAPIC spots in favor of APA and APPIC despite being located in California.

That all being said, I still think (as has been mentioned many times) Rutger's is the best option.

PGSP's PsyD does appear to have a decent APA match rate, especially when you compare them to schools in California (which, as you said, often send many students to the unaccredited, potentially unpaid CAPIC sites). PGSP's full disclosure data is also much more clear than many professional school's C-20 data (http://www.paloaltou.edu/sites/default/files/u10/PsyD APA Data 5-23-11.pdf), fits very closely with their entry in the APPIC data set (many large schools report many fewer students in their C-20 data than the APPIC data says sought an internship), and pretty clearly explains the cost of the program up front. From the APPIC data, their PsyD program appears to be much stronger than their PhD program (which graduates about double the number of students the PsyD program does, and has a poorer match rate.

I'd go to Rutgers though.

 

[Zen Master]

Maybe the APA match rate was 93% this year, but if so, it was a bit of an anomaly. Their website lists the APA match rates as being between 45% - 76% over the last five cycles. Not horrible, but fairly consistently below the national average.

Most likely the 93% is the APPIC match rate.

To close this particular loop on PGSP/Stanford's PsyD program, the file shared by CaliPsych specifies a 93% overall match for the year, which breaks down to 82% APA/CPA and 11% APPIC.

Romy7126, thanks for your response to my question. I'm aware that the PhD and PsyD experiences within PAU/PGSP tend to be pretty distinct, but you raise good points that seem to apply regardless of which side of the house you're on.

 

[paramour]

According to information at the link provided above, for the most recent match (a few weeks ago), their overall match rate was 93% (26/28 applicants), with 82% (23/28) matching at an APA/CPA approved site, 11% (3/28) matching at an APPIC site, and 7% (2/28) not matching. Even without knowing the quality or the sites or the rank number of the sites, these numbers are relatively impressive (though the fact that 28 students applied in the same year is a little concerning).

To close this particular loop on PGSP/Stanford's PsyD program, the file shared by CaliPsych specifies a 93% overall match for the year, which breaks down to 82% APA/CPA and 11% APPIC.

Romy7126, thanks for your response to my question. I'm aware that the PhD and PsyD experiences within PAU/PGSP tend to be pretty distinct, but you raise good points that seem to apply regardless of which side of the house you're on.

Yep. I think we established that one.

 

[KillerDiller]

To close this particular loop on PGSP/Stanford's PsyD program, the file shared by CaliPsych specifies a 93% overall match for the year, which breaks down to 82% APA/CPA and 11% APPIC.

Ok, thanks. The link didn't work for me so I thought it was broken.

 

[CaliPsych]

Romy, I know that you said you are not here to argue with anyone, and I am not here for that either. I just want to make sure that no unreliable or inaccurate information is floating around about the PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium. I know you are currently a student in the PAU Ph.D. Program, and I know very little about your program because our programs have very little to do with each other. We have mostly different faculty, different administrative staff, and completely different classes and practica.

Your comments about students not being allowed to apply to the APPIC match are 100% untrue and unfounded in fact or reason. All students in the Psy.D. program are actively encouraged to apply for internships that meet their needs, and the vast majority of the class participates in the APPIC match. Those that do not generally choose not to for personal reasons, but they are in no way encouraged to do so by the program.

In terms of growing size, the size of the PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium has remained steady (a cohort of 30, give or take 1 or 2) for many years. We still receive the same individualized attention that we did when the program started. I have been very happy with my academic advisor and my practicum experiences. We get incredible support from multiple faculty members to help us through the internship application process. The environment is supportive, encouraging, and tailored to each student's individual needs.

Someone else commented that we have a captive VA site. We have that site only for practicum in the 2nd year; it is not an internship site. We can apply to the Palo Alto VA internship just like people from all over the country in other programs. Other people have wondered about the quality of our match sites. We have had students match at VAs all over the country, Duke, Yale, Harvard, UCLA, UCSF, USC, UPenn, and Vanderbilt. This is just a small sampling of the diverse APA sites that people have matched at across the country.

I hope this clears up any confusion. Please feel free to post or PM me with additional questions.

 

[CaliPsych]

Agreed, and that's what would worry me (especially if what an earlier poster mentioned is true, and this relatively large number only reflects the individuals who were approved to apply rather than all of the students in the cohort/who were ready to apply for internship).

I just want to clearly state again that NOBODY from our program is told they cannot/ should not seek an APPIC internship. There is no process by which people are "screened" for application to APPIC and turned away. Our match rates reflect students who choose to apply for APPIC, and the vast majority of students do make that choice. I have no way of knowing whether this is the case in the PAU Ph.D. program; I am speaking only for the PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium.

 

[niknok]

I believe they have a quasi-captive VA site in Palo Alto, which may account for the match rate.

PAU in general have this "captive" site for practicum, not internship. It's actually pretty hard to get into PAVA and despite their relationship with PAU, they still prefer university based school. With that said, there have been PhD PAU students who matched here.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Your comments about students not being allowed to apply to the APPIC match are 100% untrue and unfounded in fact or reason. All students in the Psy.D. program are actively encouraged to apply for internships that meet their needs, and the vast majority of the class participates in the APPIC match. Those that do not generally choose not to for personal reasons, but they are in no way encouraged to do so by the program.

It is worth noting that this is often not an option for many doctoral students because their programs require an APA-acred. internship in order to graduate. I believe APA-acred. should be the only allowable standard for internship site, that is a discussion for another day.

What % of students from PGSP outside of the match...e.g. CAPIC? Do you think this should be allowed, given the implications it can have on licensure outside of CA and the negative consequences it can have on competitiveness for jobs?

Full disclosure: I know people from PAU Ph.D. and PGSP Psy.D. and they both are excellent clinicians, so I have no doubt that PGSP & PAU can produce very good clinicians...my comments are more for the students who are not as competitive and/or take alternative pathes.

 

[Zen Master]

It is worth noting that this is often not an option for many doctoral students because their programs require an APA-acred. internship in order to graduate. I believe APA-acred. should be the only allowable standard for internship site, that is a discussion for another day.

What % of students from PGSP outside of the match...e.g. CAPIC? Do you think this should be allowed, given the implications it can have on licensure outside of CA and the negative consequences it can have on competitiveness for jobs?

Full disclosure: I know people from PAU Ph.D. and PGSP Psy.D. and they both are excellent clinicians, so I have no doubt that PGSP & PAU can produce very good clinicians...my comments are more for the students who are not as competitive and/or take alternative pathes.

The file provided by CaliPsych has a 0% CAPIC rate for PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium students.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The file provided by CaliPsych has a 0% CAPIC rate for PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium students.

Thanks.

I was asking because I know they have had a few students in the past accept CAPIC positions, and I wasn't sure if this was still allowed and/or encouraged. Their match rates are definitely better than some other CA programs (non-UC affiliated), some of which actively encourage trying to match through the CAPIC.

 

[futurepsydoc]

I would suggest the following when considering the four programs:

First, consider the internship match rates for each school. While you should look at the overall rate, pay special attention to the number of students who go to APA Accredited Internships. Given the current internship crisis, you want to put yourself in the best position possible. The APPIC Match data for all programs over a 10 year period can be found here: http://www.appic.org/Match/Match-Statistics

Second, evaluate the actual cost of each program by breaking down the projected expenses for each year: 1) tuition, 2) fees, 3) cost of living (e.g., apt, electric, cable, transportation), 4) cost of traveling from school to home "X" number of times per year, 5) estimated cost of books, 6) car insurance, 7) cell phone bill, etc. If you receive financial assistance from any of the schools, use that amount to see how much it actually offsets your expenses. Just because the school gives you help in the form of tuition remission or a stipend doesn't mean that the school be less expensive than others. Also, check to see if you get a reduction in tuition once you become a full-time state resident. This may also off set costs more for some of the programs.

Third, consider which of the program you liked most by weighing out the pros and cons from professional stance. Courses? Theoretical orientation of staff? Practicum experiences available? Sense of culture within the department? Thoughts from current students? Reputation?

Fourth, weigh out the pros and the cons from a personal perspective: Quality of life? Environment? Setting? Distance from home? Impact of distance on relationships?

I think this considering these issues will help in making an informed decision. I did this when I chose between programs and it really opened my eyes to a few things I was not really thinking about. In the end, it helped me feel good about the decision I had made.

Of the programs you mentioned, I would lean towards Rutgers, as many others have pointed out.

 

[ctinamo]

Awesome, thanks for all the replies! They had helped me make my decision. It was a tough call and.....I have decided on Rutgers!!! The biggest motivators were their APA match rates and cost of attendance. I did a cost analysis of each program (education expenses plus living) and Rutgers would save me $35k more than FIT which was the next cheapest option. Also, the program electives, professor interests, and training sites match my interests. I also received tuition for the first semester and a $10k fellowship for the first year. It isn't much compared to PhD programs but I knew going into a PsyD program that funding would be hard to come by especially since I am not interested in doing extensive research. The biggest obstacle for me will be adapting from the west coast to the east coast and most importantly being so far from my significant other. However, after careful consideration and soul searching I made the best decision. So, if anyone else will be attending Rutgers this Fall PM me!

 

[deliciousgoose]

Awesome, thanks for all the replies! They had helped me make my decision. It was a tough call and.....I have decided on Rutgers!!! The biggest motivators were their APA match rates and cost of attendance. I did a cost analysis of each program (education expenses plus living) and Rutgers would save me $35k more than FIT which was the next cheapest option. Also, the program electives, professor interests, and training sites match my interests. I also received tuition for the first semester and a $10k fellowship for the first year. It isn't much compared to PhD programs but I knew going into a PsyD program that funding would be hard to come by especially since I am not interested in doing extensive research. The biggest obstacle for me will be adapting from the west coast to the east coast and most importantly being so far from my significant other. However, after careful consideration and soul searching I made the best decision. So, if anyone else will be attending Rutgers this Fall PM me!

Not knowing you at all, I think you made the right decision.

One thing that no one mentioned in terms of your relationship is the added stress that extra debt can put on a relationship. Even though you are moving far away from your partner, going to a funded program like Rutgers will make actively starting a life post-school much easier for you as a couple, and/or for you as an individual.

 

[BCR]

Very briefly, the cost is the biggest reason. I also feel there is very little in administrative support at the school which may not seem like a big deal to an outsider but when you are trying to apply for financial aid for the $40k tuition and you can't get an answer for weeks, it becomes probelmatic.

Regarding internships, my biggest complaint is the fact that the school will decide if you are eligible to apply for APPIC the summer before applications start. While the match rate on paper may look high and may be high, keep in mind not all students are allowed to apply for APPIC internships at all thus reducing the amount of students who don't match.

It does largely depend on the practicum sites you get, the advisor you chose and so forth but that is my opinion. I've been at PGSP for many years now and have seen it get larger and larger with little improvement to anything other than the size of the builiding we are in.

I'm not here to argue with anyone. Just stating my opinion, which was requested.

As a current PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium student, anyone with questions or concerns about our program should feel free to PM me. The PAU PhD program, as Romy appears to be speaking to, is completely different and separate from the PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium program. Myself or CaliPsych can speak best to any questions you may have about financial aid, match rates, curriculum, etc. as we are both students.

I'm not sure what Romy is specifically referring to when speaking about an increasing size (I would assume the increasing PhD class), but the PGSP-Stanford capped the class size at 30 and will be keeping it at such. Faculty on both the PAU side and Stanford side for our program are incredibly accessible, helpful, and knowledgeable and speaking from my own experience, I have not had any difficulties with the financial aid process.

 

[cara susanna]

Capped the size at 30? That's really large...

 

[JeyRo]

I know a little bit about Rutgers since I've worked with one of their grads years ago and I know their reputation, and it's always been quite good. I know a bit more about PAU's reputation as we work with their practicum students regularly here (both PsyD and PhD program), and I'm a grad from many years ago.

Knowing what I know now, I'd apply to a place like Rutgers over PAU any day (if not a completely funded doctoral program). Cost is an increasingly enormous issue these days, and my understanding is Rutgers students can expect to graduate with roughly half (or less) than the average debt load of PAU students, with probably roughly the same job prospects. Since I graduated from PAU a little less than a decade ago, tuition and fees have appeared to nearly double in cost.

Anyone graduating now or in the near future with student loans will have to expect their rates to average 5-10 percent. With a principal of 70-200K owed (the high end being typical of PAU students today) that translates into payments of a thousand bucks or more per month, and guarantees income-contingent payment for the rest of one's life in order to simply keep one's head above water. This is not insignificant. Unless your parents are wealthy, or you have no problem with a life of indentured servitude (which is what debt of this kind is, really) you should probably stay away from places like PAU. And that's regardless of my opinion of the program - as a point of fact, I think their training quality, particularly for the PsyD program, is a good deal better than the average FSPS PsyD program out there (which may not be saying much) - and they do have fairly good internship match rates. But again, aside from the larger point.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Capped the size at 30? That's really large...

ITA. My cohort is 10 (probably on the high-end for university-based PhD programs), and I can't imagine a cohort much larger than that (maaybe 12-ish with a high number of faculty, but that's really pushing it) really functioning as a cohort or getting the type of mentorship they should be getting in a doctoral program.

 

[amy21]

As a current PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium student, anyone with questions or concerns about our program should feel free to PM me. The PAU PhD program, as Romy appears to be speaking to, is completely different and separate from the PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium program. Myself or CaliPsych can speak best to any questions you may have about financial aid, match rates, curriculum, etc. as we are both students.

I'm not sure what Romy is specifically referring to when speaking about an increasing size (I would assume the increasing PhD class), but the PGSP-Stanford capped the class size at 30 and will be keeping it at such. Faculty on both the PAU side and Stanford side for our program are incredibly accessible, helpful, and knowledgeable and speaking from my own experience, I have not had any difficulties with the financial aid process.

This thread popped up on Google & this site has been very helpful to me in the past -so I thought I'd inquire more here. I'm looking at PGSP's PsyD & PhD program-I'm not sure if either is right for me. I interviewed at both & I liked the PhD more because I have an interest in forensics & it's better suited for that. The PsyD interviewees also seemed a bit immature & I'd prefer a less cloistered, lock-step environment. However, the PhD placement stats are not as high as the PsyD's & I'm not sure how the training compares. I'm hoping to stand out on my own (regardless of program) but I've been advised (on this site) that that's not a great policy with these programs. I've ruled out all other local programs but I'm still not sure about either of these. I'm an outsider here but any/all opinions, especially from the insiders, would be welcome.

 

[PsychResearch]

What is the research culture like at Rutgers? I know the thread is about their PsyD program, but I am curious how good they are in terms of research. Any ideas?

 

[erg923]

What is the research culture like at Rutgers? I know the thread is about their PsyD program, but I am curious how good they are in terms of research. Any ideas?

I am interning with a Rutgers PH.D grad. His perception is that it was a pretty academic/research focused and very, very CBT. He however, it much more a clinican at heart.

 

[amy21]

Would not do the PhD there, for sure, because you can do a PhD at a school with full funding.

As far as the PsyD.. . cost, cost, cost, cost.

Thank you. I think the funded phd programs are better investments than both non-funded phd & psyd programs. I'm unusual in that the time/geography sacrifice to go to a funded phd might impose greater hardship for me than the $ sacrifice to go to a school like PGSP.

BUT I'm well aware that non-funded programs tend to be weaker in research & sometimes even clinical training. I think PGSP is the strongest in the area. I'm sure you're not affiliated with it, but wonder if you would discourage attendance based on factors other than cost??

 

[docma]

However, the PhD placement stats are not as high as the PsyD's & I'm not sure how the training compares. I'm hoping to stand out on my own (regardless of program) but I've been advised (on this site) that that's not a great policy with these programs. I've ruled out all other local programs but I'm still not sure about either of these. I'm an outsider here but any/all opinions, especially from the insiders, would be welcome.

Comparing the PhD PsyD stats may be apples/oranges as the cohorts and program requirements are different. The PsyD program rarely allows students to apply to APPIC non-APA sites and many of their students leave the area for internship; they also have a much smaller cohort. The PhD program has a larger and much more diverse cohort. Many of their students do not or cannot leave the area and the PhD program will allow internship at non-APA sites (APPIC or CAPIC). Both programs provide a lot of support and direction in the internship application process.