So I reviewed a few of my syllabi so I could provide a few hard examples, but I really only gave it a half-hearted attempt. Also, some of these examples could be due to the specific psych undergrad program I went to, so maybe someone else can help me put these into perspective.
So when I got to my MSW program, I started hearing of theories and theorists (for all types of frameworks, not just therapy) that I'd never had exposure to in my undergrad psych program. Like Vygotsky (cognition) for example. But when I google Vygotsky, he doesn't seem particularly seem controversial? Also, I had a problem with the way we were taught theories. Like when we were introduced to Bowen for family therapy. I felt like not enough attention was paid to explaining how wrong some of his theories turned out to be, mostly like it was glossed over. Yes, yes, triangles, but please re-iterate how wrong he is about schizophrenia. Also, I am very new to family therapy modalities, but everything I found about Bowenian therapy is old. In my personal research it seem as this is old and outdated. I'm really just not sure it's a current theory (please someone with more experience correct me if I'm wrong). Yes, it is important to understand it as foundation, but does it have research backing it? I know it's family therapy and there are problems studying it to begin with, but I don't know. This theory went on the back burner in my mind for many reasons haha. This could be because of my personal bias?
There are some theoretical frameworks, like the ecological perspective, that seem like barely more than an extended metaphor. Mostly when I think of the "beloved theories" statement I made earlier, they were theories of human development that I had literally never heard before I got to an MSW program. We were also reminded of Erikson and Piaget etc.. but also some really wonky theories I obviously immediately blocked out. I wanted to pull out my books to give you a good side by side comparison, but I really am not finding the time for that. And I discovered my developmental psych books are in storage haha.
I guess some of my feelings can be summed up by saying I felt like in my foundation courses (first year of program) we got a huge BROAD education rather than focusing on a few scientifically grounded theories. This is also directly related to the MSW program I went to, as it has a much larger generalist leaning than I thought when I chose the school. I felt like throughout my program they have said, "here are the theories of the world and everything, now research and pick one that you are comfortable with and think has the most efficacy." I have taken great care to pick highly focused classes when I could, and I did so with my practicum site as well.
And so that readers don't think my whole program was a mash of touchy-feely socialworky stories, what I did appreciate is that my program spent a lot of time teaching us how to review research literature and critique it. Many assignments covered how to review research and apply to a practical situation. While I don't think that my education has been ideal, I am not certain the grass is greener in counseling programs in my area. I ran into a student from a counseling program (a state run university -- not a private or professional school) who had not had a DSM or psychopathology class. Maybe she had not had it yet, but she was in a counseling focused practicum at the time.
I'm not sure I answered your question specifically Future, but maybe I answered it generally? LOL
